So you answered an personal ad on Craigslist...

[Espy]

There was a case, in Britain I think, where this guy is hanging in a bar and meets like 2 or 3 other men. He invites them over to his house to have sex with his wife, saying that if she fights that's the way she likes it. So they do. In that case, which was years ago, the husband was actually there and still didn't get convicted of rape or attempted rape.

There was another case where a man did something like this but with personals in a magazine I think. He was charged with something but it wasn't rape.

I don't know how the marine guy could be charged with attempt to have forcible sex with someone because he didn't make that attempt. He set up the circumstances for it to happen. It's really unfair but I don't know what he can be charged with.

I was hoping you would jump in. It's a shame they can't charge him with anything else... I think he's just as much or more to blame for this.

EDIT: Alright so here is another article I found that lays out the charges:http://www.trib.com/news/local/article_99865963-0de9-5aa3-8b8d-2b493d7b53f0.html (by the way, the article describes a little more what happened, so while not terribly explicit some might want to avoid it)
The Marine: Stipe, 27, has been charged in Natrona County Circuit Court with conspiracy to commit first-degree sexual assault.
The actual attacker: Ty Oliver McDowell, 26, has been charged with three counts of first-degree sexual assault, one count of aggravated kidnapping and one count of aggravated burglary.

 

[Hailey Knight]

The Marine should be charged for rape and for fraud as he portrayed himself as someone else. Once he serves his time he should be charged with conduct unbecoming a Marine and slammed in military court also. Let him do additional time in Leavenworth.

As to the guy who did it....He should also be charged with rape and here's why. Even though he thought it was consensual he still WANTED to commit the act of violence against a woman. It turns out he had a fantasy of tying and raping a woman and proved he was not above acting on these fantasies. Granted, he may not have ever acted on it without this virtual impetus, but he did in this case.

If MY WIFE wanted me to do this I don't think I could. If she talked me into it and she fought me like this woman must have fought him, I would have stopped immediately because I would have known something was seriously wrong. This guy not only wanted to do the act but showed he was willing to act it out even when he MUST have at some point realized that something was wrong.

Totally agree with Dave.

 

[AshburnerX]

Reckless endangerment might fit. He knowingly set up a situation that might have ended up in his wife getting raped.

 

[Tinwhistler]

The marine can still be charged with rape under the UCMJ.

Rape by using force:
"That the accused caused another person, who is of any age, to engage in a sexual act by using force against that other person. "

It doesn't say he has to do the penetrative act. Only that he has to have caused it to happen.

 

[Kitty Sinatra]

So there is nothing he can be charged with since he didn't commit the actual crime?

Your article says he's been charged with being an accomplice. I have no idea what that means specifically, though - is it "accomplice to rape" or some vaguer, more broad crime of "accomplice in wrongdoing of any sort"

 

[makare]

Yeah that's about right. I am not an expert but I know he cant be charged with attempt because he didn't. Conspiracy is such a kitchen sink charge it's what they use when they have nothing else. And I don't know how he could have conspired because both parties have to intend, or at least know they are about to commit the crime and there is evidence to show that the actual rapist didn't have that intent (this case is so ridiculous.) What I'm saying is if he has any kind of competent legal representation he might even get out of the conspiracy charge.

I'm glad he is being charged with something but it is just so unfair.

 

[Espy]

So there is nothing he can be charged with since he didn't commit the actual crime?

Your article says he's been charged with being an accomplice. I have no idea what that means specifically, though - is it "accomplice to rape" or some vaguer, more broad crime of "accomplice in wrongdoing of any sort"[/QUOTE]

Yeah, sorry, I meant "something more".

 

[Kitty Sinatra]

The marine can still be charged with rape under the UCMJ.

Rape by using force:
"That the accused caused another person, who is of any age, to engage in a sexual act by using force against that other person. "

It doesn't say he has to do the penetrative act. Only that he has to have caused it to happen.

That looks like the accused would have to use force, though. I know you're reading it as "she was forced, so all involved are guilty of forcing her into a sexual act" but I don't think it reads like that.

---------- Post added at 07:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:37 PM ----------

Man, I'm being nitpicky here.

