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

[Zeuhl]

eyethankyou

you are confusing two different legal contexts.

The police need to use breath and blood testing equipment in order to support a case that is primarily about alcohol levels eg drink driving

In a case of criminal assault such as rape, witness opinions about someone's levels of inebriation are admissable and it is up to the jury to be persuaded or not.
.

[eyethenkyew]

I am definitely not confused because regardless of the fact that someone either has been breathalysed with what is called a "positive" outcome, i.e. the use of an official intoximeter at a Police Station, OR a person is accused by eyewitness accounts, i.e. signed written statements, those methods are not sufficient to convict them alone, that is always a matter for a court of law to decide.

In either case, what is being provided is some form of evidence which a court takes into consideration before reaching its conclusion, i.e. guilty or not. The reason I used the breathalyser example earlier was to highlight the fact that such evidence is far more indicative of alcohol levels in a person's system as opposed to a witness who has merely seen someone drinking alcohol, falling over, vomiting etc.

In the end analysis, however, neither is sufficient to prefer a guilty verdict which is something decided by a court which has as much evidence as possible in front of it which will enable the Magistrates / Judges+Juries to reach their conclusion(s).

Scotland probably has the best system because there is a verdict of "Not Proven" in cases where there is sufficient doubt of a defendant's guilt. England and Wales do not unfortunately have such a "tool" in their judicial armoury.

[jackthehat]

Listen to Barmaid, will you ................?

She's forgotten more about law that you will ever know...........

[Zeuhl]

Well you seem confused.

you posted: <<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>>

If the opinions and statements of witnesses eg " I saw her drink 19 glasses of vodka" or "she seemed very drunk to me" are accepted as a relevent factor by a jury then it does become "proven fact"

Unfortunately, jurisprudence cannot rely on measurable, definite, not open to interpretation 'facts' because they are few and far between.
.

[jno]

the law specifies blood/alcohol levels you must not exceed when driving. There are no such levels to observe before having sex. It might be a good idea to breathalyse each other first, perhaps with the surreptitious use of devices during open-mouthed kissing; but I can't see it catching on.

[anotheoldgit]

joggerjayne

/// Technically, it is rape ... of course.///

/// If a girl is drunk, she can't give consent.///

/// If she hasn't given consent, it is rape ///

Therefore it is reasonable to assume, if a wife is drunk, and hasn't given consent, it is rape?

Or if a long term partner is too drunk to give consent it is also rape?

Or does this rule only apply to casual acquaintances?