Watch out men, even if she consents you can still be charged with rape.

[hsmith]

State's Highest Court Rules In Sexual Consent Case - WBAL Radio - wbal.com

The Maryland Court of Appeals has ruled police can charge a man with rape if he ignores a woman's request to stop, even if she earlier agreed to have sex.
The state's highest court has made its ruling in the Montgomery County case of Maouloud Baby.

He was convicted in 2004 of rape, but the Maryland Court of Special Appeals overturned the verdict.

The Court of Appeals writes in a 76-page opinion that "post-penetration withdrawal of consent negates initial consent for the purposes of sexual offense crimes."
Maryland joins seven other states whose courts have concluded a woman can revoke her consent after intercourse begins.

I can see cases where this SHOULD be the case, such as where the man possibly gets violent in the middle of intercourse. Yes, that should be considered an assault (I would argue if it is rape though). If a woman says "stop" in the middle, I would argue that you MUST stop continuing I wouldn't know if it was rape but it is defiantly a crime.

So basically, men can be charged with rape if both parties are drunk and agree to have sex. Men can also be charged with rape if a woman changes her mind in the middle.

Found the original account:

Court Says Consensual Sex Can't Become Rape - washingtonpost.com

While deliberating on a rape case in December 2004, a Montgomery County jury asked the judge the following question: If a woman agrees to have sex, but while having intercourse changes her mind and withdraws consent, is she being raped if the man doesn't stop?
Circuit Court Judge Louise G. Scrivener told jurors they would need to determine that themselves, relying on the instructions they had been given. The jury returned a guilty verdict.

The Court of Special Appeals of Maryland this week overturned the conviction -- kicking the case back to Circuit Court -- and delved into the thorny legal issue of revocation of consent in rape cases. In a 51-page opinion, it faulted Scrivener for not telling jurors that under Maryland law the scenario described does not constitute rape.

The appeals court decision could lead to a new trial, or possibly a dismissal of charges, for Maouloud Baby, who was 16 at the time of the incident and is now 19. He is serving a five-year sentence.

"He's lost these formative years of his life," said his attorney, James F. Shalleck. "You don't get your time back from the court."

Prosecutors said the conviction was the right outcome, and the attorney general's office intends to appeal this week's decision. If the state's highest court agrees to hear the case, it could set precedent on a legal question that hasn't been seriously broached by Maryland courts since 1980.
"We may have lost the battle, but we might ultimately win the war," said Assistant State's Attorney Alex Foster.

The case stems from an encounter among teenagers Dec. 13, 2003. Baby and a classmate, Michael Wilson, then students at Watkins Mill High School in Montgomery Village, drove to a residential area with an 18-year-old woman who attended Montgomery College. Baby and Wilson, who was 15, knew the woman socially. She is not being identified because The Washington Post generally does not identify victims of sexual crimes.
The appeals court decision provides this account of the case:
After the woman parked the car, Baby and Wilson asked her to sit between them in the back seat. She did. They began fondling her and making other sexual advances. Baby got out of the car at one point, and Wilson had intercourse with her. Then Baby got back in and had a brief conversation with the woman.

"After that, we sat there for a couple of seconds, and he was like, 'So are you going to let me hit it?' And I didn't really say anything, and he was like, 'I don't want to rape you,' " the woman testified.

The prosecutor asked whether she responded to that statement.

Yes," the woman testified. "I said that as long as he stops when I tell him to," he could do it.
The woman testified that she didn't feel that she could turn him down.

"Something just clicked off, and I just did whatever they said," she testified.

Baby began to have sex with her, but the woman said she felt pain and indicated that she wanted him to stop. She said he stopped "five or so seconds" after she made the request. Baby testified that the sex was consensual, that he explicitly told her "I'm not going to rape you" and that he stopped as soon as she expressed discomfort.

The trio returned to a McDonald's restaurant in Montgomery Village, where they had been earlier. Before departing, the woman and Wilson hugged, and she gave Baby her phone number. Hours later, the woman told a friend's mother what had happened -- a delayed reaction that prosecutors ascribed to "rape trauma syndrome."

Baby and Wilson were charged as adults with first-degree rape, among other charges. Wilson pleaded guilty to second-degree rape and was sentenced to 18 months. Baby's first trial before a jury of 11 men and one woman ended in a mistrial. In his second trial, Baby was convicted of first-degree rape, first-degree sexual offense and third-degree sexual offense.

In its decision, the appeals court notes that Maryland, like North Carolina, has held on to the legal view that a woman cannot be raped after she has agreed to have sex. In those cases, defendants can be charged with sexual assault.

Some other states have changed this area of the law through legislative initiatives and precedent-setting cases that have established that a woman can be raped even if she initially consents to have sex.

Foster, who has prosecuted dozens of rape cases, said he hopes Maryland will join them.

"There are a lot of scenarios where we really need to think this through," Foster said. For example, he said, a woman could agree to have sex but later object if she learns that the man is not wearing a condom or has a sexually transmitted disease.

They are pushing the fact it was rape even though she originally consented where she said stop and testified that he DID STOP!

*THAT* is disturbing my friends.

[Thorgrim]

I thought this was old news?

I read about cases like this that are decades old...and are unchallenged...and I don't see it changing, ever

[7960]

While deliberating on a rape case in December 2004, a Montgomery County jury asked the judge the following question: If a woman agrees to have sex, but while having intercourse changes her mind and withdraws consent, is she being raped if the man doesn't stop?

The answer to that is "yes."

