<p>Interesting query zoos, post 114. There was a post pages ago that said in her jurisdiction, if a woman was voluntarily intoxicated that her consent did not count.</p>
<p>Famous atty Gloria Allred said it is up to the man to decide for both. She said if both were drinking, and both said yes to sex, that despite the woman’s “yes”, the guy should know better and not do it, lest it be rape. </p>
<p>I don’t agree with those positions though, in examples of voluntary intoxication(not passing out). If “no” means no, can’t “yes” mean yes? I also don’t believe in the old phrase “he got me drunk”, though I don’t think it’s used much anymore. A fellow might encourage a gal to drink, but unless she’s tied to a chair with a funnel in her mouth, the he can’t get her drunk. It’s her choice.
(reminder- I am speaking of examples of voluntary intoxication)</p>
<p>But how often do the courts get it correct if the parties involved were drunk enough to not clearly remember what went on? Or how often are prosecutors and police unable to come up with enough consistent evidence or testimony for it to be prosecuted, due to clouded minds due to drunkenness?</p>
<p>Not only does being drunk increase one’s likelihood of becoming a crime victim*, being drunk also makes it more difficult to remember what happened well enough to tell the police and courts what happened in order to get an arrest and conviction.</p>
<p>*Lots of crimes, not just rape or sexual assault, and applicable to both males and females.</p>
<p>Looking at the 1995 study noted on the web page Jonri linked to, the overall incidence in that group was 20% of women raped. However, that is from pre-college age to age 25. The study states that 11.1% of those attending or having attended 4-year colleges answered yes. The table also shows that 10% (roughly half) stated that this occurred between age 13 and 18, generally before the student got to college. Of course that means this is a big problem in high school that should be addressed there. </p>
<p>None of that means that this is not a problem, but that stating that 20% of college women are raped while in college, overstates the findings.</p>
<p>“But how often do the courts get it correct if the parties involved were drunk enough to not clearly remember what went on? Or how often are prosecutors and police unable to come up with enough consistent evidence or testimony for it to be prosecuted, due to clouded minds due to drunkenness?”</p>
<p>Adding more wrenches to the machine, if we leave it to the courts, we have to remember that the courts getting it “correct” means finding proof beyond a reasonable doubt. So if the facts leave it 80% likely that it was rape, and 20% that it wasn’t, the “correct” answer is probably for the accused to walk.</p>
<p>it is a bit of a tangent, but I wanted to comment un ucb’s comment about drunk people remembering events(post 122). A drinking law in our state is that a bartender cannot knowingly serve a patron that is visibly intoxicated.(2 variables) So, if a drunk guy leave a bar, gets in a car wreck, then wants to sue the bar, he has to prove the tender served him and disregarded the 2 conditions. Puts a tough burden on the drunk. He must claim he was so drunk that he should not have been served, yet, if he was so drunk does it really seem likely he is remembering the events correctly? The bar could ague that if he remembers things so clearly, then it wasn’t apparent to the tender that he was so visibly drunk!</p>
<p>Here’s a practical question: what are some policies that will either deter or apprehend the serial rapists? I’m not convinced that stricter punishments alone are the answer to this. It seems to me that the problem is that college provides a target-rich environment for these individuals. How are you going to change that? We’ve been talking here mostly about how an individual might avoid becoming one of the targets, but we need a broader solution than that.</p>
<p>What? I don’t think Yoffe or anyone else is advocating this.Are you saying that the issue of “what is consent” should not be addressed, because it is telling men that they mgiht become rapists? I think it needs to be addressed because there are people who, while not outright predators, are likely to be drawn into testosterone-fueled behaviors in which they try much too hard to “score.” These guys need to learn what’s what. A change in “rape culture” would make this socially unacceptable, not something to be celebrated.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I completely agree.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I also agree with this. I went to college in the 70s. I witnessed–and participated in-- very little binge drinking in comparison to what I hear about now. Yes, we drank. Yes, we sometimes got drunk, and sometimes very drunk. But it was not a weekly ritual and it was not regarded as “normal” to be that drunk on a regular basis. </p>
<p>There were two things that MAY have made a difference: the legal drinking age was 18, and pot-smoking was very common.</p>
<p>Hunt, the most obvious tactic for catching serial rapists is to report rapes immediately to the REAL police.</p>
This seems sensible, but the problem is that it’s really, really hard to get a rape conviction when there is anything gray at all about the situation. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt, and these college situations are not always that clear. Indeed, this is pretty much why colleges were told to use a much more lenient (for the “prosecution”) standard in adjudicating rape cases for disciplinary purposes–the cases are just hard to prosecute in regular courts. I think there will have to be some other approaches to the problem.</p>
<p>There was a case mentioned upthread in which the facts seem pretty horrible, but the accused plead guilty to a much lesser charge, and didn’t have to register as a sex offender. In the eyes of the law, that guy was not a rapist. And I think that case was clearer than a lot of cases are likely to be, especially if there are deliberate serial rapists who are taking steps to avoid getting caught.</p>
<p>An individual case may not result in a conviction, but if 5 or 6 women file complaints against a serial rapist, he is going to be outed. And probably more likely to be convicted of SOMETHING.</p>
