"No" means "No"...But is there a grace period?

**Athena** · April 28th, 2008, 05:16 PM

This is the question the Maryland Court of Appeals had to address this past month.

The scenario: The Victim, then 18, agreed to give the defendant, then 16, and Wilson (defendant's male companion) a ride to a party, she testified. The three wound up in the victim's car, where the boys allegedly sexually assaulted her in multiple ways before the defendant got out of the car and Wilson had sex with the victim. The boys then switched places; the defendant asked the victim for sex and told her he “didn’t want to rape her,” she testified.

The victim testified that she consented to sex with the defendant because the boys had told her she could leave “as soon as we’re done,” but that she told the defendant he had to stop when she told him to. After penetration, she cried that it hurt, told him to stop and tried to push him off, but he continued for between five and 10 seconds, she testified.

While I agree that, by consenting to sex, you are not waiving your autonomy until the act is completed and that a woman should have the right to withdraw consent at any time, I could see this ruling causing potential problems.

Could this decision, asserting that the amount of time after consent is withdrawn but before the act is ceased does constitute as rape, cause more damage to rape proceedings than good? For example, do you think it will lend credence to women alleging rape simply because they regretted their decision?

Also, do you feel as though, that period of time (5-10 seconds, in this case) should be regarded no differently than traditional rape that involves no consent at any point, and should be sentenced as such?

Article

**Nell** · April 28th, 2008, 05:21 PM

God I am glad I am not a guy. I never have to worry about this crap. I think this case is really kinda ridiculous. And I have been raped, so no, I don't think this was forced sex. If she is telling the absolute truth he got off of her almost immediately. How fast was he supposed to jump? I don't know, people are gonna probably flip on me for saying that.

But dang Athena, you come up with the most interesting threads!

**Athena** · April 28th, 2008, 05:34 PM

When it comes down to the raw deal, I believe that a woman's body is her own from the second she says so, whether it be 5 seconds or not. But, how realistic is that?

On one hand, if she screamed "stop" and claims that it hurt, 10 seconds probably seems like much longer. Not to be graphic, but, I look at the clock and imagine a standard rate, and quite a few pumps can be gotten in during 10 seconds.

But, on the other hand, I'd hate to be the guy who has to deal with the wrath of a woman who didn't say "stop" clearly, or if he misinterpreted. And what about kinky stuff like rape simulation and such? Chappelle's sex consent form might not be such a bad idea.

Glad you like the threads, Nell. I'll try to keep them up. :)

**TheMorningStar** · April 28th, 2008, 05:36 PM

After penetration, she cried that it hurt, told him to stop and tried to push him off, but he continued for between five and 10 seconds

She tried to push him off and could not. She told him it hurt but he continued. This is rape. He should have been off her the second she said it hurt, and he certainly should have allowed her to push him away. Five or ten seconds can seem like forever.

**Mom of 4** · April 28th, 2008, 05:39 PM

Originally Posted by TheMorningStar

After penetration, she cried that it hurt, told him to stop and tried to push him off, but he continued for between five and 10 seconds

She tried to push him off and could not. She told him it hurt but he continued. This is rape. He should have been off her the second she said it hurt, and he certainly should have allowed her to push him away. Five or ten seconds can seem like forever.

Yep it can seem like forever. The whole story leaves me with many questions to begin with. I cannot be certain without more details however it sounds to me like they set this up with this girl and she didn't feel she could leave freely unless she gave them what they wanted.

**Nell** · April 28th, 2008, 05:43 PM

What I thought about the length of time. If she is the one who said that it took only 5 or 10 seconds for him to stop after she said too maybe it was considerably less? I know when I am in a scary situation that I want to stop ,now, time can really be subjective.

And I also thought of the whole did she say it loud enough or in a way he would understand? The guy that raped me I punched in the face and screamed, so he knew. But I was a teenager not that long ago and if she was just kinda going " that hurts, stop," well that is not always gonna get thru a horny teens brain really quickly.

I am NOT excusing this or saying she didn't have the right to say no no matter what, and he should listen, respect that, and stop, if that is the way it honestly happened. But this is more a matter of how FAST he should stop, and I don't think you should cry rape if he stops pretty close to immediately.

That said, I do agree with mom of 4 that she probably felt pressured to do something she didn't want to do. I have also been in this situation. That is entirely shitty and should be punished.

**Athena** · April 28th, 2008, 05:54 PM

See, it is hard to judge based on the details given in the article. I mean, she's 18, whereas her "attacker" was only 16. Plus, they were in HER car. If she offered them a ride to a party, how'd it suddenly become a situation where she felt she was obligated to do anything?

I don't know...I feel really sorry when it appears that a woman is simply too stupid to fend for herself.

**Nell** · April 28th, 2008, 05:58 PM

I think the feeeling of obligation came in because some girls with poor self esteem will think they have to do whatever their man asks of them, including sleeping with their friends. I have a suspision that is what happened here, and then she felt bad and changed her mind. But to charge him with rape? I still don't think that is totally ok.

