WhipTheHip
Posts: 1004
Joined: 7/31/2006 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: LadyPact There's really three separate issues with this. One being if this was an abusive situation or not after the age of 18. It absolutely was prior to that (the second) when she was a minor. The third being the constant reminder that, no matter how we as a community use the word 'consent', the law doesn't recognize that for our activities. Anybody involved with this girl before her eighteenth birthday absolutely should be prosecuted. If she was not a legal adult, I absolutely believe that a crime was committed. The girl wouldn't have a leg to stand on signing any other type of contract before she is an adult. Any adult having sex with her before the age of 18 should be aware of the laws in their state. We really can't kid ourselves on the rest. A lot of what we do isn't legal. I could be prosecuted for doing some of the very same things to clip over the years. Cracking out the wand really is the same thing as 'electro-torture' and I don't even want to waste the space to discuss everything else. I hate to see all of the charges that someone could find to bring against Me if I ever got nailed for BDSM. In general, what people do in the BDSM community is not illegal. There are 50 states and 51 sets of laws, that are constantly in flux, so it is very hard to say anything with 100% certainty. I am not attorney, and not allowed by law to give legal advice. Hence, I do not give legal advice. I do have a right to state what I believe to be the truth. They have been several BDSM cases tried in the US, and in every case I am aware of the Defendant has been found "Not Guilty." Where he alledged victim admited to not using her "safe word," the Defendant was found "Not Guilty." If someone touches you without permission that is battery. If you give them permission to touich you, they are not guilty of committing the crime of battery. Biting, scratching, hair pulling, slapping, pinching, anal sex, flogging etc can all be considered part of consensual sex. A male sought out someone to castrate him. Things went badly and the guy almost bled to death. Police didn't file charges for days. They couldn't think of a valid legal theory to charge the guy with until they finally decided to charge him with praticing medicine without a license. The did not charge the Defendant with battery or aggrevated battery. This is an extreme case, and still no charge of assualt or battery. Anyone can bring any charge for any reason. The requirement for filing charges is very low compared to the requirements to find someone guilty. It is very hard for the state to prove that a top went too far. If tops want to protect themselves they should get their play partners to provide them a notorized document. The document should be as specfic as possible. It should give the date of play, the practices the bottom will allow, the hard limits of the bottom, the bottom's safe word, and an estimated start and end time. It should include a maxium number of floggings. This may sound silly. But armed with such a document few prosecutors are gong to take such a case to trial. IF you do something that is not in the contract, the bottom my say they never gave you consent to do that. So everything you do should be in the contract. Spelling things out in this way in a contract also eiminates a lot of possibilities for misunderstandings and bad memory. A sub my night remember giving persion for something he have permission for. Slave contracts really protect both parties. If one party changes their mind it should be written in the contract that it is their resonsiblity to make this known in writing to the other partner. This does not mean an oral revocation is not valid. But if it is stated in the contract courts will presume revocation was not given unless it can be documented that it was. If a sub wrote to a Dominatrix asking her to do x, y, z to him, and she ignored his safe word, and left nipple clamps on him much longer than he really wanted, if she flogged him extra long without leaving marks, there is really very little he could do to prove she violated his safe word. The burden of proof would be on him to prove he used his safe word and she didnt listen. Judges and juries have a right to use common sense.
< Message edited by WhipTheHip -- 9/18/2010 4:06:32 PM >
_____________________________
|