I agree with this–and I think it means we have to look for ways to encourage reporting. I think publicizing more the idea that there are these serial offenders might help.</p>
<p>But isn’t that in the broad scope a “good” thing? Gray implies that it’s not clear or if there was criminal behavior. As mini is telling us, rapists tend to be serial and consolation is pointing out that if women report then perhaps there will be multiple reports against a single individual. The individual case of the women changing their mind and crying sexual assault are fairly rare and I’m guessing there are few convictions in those cases which is as it should be. Not reporting is the biggest mistake.</p>
<p>We’ve had this discussion before, but I completely disagree that the most effective approach would be to report cases to the “real police.” The real police hate anything ambiguous, and generally want no part of policing the sex lives of people who know each other. And real prosecutors REALLY hate anything that isn’t a slam dunk, and have lots of ways to take it out on police who bring them fuzzy cases. Real police and real prosecutors, the movies notwithstanding, are tightly constrained by privacy laws, and do not have any effective way to “out” someone whom they cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt committed a particular crime. And they won’t be able to use multiple complaints as evidence that he committed a crime unless they can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed crimes then, too.</p>
<p>College administrators may have more of an interest in keeping things under wraps, sure, but they are far less constrained by due process and standard of proof than the police and prosecutors are. They also have a broad spectrum of punishments available, which of course stop short of prison or felony conviction, but include referring cases to the real police and prosecutors. They are the ones who, if everyone reported every incident, would be able to spot patterns and respond quickly. And they have a strong incentive to identify bad actors and to exclude them from the college community ASAP.</p>
<p>We tell people to not steal, but theft prevention is a multi-million dollar industry. We tell our kids to lock their doors, close the windows, and not prop the dorm room door open. We buy them cable locks for their laptops, anti-virus protection for their computers, and homeowner’s insurance for their valuables; give them credit cards with fraud alerts and fraud protection; teach them how to password-protect their identity; give them access to a bank account so that they can have a safe place to store money; teach them to not leave their wallets unattended while they go to the bathroom; buy them lockboxes or other means of keeping valuables safe; encourage them to leave the nice jewelry at home; and otherwise expend a lot of time, money, and effort to preventing theft.</p>
<p>Is that “blaming the victim”? If not, can we get over the asinine, childish idea that it’s “blaming the victim” to tell women to grow the f— up and take some responsibility for their safety and well-being?</p>
<p>Being the liberal I am, I don’t think we should be prosecuting things that are “ambiguous” and I appreciate that our judicial system wants no part of policing the sex lives of people. But I would still tell women if they have been assaulted (raped, whatever that particular state calls it) they should report it. If they report it there is a report whether or not the prosecutor decides to prosecute.</p>
<p>The likelihood that a rapist will be convicted of a crime is (I believe) much, much higher if the rape is reported immediately after it happens, as opposed to the next morning, or even worse, days later. This is probably another reason the serial rapists are targeting girls who have been drinking–they’re not going to do anything until the next day.</p>
<p>My lengthy prose was lost by CC. But since then, #134 says all.</p>
<p>Way back in the olden days there was a TV ad about safe driving. The tag line…“You may be right, dead right”. Our obligation to our D (and S) transcends our obligation to be PC and avoid the possibility of hurting someones’ feeling.</p>
<p>BTW. Men also need to be very careful. We pounded into S head to avoid contact with inebriated women…an accusation can easily be thrown his way the next day…and in the college a male is presumed guilty of assault …and will have to prove himself innocent.</p>
<p>Re: #133 and real police/courts versus college administrators</p>
<p>Yes, motivations and constraints can vary between the real police/courts versus college administrators, which can result in either being unable or unwilling to do something about it. But perhaps any crime of this nature should be reported immediately to both, in order to maximize the chance that some real result will occur.</p>
<p>In the NPR report posted by Mini in #3, one psychologist is reported to state that there are serial predators on campus, while another: </p>
<p>Stetson University law professor Peter Lake agrees there are plenty of predators on campus, and that it’s important to spot them and get them out of school. </p>
<p>But Lake says there’s a problem the predator theory underestimates: the amount of drinking and sex that’s become common with many although certainly not all college students.
and then:
“So you have a lot of sexual activity, you have alcohol, you have a population that’s sort of an at-risk age, and it’s in some ways, it’s a perfect storm for sex assault issues.”</p>
<p>It certainly does not clearly conclude that most sexual assaults on campus are by serial predators. Nor that alcohol does not play an important role.</p>
<p>“If we continue telling men they are likely to become rapists (and shouldn’t do so) we “normalize” rape simply as something that all men might do (and they don’t.”</p>
<p>What? I don’t think Yoffe or anyone else is advocating"</p>
<p>I don’t particular care what she thinks she is advocating. I do care about the consequences of what she is advocating. Teaching men that they shouldn’t rape means that the assumption is that they need teaching, because of course rape is normal behavior. Regular reporting, follow-up, expulsion, and prosecution of rapists will change the culture pretty quickly. When there is a murder in my neighborhood, I don’t hold seminars in the neighborhood telling men they shouldn’t murder.</p>