The Law and Justice Room
New York lawmakers seek major expansion of state power to criminalize sexual relations.....
Due to pressure from activists and political figures including President Joe Biden, colleges have made it harder for students accused of sexual misconduct to show they obtained "consent" from their partners.
Bills in the state Assembly (A6540) and Senate (S6200) would nullify consent if it were obtained through "deception, fraud, concealment or artifice," meaning a person who told a falsehood or incomplete truth in the pursuit of sex could be prosecuted for sexual assault.
Assembly sponsor Rebecca Seawright portrayed the measure, which would define consent for the first time in New York penal law, as needed to "hold predators like Harvey Weinstein accountable."
Since Weinstein defended himself by claiming "that he felt confused" about the definition of consent, "there will be no more confusion" under this legislation, Wulff said.
"Failure to define consent creates disparate outcomes in convicting sexual predators as each jury grapples to create its own definition with no guidance from New York State's statutes," the Senate version reads. "This vital concept cannot be left to chance."
Reason editor Elizabeth Nolan Brown deadpanned that the legislation would criminalize being "less than fully truthful with sex partners."
She warned it could "open the floodgates" of prosecutions and civil suits against women for "lying about contraceptive use or menstrual cycles, and men for lying about having a vasectomy," or simply hiding unpleasant facts about one's financial status.
The bill language is so poorly drafted that it will lead to "selective prosecution" and racially biased results, according to Fontier: A person could be guilty "a thousand different ways."
Being branded a sexual offender is a "life-altering event that can't be taken back" even if the defendant's conviction is overturned, she said. "You don't get that time back."
Current law requires sex partners only be conscious and aware of the nature of the sexual activity for consent to be valid.
Any "unwanted" touch that was made "intentionally, and for no legitimate purpose," could be prosecuted. Current law requires prosecutors to show the accused wanted to "gratify their sexual desire or to degrade or abuse the victim."
"Even if an individual is conscious and capable of communicating consent, their partner … could still be arrested, prosecuted, and ultimately found criminally liable" under the constantly shifting "reasonable person" standard, she wrote about the intoxication bill.
The sexual initiator must "guess and gauge the legal competency of their partner" who has taken any substance, an inversion of criminal law principles, she argued. "In other words, you are expected to know what is in another person’s head," she said. It would criminalize sexual encounters "when one person later regrets their actions," she added.
The unwanted touching bill would eliminate the "mental state" required to commit a crime, which is a "bedrock principle of our criminal code," Fontier wrote. The bill specifically mentions touching "on a bus, train, or subway car.".....snip~
New York lawmakers seek major expansion of state power to criminalize sexual relations | Just The News
Is this more patheticness by Deviant Democrats in New York.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Dr. Who