Yeah, sorry, I meant "something more".

There may not be need to charge him with more. This vague "accomplice" charge, whatever it is may carry enough weight for decent punishment. And who knows, maybe he's been charged with several things anyway, and the article just encompassed it all with that vague "accomplice" thing.

 

[Espy]

[/COLOR]Man, I'm being nitpicky here.

Yeah, sorry, I meant "something more".

There may not be need to charge him with more. This vague "accomplice" charge, whatever it is may carry enough weight for decent punishment. And who knows, maybe he's been charged with several things anyway, and the article just encompassed it all with that vague "accomplice" thing.

From the way Mak makes it sound ("What I'm saying is if he has any kind of competent legal representation he might even get out of the conspiracy charge.") it doesn't sound that way but I sure hope you are right. I don't see why he shouldn't got to jail for just as long as the other guy if not longer.

 

[Kitty Sinatra]

what expert knowledge does makare have here? I thought Wolfodin's our sole legal eagle.

 

[Espy]

what expert knowledge does makare have here? I thought Wolfodin's our sole legal eagle.

I believe she's in law school.

Besides, THIS: View attachment 307
is our legal eagle!

 

[Kitty Sinatra]

Oh. I thought she was in child care. Huh. Awesome for her, then. There's way more money in law.

 

[makare]

I do it all gruebeard. and I do it.. in style.

 

[Kitty Sinatra]

You're now my hero. And I'm gonna assume that your style includes spandex and a cape.

 

[strawman]

She said no.

He performed the act anyway.

It's rape, regardless of what brought them together.

If my wife said no, and I went ahead and forced her, she could still get me charged with rape. She could even sign a contract, accept all liability, with witnesses and a notary public, and I can still be charged and convicted of rape.

This man is certainly guilty of rape.

The man who set her up should also be charged as an accomplice - he set up the scenario where he knew she would be raped, and convinced someone else to perform the job. He was, in a sense, a sidekick of the rapist, finding a suitable prey. It will probably be a lessor charge, though.

They should both be listed on sex offender registries.

You don't violate someone in that way and expect to dodge the consequences.

Those who claim that the BDSM community proves that some acts are not criminal if performed with consent - that is only true if all parties to the act decide, before, during and after, that the act is consensual. They can change their mind at any time and press charges, even if at the time of the act it was consensual. The only thing protecting their partners is their own social contract, which is not in any way shape or form legally enforceable.

 

[David]

Pretty much everything Stein said said (except "AFTER the act", not sure what you meant by that... changing your mind AFTER everyone is finished and gets their pants back on would involve some quantum shit right there) plus Gas's point that someone who orders a hit is still a murderer. BOTH men should be charged to the fullest possible extent.

 

[Espy]

Stien, do you think the Marine should be charged as much as the other man or should get lesser charges (not what he WILL get but what you think he should get)?

 

[Covar]

This was an episode of Law and Order: SVU.


I was on the fence about this, but seeing other peoples posts swayed me to agreeing that rape charges should be brought all around.

 

[Tinwhistler]

The marine can still be charged with rape under the UCMJ.

Rape by using force:
"That the accused caused another person, who is of any age, to engage in a sexual act by using force against that other person. "

It doesn't say he has to do the penetrative act. Only that he has to have caused it to happen.

That looks like the accused would have to use force, though. I know you're reading it as "she was forced, so all involved are guilty of forcing her into a sexual act" but I don't think it reads like that.[/QUOTE]

That's definitely the defence I'd take if I were the marine: *I* didn't use force, I'm not guilty. If I were the prosecution, I'd say that he used force same as anyone who stood there and encouraged his military buddy to beat and rape a civilian in a war setting...guys get convicted in that scenario. And then let whoever had the better lawyering prevail.

 

[phil]

Man, the more I think about this the more I can't decide fully on what I'd do if punishment was left up to me.

I mean, I guess without knowing exactly what the emails said and what exactly was allegedly agreed upon, I'd have to go with charging the guy who actually did it with full on rape. I mean, I feel a little sorry for the whole situation because it all comes back to the ex-boyfriend. If he hand't have orchestrated the whole thing then none of it would have happened. But even considering that, at the end of the day the dude did rape a woman. I mean, he's not completely blameless because at some point he really should have known. Had he stopped and realized what was really going on I'd probably feel different about it.

