Defence to rape!

  Pine Man 19:19 14 Nov 08
Locked

Sorry about the scary heading!

I am following a local case where a man has been deported back to England to face charges of rape and murder. DNA from him has been found on the dead woman and he is not denying having sex with her.

His defence is:-

He was abducted, blindfolded, had his hands tied behind his back and thrown into the back of a van where he was forced to have sex with the woman who was later killed (allegedly by him).

A tragic incident but how could a defence like that ever 'stand up' in court?

Is that at all credible?

  sunnystaines 19:26 14 Nov 08

there was a real case where on of the miss world contestants was found murdered in a derelict house, a homless person that dossed there was charged. he said in court in entered the house drunk and crashed out and woke up next to the body so forensics out the window.

he got away with it a court.

  Si_L 20:02 14 Nov 08

Innocent until proven guilty.

  MAJ 00:39 15 Nov 08

*Presumed* Innocent until proven guilty, Si_L.

  Si_L 13:03 15 Nov 08

Of course its presumed. He should be treated as innocent until he has had a fair trial. Who knows, maybe he was telling the truth?

  Pine Man 14:03 15 Nov 08

I am not disputing his right to a fair trial but, without being indelicate, I can't imagine that what he is suggesting is physically possible!

  sunnystaines 15:13 15 Nov 08

call in columbo

  Pineman100 15:39 15 Nov 08

I understand your delicately put anatomical question, and it's a valid point. But I wonder whether a man can be taken to a point where, regardless of his initial moral objection, he is no longer able to resist. Would he then become an active participant, thus blowing his chances of crying "rape"?

Have you read Michael Crichton's 'Disclosure'?

  Si_L 15:51 15 Nov 08

If the other option was getting your throat cut, I know which I'd choose.

  Si_L 15:52 15 Nov 08

Sorry for two posts, I forgot to ask, do you have a link to the story?

  bremner 15:54 15 Nov 08

In your scenario the person would not have the necessary mens rea to have committed the offence.

Simply being physically able to commit the offence is insufficient.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

LG G6 review: Hands-on with LG’s bold, big-screen shot at perfection

1995-2015: How technology has changed the world in 20 years

How the painting-like animated sequences in A Monster Calls were created by Glassworks Barcelona

The 22 best Safari extensions | Best Safari plugins: Improve Apple's Safari web browser with these…