home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky alt.feminism:6659 misc.legal:21869
- Newsgroups: alt.feminism,misc.legal
- Path: sparky!uunet!enterpoop.mit.edu!world!srm
- From: srm@world.std.com (Stevens R Miller)
- Subject: Re: Retardation and Rape (was: Re: Mysogynist Bullshit)
- Message-ID: <C045rp.64o@world.std.com>
- Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
- References: <1992Dec27.183632.9369@zooid.guild.org> <Bzxpq3.Fw7@news.cso.uiuc.edu> <1992Dec27.235337.25000@panix.com> <Bzy3Gv.7vH@world.std.com> <1992Dec29.021854.28426@panix.com> <C02ssH.C6A@world.std.com> <1992Dec31.020339.25472@panix.com>
- Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 07:50:13 GMT
- Lines: 30
-
- lkk@panix.com (Larry Kolodney) writes:
-
- >In <C02ssH.C6A@world.std.com> srm@world.std.com (Stevens R Miller) writes:
-
- >>lkk@panix.com (Larry Kolodney) writes:
-
- >>>But if the Glen Ridge defendants were convicted SOLELY on the basis
- >>>that the victim was retarded, they would only be guilty of statutory
- >>>rape, and would (I suspect) face a significantly lighter sentence.
- >>>You'd have to show actual lack of consent for a regular rape charge to
- >>>stick.
-
- >>Incorrect. PL 130.05(3)(b) makes mental incapacity the legal
- >>equivalent of actual lack of consent. From that point on, the
- >>charge of rape is treated identically with any other. (As it should
- >>be, IMHO).
-
- >The Glen Ridge case is being tried under NJ law, so PL 130 (NY Law) is
- >irrelevant. I don't have the NJ law in front of me, but the Model
- >Penal Code appears to distinguish between "rape" and "gross sexual
- >imposition" which is a lesser offense and which includes having sex
- >with a person incapable of giving consent.
-
- So the MPC is also irrelevant. I know that Glen Ridge is in New
- Jersey. I referred to the NY law in order to explain a point of
- law, not to predict the outcome of the case. Also, all charges of
- rape are statutory in both New York and New Jersey; neither state
- has common law crimes.
- --
- Stevens R. Miller J.D.
-