Something that I'm wondering is if they NEED to charge the guy with rape so that they can charge the ex with being an accomplice, and hopefully an equally heavy sentence. I mean, would charging him with conspiracy to commit be a lesser sentence?

Jeeze, the whole thing is just too fucked up really.

 

[Espy]

You can't get away from the fact that the guy WAS manipulated on some level. It still doesn't excuse him from not finding out more information. With just a little more info he could have stopped this before it started.

 

[phil]

You can't get away from the fact that the guy WAS manipulated on some level. It still doesn't excuse him from not finding out more information. With just a little more info he could have stopped this before it started.

True, I mean, if he was simply ignorant and manipulated then I feel bad for him sure. I think that that's just how the cookie crumbles sometimes though.

I thought about it from a similar story to kind of help put it in perspective. What if the ex had given him a gun and said it was full of blanks, or even empty. Then he told the guy to pretend to shoot the victim to give her a scare or something because she liked jokes like that. Instead though, the gun was loaded with live rounds so instead the patsy guy just shot her in the head. It's the same kind of situation, a guy was tricked into committing a crime, but its kind of simplified because questionable sex practices are taken out of the equation. The guy in this situation committed murder, not manslaughter, in my mind because if this guy had done any kind of investigation into the situation or even just had the sense to not do something that's kind of fucked up to start with then the woman would be alive. Now, maybe throwing the book at him is a little harsh but certainly a harsh punishment is in order. I can also understand giving the patsy a harsher charge in exchange for giving the mastermind guy an equal charge and chance of punishment as a willing accomplice.

 

[Espy]

See, I feel bad that he was manipulated BUT only to a certain extent. He should have done a HELL of a lot more research before going there.

 

[Cajungal]

Lesson learned:

If a stranger asks you to rape them, get them to sign a contract first that they're not going to call the cops afterwards. And even if you did sign a contract, you would still go to jail if they called the cops. So don't 'rape' strangers!

Because rape is illegal. There's no such thing as consensual rape. A rape fantasy is a bit of an oxymoron because it implies participation and consent. Rape has neither. What is considered a 'rape fantasy' is more 'pushing the line on rough sex'.

While it's a shame he's gonna go to jail for this, he only has himself to blame.

Reminds me of the short story "Rape Fantasies." The main character says something close to that.

 

[strawman]

Stien, do you think the Marine should be charged as much as the other man or should get lesser charges (not what he WILL get but what you think he should get)?

I don't know what the laws are.

If I could choose and apply the laws then it would have a strong parallel to hiring a hit man who successfully killed your target, except within the realm of rape vs murder. The person who hired the hitman is charged with murder 1 - premeditated murder. Rape is simplified, but given that it was aggravated rape (ie, the marine 'ordered' the rape to be as bad as it was, rather than simply saying, "hey, go rape me" it was his intent to make her suffer significantly during the ordeal) then the modification of aggravation plus breaking and entering, etc should land the man who hired the 'hit' in the same hot water as if he had done it by his own hands.

But I don't know that the laws that cover accomplice to rape are as strong as accomplice to murder, or the various other related laws.

I suspect the case has gotten enough national attention that some places will be looking at their laws to see if something should change.

But chances are the marine won't get more than a few years, max, and he may well believe it's worth the price.

 

[Math242]

I think both of them should get max punishment for rape charges.

Even if it's roleplaying, the dude just should have fucking noticed she was not into it and something was iffy. As for the marine, let's just say i hope inmates like his tight army ass.

 

[@Li3n]

The guy that set it up should be getting full charges...

Those who claim that the BDSM community proves that some acts are not criminal if performed with consent - that is only true if all parties to the act decide, before, during and after, that the act is consensual. They can change their mind at any time and press charges, even if at the time of the act it was consensual. The only thing protecting their partners is their own social contract, which is not in any way shape or form legally enforceable.

