Patrick Kane subject of police investigation [Mod Warning in OP]

[Stand Witness]

I suppose they could try. But in this specific case, there is no indication that Kane is claiming he was raped. So the what ifs are just unnecessary at this point.

Just playing devils advocate here but if it was a situation where she woke up the next day and felt like the previous night she was raped couldn't the other person also just claim the same thing?

 

[hockeykicker]

Tim Graham ‏@ByTimGraham · 1m1 minute ago
From @TheBuffaloNews law-enforcement source: Roseanne Johnson, Erie Cnty DA Special Victims Bureau, is prosecutor assigned to Kane case

Charges coming?

apparently most said few pages ago that she looks at evidence and sees if she needs to charge

 

[Hobo Bob]

This is a much better argument. The answer to the question "is it rape because she was drunk" is unequivocally yes.

That's just not true. Alcohol isn't a magical drug that makes you go crazy. Unless you've drunk an obscene amount you're more likely to have lowered inhibitions and poorer judgment. Not all drunk sex is consensual, but neither is all drunk sex rape.

 

[Captain Bowie]

Unnecessary for what? They aren't unnecessary for pointing out whether or not the law is contradictory.

There is no indication that what you are saying has any bearing on the specific case we are discussing. If Kane comes out and accuses rape or being too intoxicated then it will be worth discussing. At this point it just comes across as victim blaming.

 

[7even]

See tsujimoto's post a few posts up. Seems like according to NYS law, you are not a victim of rape simply because you're drunk. You would have to be drunk and passed out, or else you have to be drunk because you were slipped alcohol without your knowledge.

NY sure. I was making a broader statement.

 

[neelyforpresident]

Innocent until proven guilty...but man do I have a bad feeling about this.

 

[Cane mutiny]

Yeah. We need signed contracts now before bumping uglies.

Somebody made ya sign a contract, eh?

 

[EvGeno]

I agree. I think there should be some serious punishments for false accusations

Would never happen, because this would make true victims even more reluctant to speak out and press charges (i.e. if perpetrator is able to get off, victim's life is ruined).

 

[Canadian Wampa]

As someone who isn't really familiar with all the laws surrounding rape, how is this affected if they were both drunk? Both parties are unable to consent so is it rape for both?

 

[Captain Bowie]

Just playing devils advocate here but if it was a situation where she woke up the next day and felt like the previous night she was raped couldn't the other person also just claim the same thing?

Sure, anyone can claim anything they want.

 

[Stand Witness]

Not the original one I was following.

Here was the first post:

I think Kane (or anyone who is in this situation with too much alcohol) could argue that they themselves were too drunk to consent any acts and therefore he was raped himself.

For example, what happens when two black out drunk people have sex? Neither was in position to consent to it.

It is a bit out there, but depending on the definition of consent it does fit the bill. Let me state this again because somebody will still attack me, this is a bit out there, I know.

Was in reply to another post, but this stemmed the drunk driving tangent.

 

[Loosie]

I guess, for the record, a sexual assult could be as much as a saying something dirty to an unwanted party, it doesn't have to even involve sex.

at least in canada that is how it is. not sure about the states.

Hr could've smacked her butt ala Giroux and the police officer in ottawa.

I don't think she would have gone for a rape kit if there was no sexual intercourse.

 

[Paper]

It's not bizarre at all. You should either be responsible or not responsible for the decisions you make while intoxicated. The double standards are bizarre.

You are responsible for the decisions you make while drunk. Getting in the vehicle and driving is a decision. Being taken advantage of is not a decision, if a party can't give consent then it's rape.

There's grey in there, of course, when trying to figure when exactly a person can or can't give consent.

 

[hatterson]

It's not bizarre at all. You should either be responsible or not responsible for the decisions you make while intoxicated. The double standards are bizarre.

Do you really not understand the difference between being a victim of a crime and a perpetrator of a crime?

 

[Beerz]

NY sure. I was making a broader statement.

Your broader statement is dead wrong.

 

[hockeykicker]

As someone who isn't really familiar with all the laws surrounding rape, how is this affected if they were both drunk? Both parties are unable to consent so is it rape for both?

well every state is different, i know my state is different then new york. i believe someone posted a good amount of info in the last few pages

 

[King Mapes]

think this sums it up well for everyone

Agreed. It's natural to pick a side and run with it but let's wait until the facts come out and he is found guilty or innocent.

 

[Stand Witness]

Would never happen, because this would make true victims even more reluctant to speak out and press charges (i.e. if perpetrator is able to get off, victim's life is ruined).

Didn't I follow up the rest of the post saying that? If I didn't I definitely did with another similar post.

 

[DanZ]

There is no indication that what you are saying has any bearing on the specific case we are discussing. If Kane comes out and accuses rape or being too intoxicated then it will be worth discussing. At this point it just comes across as victim blaming.

I'm not blaming anyone. But sure though, jump to those conclusions if that makes you feel better. It is worth discussing when someone disputes the double standards that exist.

 

[Off Sides]

See tsujimoto's post a few posts up. Seems like according to NYS law, you are not a victim of rape simply because you're drunk. You would have to be drunk and passed out, or else you have to be drunk because you were slipped alcohol without your knowledge.

There has to be some sort of stipulations there. While I see the law as written, if someone is intoxicated yet not passed out, they can not be considered assaulted? That just does not seem to make any sense.

 

[Makar Goes Fast]

I don't think she would have gone for a rape kit if there was no sexual intercourse.

ahh missed that part thanks.

 

[Dalagaze]

Innocent until proven guilty...but man do I have a bad feeling about this.

So do I. Hopefully, though, it's nothing. Hopefully.

 

[CrypTic]

So two drunk guys walk out of a bar, there's no cab in sight, their cars are in the parking lot, and one guy begs his pal to just go ahead and give him a ride home. Guy number two finally agrees. Was he able to consent? Should he be charged?

These discussions are ridiculous. My point is this: does being drunk absolve you of making bad decisions or not? It's a slippery slope when someone can wake up feeling regret in the morning and turn around and ruin another's life.

EDIT: None of what I'm saying relates to Kane or the complainant. I have no idea what happened there nor do any of you.

You seem to repeatedly miss that consent is irrelevant in the case of drunk driving. I don't know if you're trolling or if you genuinely don't understand the difference. But it's been explained quite a few times in the last few pages and I doubt that my explaining it once more will help but I will try.

He should be charged with drunk driving bc consent is irrelevant to that crime. It's not an element of that crime. If you drive when your blood alcohol level is above a certain %, you have committed the crime of drunk driving. Please explain how consent is at all relevant in determining whether you have (1) driven or (2) your blood alcohol level.

 

[7even]

That's just not true. Alcohol isn't a magical drug that makes you go crazy. Unless you've drunk an obscene amount you're more likely to have lowered inhibitions and poorer judgment. Not all drunk sex is consensual, but neither is all drunk sex rape.

Well, define rape. If rape is "any sex that occurs between an intoxicated party and a sober party," yes, all drunk sex is rape, even drunk consensual sex.

In less than some strict legal sense, though, of course there are degrees.

 

[Captain Bowie]

I agree. I think there should be some serious punishments for false accusations because they have the potential to ruin someones life. It is a hard balance to achieve though because you don't want to turn away actual rape victims but you don't want to lock up anyone innocent too.

Victims have a hard enough coming out with allegations. I've heard the % of victims not saying anything is like 70% or higher. Don't quote me on that though. Last thing we need to do is de-centivize victims coming forward.

And why would false accusations of rape be different than any other false accusations of another crime?