The Maryland Court of Appeals has ruled police can charge a man with rape if he ignores a woman's request to stop, even if she earlier agreed to have sex.

That's how it should be.

Baby began to have sex with her, but the woman said she felt pain and indicated that she wanted him to stop. She said he stopped "five or so seconds" after she made the request.

She said ok, then she said stop and he did, and he got charged with rape. Tha'ts fucked up.

[motivez]

I guess the question is whether those 5 or 6 seconds, if we take her word for it, constitute rape?

I would say if you don't stop immediately it's rape, but if she agreed to have sex.. and you're in the middle of it, the physical evidence for sex is already there, so how can they believe one person over another?

[7960]

Originally Posted by motivez

I guess the question is whether those 5 or 6 seconds, if we take her word for it, constitute rape?

Nothing is instantaneous. If a cop yells "drop it" and then immediately fires at you, he's in trouble. If she says "yes, it's ok" and then 2 minutes into it says "stop" and you take 5 seconds to stop........you stopped.

[Galactic Gigolo]

What a load of crap. How can this girl live with herself knowing that she has pretty much destroyed the life of a man who, from her own testimony, said he did not want to rape her and almost immediately stopped having sex with her when requested?

[JaJae]

I actually know a handful of girls who claim they have been "raped". Their stories typically start with they went to a party, got drunk, woke up next a guy and concluded they didn't really want to have sex with him. So they go around campus telling all their friends that this guy raped them. Now this isn't the same thing as what happened here, but it shows how quickly some people are to throw the label around.

Now if this guy was being very physical with her and continued being extremely hard on her for those 5 or 6 seconds I think he did something legally wrong. I don't know if rape is the term or if having his life ruined and labeled by the law is exactly in order.

My old roommate in college who often had consensual sex with a girl. Eventually he didn't want to pursue a relationship with her or something happened and he called it all off. She went to the college administration and the police and called raped. She changed her story numerous times and after a month or two of lawyers it was eventually thrown out and dismissed. Yet during this time the school kicked him off campus (for safety). He didn't have a car, he lost his meal plan and his dorm, etc. Nothing happened to the girl, but his life was almost ruined and was extremely inconvenienced for some time.

The point of all this is that we have to be careful with the label. Rape is a horrific crime, but it is being cheapened by all these cases we keep hearing about.

[7960]

Originally Posted by JaJae

I actually know a handful of girls who claim they have been "raped". Their stories typically start with they went to a party, got drunk, woke up next a guy and concluded they didn't really want to have sex with him. So they go around campus telling all their friends that this guy raped them.

I was an RA at my college. I heard that weekly, and got in trouble more than once for saying "that's regret, not rape."

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by 7960

I was an RA at my college. I heard that weekly, and got in trouble more than once for saying "that's regret, not rape."

Imagine if a guy cried rape every time they went to a bar and woke up next an ugly chick in the morning. This doesn't happen though, I think society is accepting and/or sympathetic of these types of stories coming from women.

[Dispatcher]

Originally Posted by JaJae

Imagine if a guy cried rape every time they went to a bar and woke up next an ugly chick in the morning. This doesn't happen though, I think society is accepting and/or sympathetic of these types of stories coming from women.

As long as it was dark and I was drunk,
she could be as ugly as a mud fence .

[motivez]

Originally Posted by 7960

Nothing is instantaneous. If a cop yells "drop it" and then immediately fires at you, he's in trouble. If she says "yes, it's ok" and then 2 minutes into it says "stop" and you take 5 seconds to stop........you stopped.

So how long do you have to stop before it becomes rape?

What if it's 10 seconds? 15?

[7960]

Originally Posted by motivez

So how long do you have to stop before it becomes rape?

I don't know.

But look at the flip side of this.....if you're on an in-thrust and she yells "stop!", if there's no time leeway then you're raping her as you're pulling out.

Like I (kind of) said above......if I'm going 80mph and a cop pulls up next to me, draws and points his gun, yells "stop!" and then upon pronouncing the "p" immediately pulls the trigger then he's in trouble. He can't claim "I told him to stop and he didn't." Nothing is instantaneous.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by motivez

So how long do you have to stop before it becomes rape?

What if it's 10 seconds? 15?

I don't think you can go by an arbitrary time limit. Criminal cases need to prove mens rea (guilty mind) and actus reus (guilty act) in order to convict. What if you're having sex and you accidentally hurt the girl and she says "stop" and you think she meant wait a second before starting again? Is that rape too?

I think you have to take it on a case by case basis. Based on what was provided in the original article it doesn't seem like the guy had any ill intentions and I don't believe from the information provided that he was someone who would commit a rape.

[DosEquis]

Originally Posted by motivez

So how long do you have to stop before it becomes rape?

What if it's 10 seconds? 15?

I would say it depends on the situation. You can't just put a number on it. "If she does consent to sexual relations, but in the middle decides the act should stop, you have 15 seconds left." That way after she says no you look at the clock and watch the second hand as you try to finish up in 15 seconds.

[7th Ninjai]

Originally Posted by motivez

I guess the question is whether those 5 or 6 seconds, if we take her word for it, constitute rape?

I would say if you don't stop immediately it's rape, but if she agreed to have sex.. and you're in the middle of it, the physical evidence for sex is already there, so how can they believe one person over another?

That's my biggest problem with this. The courts will always believe the woman - especially if the physical evidence is already in her favor.

[7960]

Originally Posted by 7th Ninjai

That's my biggest problem with this. The courts will always believe the woman -

wrong.

the public will usually think "she would have said it if it wasn't true" but the courts do not always side with the woman.