In a unique situation, men may have to prove that the sex was consensual, rather than women prove it wasn't.
Changing the law would send an important message about community standards and about what the law expects," ministry documents say.
"In particular, there would be a reminder that consent has to be obtained on each separate occasion."
Considering Kiwi chicks are reputedly the biggest slappers in the world, this should not be easy to obtain.
So remember lads and lasses, get those affadavits ready for signing before you enter the bedroom.
Wednesday nightCap
36 minutes ago
14 comments:
"Considering Kiwi chicks are reputedly the biggest slappers in the world, this should not be easy to obtain" Not? Shouldn't it be the opposite? Or are you saying they are so easy that they wont stop to sign a consent form?
Not sure there Liberty.
Either way, there is a worrying legal pecedent being broken here.
That of being innocent uni proven guilty.
There are often comments that the law is biased against men in New Zealand.
I am sure dad4Justice will have a few ords to say on the matter.
I feel comfortable that I'm going to be safe from this as I idulge in what I like to call "clebacy by universal aclaim".
Wonder if theres a market for condoms with a sexual contact contract printed on the packaging though... you heard it here first.
Yes this is a disturbing move for certain. The burden of proof must always be innocent till proven guilty. Better 10 guilty men go free than 1 innocent be incarcerated.
Heh. This legislation for a country where up to 50% of rape complaints laid are false.
JC
The article uses the term "Accused rapists" which is very different from "men accused of rape", the assumption is that all sex is rape unless consent can be obtained to a level that can be proven in court. Yes it will increase the number of convictions simply because men could and would be jailed on the whim of a woman. Remember that a man can now be removed from the house by police without proof of violence, a woman's uncorroborated evidence can now stand in court as "proof" of rape and now this. Whatever happened to one law for all?
No wonder that men are going fishing - and that there are so many adverts from 'slender, young, blonde' women who want to help you 'relax' and are 'prepared to travel'(all for a small fee of course).
I have now blogged twice about this. What the Justice Ministry is proposing is a paradigm shift from the centuries old presumption of innocence. As I have said on both occasions, it is a piece of liberal lunacy.
http://keepingstock.blogspot.com/2008/08/golden-thread.html
Hell, I'd be prepared to vote National myself if I thought it would stop public servants proposing laws on the basis that they will "send a message." Laws aren't a communication tool, you fuckwits - they're laws.
The "Justice" Ministry seems to be drastically misnamed if its staff can cheerfully propose the burden of proof falling on the defendant in criminal cases.
JC: you want to post that kind of ugly shit on our blog, you reference it. I want a source.
JC it is easy to google some stats.
Apparantly in 2005 police claimed 60-80% of rape complaints were false.
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2005/08/more_on_false_rape_allegations.html
And yes PM, laws are laws, aiming to achieve justice, not spread a message.
Isn't that what the government's advertising budget is for?
I've tried to point out that the form requires BOTH signatures, but those chicks just won't accept No for an answer :)
There seems to be a really wierd juxtaposition of extreme permissiveness and purse-lipped wowserism happening in NZ now. It's all fine and dandy to go tits-out down Queen St and as for going on the game, that's a valid career option...yet if your average citizen dares to entertain the notion of having sex they'll need prior consent in writing (and God forbid they should want a smoke - or a pie - afterwards!)
So which is it? The last days of the Roman Empire or Rule by the New Puritans?
It's not a difficult concept: the fact that women get their tits out on Queen St or work as hookers doesn't mean you get to rape anybody. Straightforward enough, surely?
Post a Comment