Judge: Law won't protect unmarried victims in rape

[aGameOfThrones]

LOS ANGELES (AP) — A California appeals court overturned the rape conviction of a man who authorities say pretended to be a sleeping woman's boyfriend before initiating intercourse, ruling that an arcane law from 1872 doesn't protect unmarried women in such cases.

A panel of judges reversed the trial court's conviction of Julio Morales and remanded it for retrial, in a decision posted Wednesday from the Los Angeles-based court.

Morales had been sentenced to three years in state prison. He was accused of entering a woman's bedroom late one night after her boyfriend had gone home and initiating sexual intercourse while she was asleep, after a night of drinking.
The victim said her boyfriend was in the room when she fell asleep, and they'd decided against having sex that night because he didn't have a condom and he had to be somewhere early the next day.

Morales pretended to be her boyfriend in the darkened room, and it wasn't until a ray of light from outside the room flashed across his face that she realized he wasn't her boyfriend, according to prosecutors.

"Has the man committed rape? Because of historical anomalies in the law and the statutory definition of rape, the answer is no, even though, if the woman had been married and the man had impersonated her husband, the answer would be yes," Judge Thomas L. Willhite Jr. wrote in the court's decision.

The appeals court added that prosecutors argued two theories, and it was unclear if the jury convicted Morales because the defendant tricked the victim or because sex with a sleeping person is defined as rape by law.

The court said the case should be retried to ensure the jury's conviction is supported by the latter argument.

The decision also urges the Legislature to examine the law, which was first written in response to cases in England that concluded fraudulent impersonation to have sex wasn't rape because the victim would consent, even if they were being tricked into thinking the perpetrator was their husband.
Willhite noted that the law has been applied inconsistently over the years in California.

In 2010, a similar law in Idaho prevented an unmarried woman from pressing rape charges after being tricked into sex with a stranger by her then-boyfriend.

The judge called what happened "despicable" but said the state's law left the court with no choice. Idaho's law was amended to cover all women in 2011.

Prior to the conviction, Schulman had argued Morales believed the sex was consensual because the victim responded to his kisses and caresses, according to the decision.

http://news.yahoo.com/judge-law-wont-protect-unmarried-victims-rape-012941200.html

[specsaregood]

Morales pretended to be her boyfriend in the darkened room, and it wasn't until a ray of light from outside the room flashed across his face that she realized he wasn't her boyfriend, according to prosecutors.

Then what happened? Did she say no and attempt to get him to stop and he didnt?

[CaptUSA]

If being tricked into having sex with a stranger is rape, then it really puts a damper on the bar scene...

[Ranger29860]

Then what happened? Did she say no and attempt to get him to stop and he didnt?

I heard a little on the radio about this. It sounded like once she realized she was being raped she started screaming rape and kicking him off

[CaptUSA]

I heard a little on the radio about this. It sounded like once she realized she was being tricked into screwing someone else she started screaming rape and kicking him offFixed that for you.

I'm not saying this guy isn't a creep and what he did wasn't wrong, but rape is sex against your will. She was willing - she was just too dumb to know who she was having sex with.

[Ranger29860]

Fixed that for you.

I'm not saying this guy isn't a creep and what he did wasn't wrong, but rape is sex against your will. She was willing - she was just too dumb to know who she was having sex with.

Well she had been drinking, so I can maybe see where some lack of situational awareness could have taken place. So I can understand how someone in the dark could make that mistake if the person you are having sex with matches the general size of your boyfriend.

But she WOKE UP while he was having sex with her so at no time was she willing are even able to give consent prior to that so I do not see how under any circumstance she would be willing. Now once she made that leap of logic to assume that it was her boyfriend who had come back with a condom then she was consenting only under the assumption that it was her boyfriend. Again she was never at any point willing to have sex with this man, as seen by the fact that she rightfully flipped the fuck out when she realized it was not her boyfriend.

The one thing I do not see here is the time frame of her waking up and when she realized. As far as we know it could have been 10 seconds which would seem a lot more probable considering, but the wording makes it seem like they were having active sex for a good while before she realized.

