The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Rate the MPC's new definition of rape/sexual assault:
Poast new message in this thread
Date: June 28th, 2015 9:43 PM Author: Cordovan piazza LOL@ LAW PROFESSORS WHAT A FUCKING DISEASE Person A and Person B are on a date and walking down the street. Person A, feeling romantically and sexually attracted, timidly reaches out to hold B’s hand and feels a thrill as their hands touch. Person B does nothing, but six months later files a criminal complaint. Person A is guilty of ‘Criminal Sexual Contact’ under proposed Section 213.6(3)(a). Far-fetched? Not as the draft is written. The hypothetical crime cobbles together two of the draft’s key concepts. The first is affirmative consent. The second is an enlarged definition of criminal sexual contact that would include the touching of any body part, clothed or unclothed, with sexual gratification in mind. As the authors of the model law explain: “Any kind of contact may qualify. There are no limits on either the body part touched or the manner in which it is touched.” So if Person B neither invites nor rebukes a sexual advance, then anything that happens afterward is illegal. “With passivity expressly disallowed as consent,” the memo says, “the initiator quickly runs up a string of offenses with increasingly more severe penalties to be listed touch by touch and kiss by kiss in the criminal complaint.” http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/28/opinion/sunday/judith-shulevitz-regulating-sex.html
|
Date: June 28th, 2015 10:02 PM Author: Aquamarine Talking Doctorate why do people who know nothing about sex feel qualified to write laws about it? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28219773) |
 |
Date: June 29th, 2015 9:05 AM Author: Light massive multi-billionaire (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28221835) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 9:27 AM Author: adulterous space philosopher-king (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28221892) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2015 10:03 PM Author: motley stain plaza I saw that on Twitter today posted by Christina Hoff Somers... She's a good source for this stuff. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28219777) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2015 10:04 PM Author: Curious Laser Beams (freeper) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28219781) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2015 10:13 PM Author: House-broken Associate Assess chaps is a bisexual urbanite who is fed up with SJWs. Work harder on your stalking game (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28219828) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2015 10:18 PM Author: Curious Laser Beams LJL, wasn't that guy some sort of freelance writer. why are the "journalists" on xo all closeted reptile? that CharlesXII guy who works for the daily caller REEKS of repressed homosexual (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28219870) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2015 10:20 PM Author: House-broken Associate Is there a single con on xo who you haven't determined is a closet homo? It's almost like you're one yourself or something (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28219876) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2015 10:21 PM Author: Curious Laser Beams ur the one who called AC bisexual (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28219879) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2015 10:11 PM Author: House-broken Associate Lmao (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28219820) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2015 10:28 PM Author: razzle-dazzle station ratface this is prima facie FUCKING INSANE. it's not even remotely ENOUGH that people are criticising it. it should not even be something that anyone is asked to CONSIDER DISCUSSING. i should not be reading about this in the NYT. stop the FUCKING INSANITY. |
|
Date: June 28th, 2015 10:33 PM Author: House-broken Associate lol brother. libsare JUST GETTINGSTARTED. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28219946) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2015 10:35 PM Author: Cheese-eating demanding abode Scary shit (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28219960) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 8:51 AM Author: Aphrodisiac mental disorder (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28221816) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 12:13 PM Author: Metal flushed place of business people who are hurt prima facie insanity.
i like it. |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 12:48 AM Author: Cordovan piazza (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28220733) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 8:44 AM Author: Cordovan piazza (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28221806) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 8:50 AM Author: sapphire bearded dragon corner Coming soon to the MBE, if it becomes part of the MPC. People who get that question wrong will be directly reported to Character & Fitness committees. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28221814) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 8:52 AM Author: confused preventive strike Is that real (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28221818) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 8:55 AM Author: sapphire bearded dragon corner http://www.law.nyu.edu/news/ideas/ali-penal-code-sexual-assault (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28221823) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 9:05 AM Author: Light massive multi-billionaire THIS IS WHY ProsBros are the
BEST
LAST
DEFENSE
against bullshit cases. |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 9:14 AM Author: charismatic sick ape parlour lol. our last line of defense is a cadre of bootlickers who chose to place their fellow citizens in cages for a living? boy do i feel safe. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28221853) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 12:02 PM Author: Irradiated hell (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28222681) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 12:03 PM Author: Irradiated hell This specific statute aside, prosecutorial discretion is the thing that scares me the most about the criminal justice system. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28222693) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 3:18 PM Author: heady frozen organic girlfriend lodge (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28224045) |
|
Date: June 30th, 2015 1:42 AM Author: underhanded appetizing school (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28228424) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 1:23 PM Author: vigorous duck-like shrine Fuck you, you piece of shit. I bet you would fail a lie detector test if you tried to claim: " I have never committed a crime while doing my job." almost 100% of prosecutors are felons. I can't wait for the lib thought police to hang you from a tree. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28223133) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 4:15 PM Author: Sooty balding locale depressive For anyone who wasn't concerned, read this post (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28224474) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 9:30 AM Author: green orchestra pit trust fund Remember when Bill Clinton-era libs were the party of freedom, liberation and fun?
