Comment

Some thoughts on 'sex by surprise'

7
goddamnedfrank12/07/2010 12:58:43 pm PST

Ever have your sergeant force a man to strip while you photograph him for physical evidence based on what turned out to be a patently false allegation that was later recanted? Count yourselves lucky because, perhaps not surprisingly, it’s a less than enjoyable experience.

Now imagine that the alleged offense you’re trying to investigate doesn’t even require a single scrap of physical evidence to support it, your witnesses have been actively colluding with each other before coming to the police, and gave interviews to tabloid newspapers during your investigation. Also, one of your witnesses has written a detailed multi step guideline for getting legal revenge on a lover who cheats on or dumps them, and step 4 is “use your imagination.” Lastly, your witnesses refuse to sign an actual criminal complaint, they insist they’re just “seeking advice” on how to force a man to take an STD test, and that there never was any threat, force, or sense of fear involved.

I’m sure there are situations where the condom breaks, the woman notices, tells the man to stop, he doesn’t and that’s a form of rape. Yet the risk of bodily fluid transmission is always present in consensual intercourse, condoms do break, in rare occasions because the woman has sabotaged them. If a person didn’t sign on for that risk, and aren’t willing to deal with attendant consequences, perhaps they shouldn’t be having sex.

Speaking solely as someone with experience in forensic analysis, I like cases that can actually be proved, that don’t hinge entirely upon competing raw assertion. Especially when my only two witnesses know each other and have been colluding with each other prior to coming forward.