The definition of rape just expanded in Maryland, where the highest state court ruled yesterday that a man could be charged with raping a woman who withdrew consent after they started having sex, according to The Sun.
Maouloud Baby was convicted of first-degree rape in December 2004 after jurors heard testimony that the 16-year-old continued having sex with a woman for "about five or so seconds" after she told him to stop.
The conviction had been overturned by lower-level appellate courts, but the Court of Appeals concluded that no means no, regardless of timing.
"We conclude that post-penetration withdrawal of consent negates initial consent for the purposes of sexual offense crimes and, when coupled with the other elements, may constitute the crime of rape," Judge Lynne Battaglia wrote in the majority opinion, according to the newspaper.
That wouldn't have constituted rape under a previous ruling. In a 1980 case, the same court ruled:
Given the fact that consent must precede penetration, it follows in our view that although a woman may have consented to a sexual encounter, even to intercourse, if that consent is withdrawn prior to the act of penetration, then it cannot be said that she has consented to sexual intercourse. On the other hand, ordinarily if she consents prior to penetration and withdraws the consent following penetration, there is no rape.
Upon conviction, the judge sentence Baby to 15 years in prison, but suspended 10 years of the sentence.
The Sun says seven other states have adopted similar definitions of rape.
1 comment:
Definitely think the prison Term is not equal the crime. However, it only takes a few seconds to feel sexually violated, a few seconds to get pregnant and a few seconds to get an STD. I'm for the new law - its about time men learn what NO means. but the prison Term for that - absolutely ridiculous. I could think of a much lesser type/Term of sentence (30 days?)that is comparable to the crime.
Post a Comment