Wait, i'm pretty sure that if you can prove that it was consensual pressing charges after won't hold up. I recall seeing somewhere something about how a big percentage of reported rapes here where actually prostitutes charging clients that didn't pay after.

Also, electrocuting someone's balls isn't torture, it's enhanced interrogation.

 

[Tinwhistler]

Those who claim that the BDSM community proves that some acts are not criminal if performed with consent - that is only true if all parties to the act decide, before, during and after, that the act is consensual. They can change their mind at any time and press charges, even if at the time of the act it was consensual. The only thing protecting their partners is their own social contract, which is not in any way shape or form legally enforceable.

That's totally incorrect around these parts. In Texas, the assaultive charges specifically have a codified defense for consent.

Sec. 22.06. CONSENT AS DEFENSE TO ASSAULTIVE CONDUCT. (a) The victim's effective consent or the actor's reasonable belief that the victim consented to the actor's conduct is a defense to prosecution


You can't retroactively revoke consent. If you let someone spank your ass, and then try to get them arrested later, and it can be shown to a jury's satisfaction that you consented, that guy will get off.

Of course, you can revoke consent at any time DURING, and that's just fine.

 

[Chibibar]

Those who claim that the BDSM community proves that some acts are not criminal if performed with consent - that is only true if all parties to the act decide, before, during and after, that the act is consensual. They can change their mind at any time and press charges, even if at the time of the act it was consensual. The only thing protecting their partners is their own social contract, which is not in any way shape or form legally enforceable.

In Texas, the assaultive charges specifically have a codified defense for consent.

Sec. 22.06. CONSENT AS DEFENSE TO ASSAULTIVE CONDUCT. (a) The victim's effective consent or the actor's reasonable belief that the victim consented to the actor's conduct is a defense to prosecution


You can't retroactively revoke consent. If you let someone spank your ass, and then try to get them arrested later, and it can be shown to a jury's satisfaction that you consented, that guy will get off.

Of course, you can revoke consent at any time DURING, and that's just fine.[/QUOTE]

Hence the "safe word" right?

 

[ScytheRexx]

If you let someone spank your ass, and then try to get them arrested later, and it can be shown to a jury's satisfaction that you consented, that guy will get off.

The last part of that sentence made me chuckle. :laugh: Is that wrong of me?

Both need to get punished. I actually think the one that orchestrated the attack should get worst, since he not only premeditated the plan, conspired to have it carried out, pushed the fantasy rapist into the act through his e-mails, and made sure to probably word it in ways that makes the fantasy rapist to think she was just "playing along". I hope he does not walk away from this with only a slap on the wrist type of sentence.

 

[sixpackshaker]

I hope the conspiracy charge carries the same punishment as the rapist. Like it was mentioned earlier, hiring a hit man that kills your target is still a capital crime. I think Texas just executed some one for hiring a hit man to kill their spouse.

 

[Math242]

he has his ex raped, how could he walk away. that would really be a slap in the poor girl's face.

 

[ThatNickGuy]

This is why I have a policy in place for meeting someone in public, first, when meeting them off the 'net. Mind you, I've never done the casual encounter thing, but I still wouldn't have someone come over or go anywhere without meeting them somewhere, first. The dude ignored the #1 policy when meeting someone off the net.

Should he be punished? Eeee, I really, REALLY don't know. I wouldn't want to be the judge in this case.

 

[Math242]

well he raped her. the line of defense: i thought she liked it is not gonna hold up.

His lawyer will try to have him look as a victim too but no jury or judge is going to show sympathy to some perv's cause.

 

[Adam]

Lesson learned:

If a stranger asks you to rape them, get them to sign a contract first that they're not going to call the cops afterwards. And even if you did sign a contract, you would still go to jail if they called the cops. So don't 'rape' strangers!

Because rape is illegal. There's no such thing as consensual rape. A rape fantasy is a bit of an oxymoron because it implies participation and consent. Rape has neither. What is considered a 'rape fantasy' is more 'pushing the line on rough sex'.

While it's a shame he's gonna go to jail for this, he only has himself to blame.

Reminds me of the short story "Rape Fantasies." The main character says something close to that.[/QUOTE]

Margaret Atwood, famous Canadian author. Nice!