And Athena is right. What in the hell was this ADULT doing fucking a CHILD then yelling? That totally flew over my head.

**TheMorningStar** · April 28th, 2008, 08:38 PM

There is a clear mens rea element in the law regarding rape i.e. the accused must be aware that the victim is not consenting or might not be consenting. However, different jurisdictions vary in how they place the onus of proof with regards to belief of consent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_about_rape

The moment she tried to push him off her, it was clear she was not consenting.

In Maryland, he could have kept going until he was finished and still got away with it.

In the article at the top of the thread:
The other three judges held that the law does not recognize a post-penetration “no” as rape, but that it should.

This is a shame and the line needs to be drawn at the instant the victim says "no", or physically resists. Setting a time limit for after the "no" is dangerous and opens up a huge grey area defence attorneys would love. Its not like anyone is standing there with a stopwatch.

**Angel** · April 28th, 2008, 09:40 PM

Originally Posted by Athena

The scenario: The Victim, then 18, agreed to give the defendant, then 16, and Wilson (defendant's male companion) a ride to a party, she testified. The three wound up in the victim's car, where the boys allegedly sexually assaulted her in multiple ways before the defendant got out of the car and Wilson had sex with the victim. The boys then switched places; the defendant asked the victim for sex and told her he “didn’t want to rape her,” she testified.

The victim testified that she consented to sex with the defendant because the boys had told her she could leave “as soon as we’re done,” but that she told the defendant he had to stop when she told him to. After penetration, she cried that it hurt, told him to stop and tried to push him off, but he continued for between five and 10 seconds, she testified.

I guess I read this totally different than anyone else here, because from what I read, the entire encounter amounted to what I would consider 'group rape'.

'the boys allegedly sexually assaulted her in multiple ways' - indicates that she was in no way willing. If I was consenting to a sexual encounter, I would not refer to it a assault. At that point in time both were raping her at the same time.

'the defendant got out of the car and Wilson had sex with the victim' - nothing about the tone of her statement has changed at this point, so I am still under the impression that it was rape.

"The boys then switched places; the defendant asked the victim for sex and told her he “didn’t want to rape her,” " - From the way this is phrased, I would tend to think that she 'consented', not because she wanted to have sex with the guy, but because she was afraid that if she didn't, he would physically assault or restrain her, and then rape her anyway. Seems to me she was choosing the lesser of two evils, in order to keep from being beaten. And in most states, coercion is the same as rape. If you compel someone to have sex with you by using the THREAT of violence, it's the same as holding a gun or knife to the victim while you rape them.

Therefore, in my opinion, the entire encounter was rape. She was forced to 'agree' in the first place, in order to avoid further physical assault. Both of these guys should be prosecuted. They are both rapists.

If someone should find any place where it says that she was willing from the start (without being threatened), then my opinion of the situation would obviously change, at least slightly.

**Raq me darkly** · April 29th, 2008, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by Angel

Therefore, in my opinion, the entire encounter was rape. She was forced to 'agree' in the first place, in order to avoid further physical assault. Both of these guys should be prosecuted. They are both rapists.

I came to the same conclusion as Angel. Reading the case the woman was "sexually assaulted" (raped) and then "asked" for sex ("if you say yes, we'll let you go") doesn't seem very consensual to me. Would it still be consensual if she was threatened more violently, "If you say yes to having sex with me, I won't bash your head in and beat you to death"?

In my opinion, coercion takes away some of the validity of the consent. Date rape often falls into this category and many women are hurt in some way by this as well. They might not be bruised and torn, but it can affect how they view sexual relations in the future.

**Athena** · April 29th, 2008, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by Raq me darkly

I came to the same conclusion as Angel. Reading the case the woman was "sexually assaulted" (raped) and then "asked" for sex ("if you say yes, we'll let you go") doesn't seem very consensual to me. Would it still be consensual if she was threatened more violently, "If you say yes to having sex with me, I won't bash your head in and beat you to death"?

In my opinion, coercion takes away some of the validity of the consent. Date rape often falls into this category and many women are hurt in some way by this as well. They might not be bruised and torn, but it can affect how they view sexual relations in the future.

A couple of issues:

1.) Sexual assault can include rape, but it does not automatically equate to rape. If she was being "sexually assaulted" during the trip to the destination, this could mean groped or kissed against her will.

2.) The word "allegedly" was used in regard to the "sexual assaults". This meant that the sexual assaults are not necessarily fact, but a claim.

3.) I only buy the "coersion" bit in the event that these boys were physically preventing her from going anywhere. You see, if they were actually preventing her, these boys would have both been charged with rape from the beginning, because one cannot legally consent under duress. In this context, the coersion wouldn't just take away from the consent, it would invalidate it.

Given these truths, we can only consider the whole situation rape if, a.) they actually sexually assaulted her during the drive and, b.) they were actually preventing her from leaving. Neither of these things have been determined, however, based on the info we've got.