*edit*
So the assumption of she was to dumb to realize it may be misguided considering the circumstances. Hell in that situation both being at least buzzed, in a pitch black room, had offered her boyfriend to stay the night and had just woken up in the middle of the act she may not have been able to fully comprehend what was going on, neither would a lot of people.

[sailingaway]

Fixed that for you.

I'm not saying this guy isn't a creep and what he did wasn't wrong, but rape is sex against your will. She was willing - she was just too dumb to know who she was having sex with.

in her own bedroom? Who is she supposed to expect when she is asleep?

whether it is rape or not, it is something, I should think.

[specsaregood]

Well she had been drinking, so I can maybe see where some lack of situational awareness could have taken place. So I can understand how someone in the dark could make that mistake if the person you are having sex with matches the general size of your boyfriend.

But she WOKE UP while he was having sex with her so at no time was she willing are even able to give consent prior to that so I do not see how under any circumstance she would be willing. Now once she made that leap of logic to assume that it was her boyfriend who had come back with a condom then she was consenting only under the assumption that it was her boyfriend. Again she was never at any point willing to have sex with this man, as seen by the fact that she rightfully flipped the fuck out when she realized it was not her boyfriend.

The one thing I do not see here is the time frame of her waking up and when she realized. As far as we know it could have been 10 seconds which would seem a lot more probable considering, but the wording makes it seem like they were having active sex for a good while before she realized.

I'd only convict the guy if she said no/tried to get him to stop and he didn't.

also, it sounds like we are assuming that they hadn't hooked up sometime previously? maybe this guy didn't think it was an issue because they were f**k buddies in the past? dunno enough about the situation to properly speculate.

[Ranger29860]

I'd only convict the guy if she said no/tried to get him to stop and he didn't.

also, it sounds like we are assuming that they hadn't hooked up sometime previously? maybe this guy didn't think it was an issue because they were f**k buddies in the past? dunno enough about the situation to properly speculate.

So the guy not thinking it was an issue ( just using your hypothetical case) because of past actions would make this ok? BTW she did kick and scream when she realized what was happening and started yelling rape.

[CaptUSA]

in her own bedroom? Who is she supposed to expect when she is asleep?

whether it is rape or not, it is something, I should think.Yeah, it IS something, alright... Pretty friggin' disgusting. But here's where I have a problem. She's stating that the guy was pretending to be her boyfriend... Well, that must mean she was awake. Otherwise, it's just some dude raping a sleeping chick. It doesn't say she woke up during it and thought it was her boyfriend... She says he was pretending to be her boyfriend. Huge difference, there, IMO.

[Ranger29860]

Yeah, it IS something, alright... Pretty friggin' disgusting. But here's where I have a problem. She's stating that the guy was pretending to be her boyfriend... Well, that must mean she was awake. Otherwise, it's just some dude raping a sleeping chick. It doesn't say she woke up during it and thought it was her boyfriend... She says he was pretending to be her boyfriend. Huge difference, there, IMO.


Straight form the article

"
Morales had been sentenced to three years in state prison. He was accused of entering a woman's bedroom late one night after her boyfriend had gone home and initiating sexual intercourse while she was asleep, after a night of drinking.
"

[specsaregood]

So the guy not thinking it was an issue ( just using your hypothetical case) because of past actions would make this ok? BTW she did kick and scream when she realized what was happening and started yelling rape.

I'm not saying it is "ok". I'm saying it might have just been some miscommunication. If he didn't stop after she started kicking and screaming and yelling rape, then it was rape. If he stopped immediately then it would depend on their relationship.

[dannno]

in her own bedroom? Who is she supposed to expect when she is asleep?

whether it is rape or not, it is something, I should think.

Well at minimum it is trespassing I would think.

I mean, I can see how a prosecutor might try and charge him with attempted rape since he obviously broke into this woman's room, who was asleep and a stranger.. but it sounds like he started to try and arouse her, if a guy wanted to have sex with a sleeping woman I would think he would want her to stay asleep. So the fact that it sounds like he tried to arouse her means it would be tough to get a conviction on attempted rape, even.

What if some guy broke into a woman's house and cuddled with her all night? What would the charges be?

Maybe some sort of sexual assault charge, but not rape.

Pretty sure if you walk up to a woman and kiss her without consent it is sexual assault and this guy did it to a sleeping woman, so probably sexual assault.