Now Obama-era libs are puritanical tyrants and worse than the Christian right. They literally want to regulate sex. |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 1:22 PM Author: Swashbuckling frum house haunted graveyard Underrated observation. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28223125) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 3:36 PM Author: green orchestra pit trust fund (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28224187) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 11:58 AM Author: Cordovan piazza (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28222658) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 12:19 PM Author: Beady-eyed blue cuckold great, this is definitely going to prevent a lot of rapes (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28222791) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 12:29 PM Author: confused preventive strike Why do libs want to put more minorities in prison? Clearly the vast majority of whites won't be susceptible, but hysterical low iq female types will probably falsely accuse their male comrades of this all the time. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28222860) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 1:18 PM Author: Beady-eyed blue cuckold The two reporters are working to avoid creating a code that is overly punitive, which could contribute to the problem of mass incarceration. “It’s kind of a weird thing to be embarking on a project to broaden and expand criminal liability in a time when everyone agrees that criminal liability has broadened too much,” Murphy says. “At the same time, mass incarceration has not been caused by overly vigorous pursuit of sex crimes. But we are cognizant that some of the more extreme penalties and collateral consequences associated with the criminal justice system have focused on sex offenders.”
just do cognizant |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 12:32 PM Author: Irradiated hell I don't think this is that outrageous to try. No one wants a statute that fails to capture a legitimate sexual assault. Should be refined though. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28222885) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 4:32 PM Author: Spectacular school cafeteria juggernaut basically every canon of criminal law comes down to the idea that criminal punishment must be underinclusive rather than overinclusive. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28224651) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 4:53 PM Author: Irradiated hell Oh, without a doubt. In the sense of the standard of proof, "better a thousand guilty men go free than once innocent in jail," all of that stuff.
But in my mind (and correct me if I'm wrong, not a criminal attorney), this is designed to resolve questions of *fact* in favor of the D. We don't know exactly what went on and we can't, so if the testimony and evidence are close, err on the side of protecting the innocent.
The point I was raising is the over- or under-inclusion of the law. Granted, you have to have a state interest to criminalize conduct and we don't want to criminalize anything we don't have to. But I think most people's concept of sexual assault would cover, for example, someone touching someone's stomach through their clothes for sexual gratification without consent. Basically, assume we have perfect knowledge of the events (including mental state/intent), and assume that what occurred is undoubtedly what "we" (society) consider to be a sexual assault. At that point, we would certainly not want to release the defendant solely because the language of the statute did not actually criminalize the conduct.
|
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 1:15 PM Author: diverse at-the-ready sound barrier I know a guy who was at the ALI meeting when this went down. If it is at all comforting, hardly anyone (besides obviously interested non-profit type lawyers) supported the draft. Everyone was pretty outraged about the whole thing. There is even a lengthy letter drafted in opposition to the reporters' work thatbwas signed by a ton of members (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28223093) |
|
Date: June 29th, 2015 1:24 PM Author: Spectacular school cafeteria juggernaut if it can be any touch anywhere on the body, why even require the defendant have sexual gratification 'in mind'? Sexuality is so fluid now with asexuals and pansexuals. Why not just remove assault/battery from the MPC and make all unwanted touching a sex crime? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28223135) |
|
Date: June 30th, 2015 1:48 AM Author: cerise lay newt i think i remember my lib crim prof in 2010 bitching that the mpc's rape statute was 1960s-era (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2922053&forum_id=2#28228453) |
|
Date: June 30th, 2015 10:51 AM Author: Irradiated hell The current statute for MBE defines sexual assault ("rape") as a man putting his penis in the vagina of a woman who is not his wife without the woman's effective consent AND by force.
So, I think we could probably update this one a little |