If a male and a woman are having sex and the woman is too drunk to know what's going on should this be classed as rape?

[MickyMacgraw]

What about if it was the other way around? What are your honest thought on this report?

http://uk.news.yahoo....r-is-too-45dbed5.html

[sara3]

Micky, if you want to put a scenario to someone that's fine.. there's really no need to suggest that a particular someone may behave in a particular way.

[MickyMacgraw]

Sorry umm I'm obviously not implying that he is, just throwing a hypothetical situation at you underlining my point of circumstance and I hope i didn't offend you as this was not my motive.
Come on sara3 I don't know umm and was just making a scenario with the view at understanding this situation from a different angle.

[jackthehat]

Steady, Micky...........don't peak too soon.
You're doing very well so far.

[MickyMacgraw]

Err thanks I think jackthehat.

[sara3]

well it was aimed squarely at ummmm, which made for uncomfortable reading from where I'm sat.

[cazzz1975]

lol jack, couldnt have said it better ;)

[ChuckFickens]

I can see what relevance extreme hypothetical situations have to anything.

[ummmm]

Lol Doc :-)

I wasn't offended Micky...

[ChuckFickens]

I meant to say "I can't see......"

[eyethenkyew]

The fact that a person, or others, form the opinion that someone is drunk is not sufficient to prove such opinion in a court of law - hearsay.

[jackthehat]

^Again...........tosh.

[Barmaid]

Absolute tosh eyethankyou. A witness can say "I served her with 5 double vodkas and by the end of the night she could barely stand". "I was with her until midnight, I saw her drink 8 g and ts and half a bottle of wine. By the end of the evening she was sleepy and talking incoherently."

[eyethenkyew]

People referring to my comments as "tosh" should really learn the difference between proof and opinion. Unlike, for example, a dead body is irrefutable proof that life has expired.

Evidence of opinion on the other hand by a witness who has seen someone consuming alcohol that aforementioned person is therefore "drunk", is simply that, it is an opinion as opposed to a proven fact, nothing else.

[jackthehat]

If Barmaid..........(who has been called to the bar) agrees that your comments are tosh, I'll take that as an indication that they are.

[Zeuhl]

Courts accept the <opinions> of witnesses

They far outweigh the incidence of <facts> in most trials

Verdicts rest on whether a jury is convinced by the validity of those opinions
.

[Barmaid]

No it is NOT an opinion. It is fact. A witness says "I saw her consume 15 vodkas. Later i saw her being sick and stumbling around". The witness is not giving opinion, they are giving statements of fact. An FME could give an expert opinion to say what effect 15 vodkas would have on a person of her weight and build. The jury could then draw their own conclusions. Apart from anything else, the complainant could give testimony to say "yes I was extremely pissed, on a scale of 1 to 10 I was at 9".

Contrary to what you say, that is sufficient to prove that the lady in question was drunk.

And it is NOT hearsay.

[NazNomad]

BM, I can't help thinking that will fall on deaf ears.

[eyethenkyew]

My whole point is clearly either being missed due to ignorance or a blatant refusal to believe the truth. The only "facts" about either serving someone copious amounts of alcohol, or seeing someone staggering around/vomiting etc, are that the person in question has been so observed. I'm not arguing about that, I too have seen many people being plied with alcohol, stumbling around, vomiting, lying in the gutter etc, and I have formed the opinion that they may be drunk.

But were I challenged to put my mortgage on that opinion being "fact", I could not honestly swear that they were indeed "drunk" simply as a result of what I'd seen. Yes, it's a strong possibility, but it is not something "proven", merely my opinion.

Hence the reason, for example, that Police Officers, who very often have to deal with alcohol related incidents, can only submit "evidence of opinion", therefore not absolute irrefutable facts, i.e. "I saw that the defendant's eyes were glazed, his breath smelled strongly of alcohol, and he was unsteady on his feet", etc etc.

It is then up to either the Magistrates / Judge etc to decide whether or not the submitted evidence is sufficient to prove the offence. That's why I or you as an eyewitness cannot prove a state of drunkenness per se simply by what we believe.