Rape by deception, real or not?

[Shining One]

I don't think laws that apply to only one sex are constitutional so any law about deception to induce, fraud, etc would be gender-neutral. I don't think men would need to fear this any more than women would, and then only liars would.

Where would the line be drawn? As mentioned throughout this thread, both genders are deceptive in various ways. Would anything less than 100%, direct honesty be punishable?

(1) a false statement of a material fact

Without a third-party witness, isn't this just a case of he said / she said?

[BlueIris]

Where would the line be drawn? As mentioned throughout this thread, both genders are deceptive in various ways. Would anything less than 100%, direct honesty be punishable?

 

Without a third-party witness, isn't this just a case of he said / she said?

 

Yeah, I think so. There are problems of proof and quantifying damages and people would decide whether bringing suit is worthwhile, which is true for all suits of all types. It's amazing how many suits are filed or defended against that shouldn't be now, in business for instance. There are lots of people who are just litigious and combative.

 

Be careful who you get involved with whether you're male or female, dishonest or honest. Don't get involved with litigious, combative, vindictive people any more than you'd get involved with a married person. Caveat emptor flows both ways.

 

I'm not implying that OP is any of those things, especially after reading her other thread.

Edited May 31, 2016 by BlueIris

[Shining One]

Yeah, I think so. There are problems of proof and quantifying damages and people would decide whether bringing suit is worthwhile, which is true for all suits of all types. It's amazing how many suits are filed or defended against that shouldn't be now, in business for instance. There are lots of people who are just litigious and combative.

I think any system that punishes deception would be exploited frequently. Imagine this scenario: A man dates a woman for a few months without sex because she wanted to take things slow. She then ends things. He then sues her for financial and emotional (for leading him on) damages.

Be careful who you get involved with whether you're male or female, dishonest or honest. Don't get involved with litigious, combative, vindictive people any more than you'd get involved with a married person. Caveat emptor flows both ways.

While this is good advice, it's not something you know going in.

[NewLeaf512]

Well, while "rape" is extreme, the OP might be on to something....

 

This woman sued the mistress under some "alienation of affection" law or something...and, the woman got away with it - even though husband was a regular cheater.

 

Wife Wins $9 Million From Husband's Alleged Mistress - ABC News

 

But yes, it's opening up a pandora's box and who can really prove these types of cases/accusations?

 

Look, I have an easier solution...don't get naked with someone without taking time to know them.

 

I have a gf of a gf who recently found out her "commitment phobe" guy had another gf the whole three years she was with him and that he recently proposed to that gf. Well, who's fault is that? In the three years with him, he'd disappear on her, would not make plans to advance the RL...it's not like there were red flags. Yes he lied, but at the same time he gave her enough red flags to dump him w/o finding out about his newly established fiance.

 

 

There are 2 laws AOA and CC. They are both damages claims and the only way to get jurisdiction to bring such a damages claim is as a secondary claim which must be part of a divorce action.

 

 

It is the reasonable expectation under the law that each of the adult parties involved complete due diligence prior to engaging in consensual sexual contact. In fact OP I would argue that in fact it was you who did no due diligence, and cite caveat emptor which would get the case immediately dismissed. You should also know that actions such as AOA or CC are civil claims and therefore all testimony given becomes a matter of public record and anyone with around $10 and a knowledge of where the clerk of courts office is can know every single detail and response given.

 

 

As soon as I got this dismissed I would immediately bring a frivolous lawsuit case against the initial plaintiff and its nearly impossible to lose a FLS which would actually put a judgement against you.

 

 

This trivialises rape, rape victims and is one of the most anti-feministic thoughts I have seen from a woman. I hope the universe always looks out for you and you are never a victim of an actual rape which is considered a criminal assault.

 

 

YMMV

 

 

The NJ legislation will never

[Liam1]

I don't think that a writing is required for suing for fraud.

 

Generally, these are the requirements:

(1) a false statement of a material fact,

(2) knowledge on the part of the defendant that the statement is untrue,

(3) intent on the part of the defendant to deceive the alleged victim,

(4) justifiable reliance by the alleged victim on the statement, and

(5) injury to the alleged victim as a result.

 

Fraud and breech of contract are two separate issues. I was simply saying that she might have a viable case for breech of contract rather than fraud, if she had something in writing.

 

You may also be referring to an "implied contract" To use implied contract as a basis for a breech of contract suit PROOF is still required that all those factors actually occurred.

 

Typically with an implied contract there are no witnesses, and it becomes a he said/she said issue.

 

Proof is needed because otherwise the courts would be clogged with people leveling false accusations simply to get a settlement.

 

The written notarized agreement is proof in and of itself.

 

Implied contracts are very difficult to prove, unless there are several, objective witnesses. For example you mother or your friend or spouse would not be considered an objective witness.

 

Also "knowledge on the part of the defendant that the statement is untrue, is another sticky wicket. It's difficult to prove.

 

But anyone can sue anyone for anything. Whether or not the courts will agree to hear the case, or simply dismiss it as frivolous is another thing.

 

Even if they agree to hear the case, that does not mean it is winnable.

 

Also, in a fraud case, how do you prove that this guy did not tell this woman he was married, and she is now lying because she is an emotionally unstable jilted lover?

 

Were their witnesses in their bed while they had sex?

[wmacbride]

How about instead of changing the law, people work towards a cultural shift where it's not seen as acceptable for a man or woman to lie or be deceptive in order to get someone to have sex with them?

[BlueIris]

Fraud and breech of contract are two separate issues. I was simply saying that she might have a viable case for breech of contract rather than fraud, if she had something in writing.

 

You may also be referring to an "implied contract" To use implied contract as a basis for a breech of contract suit PROOF is still required that all those factors actually occurred.

 

Typically with an implied contract there are no witnesses, and it becomes a he said/she said issue.

 

Proof is needed because otherwise the courts would be clogged with people leveling false accusations simply to get a settlement.

 

The written notarized agreement is proof in and of itself.

 

Implied contracts are very difficult to prove, unless there are several, objective witnesses. For example you mother or your friend or spouse would not be considered an objective witness.

 

Also "knowledge on the part of the defendant that the statement is untrue, is another sticky wicket. It's difficult to prove.

 

But anyone can sue anyone for anything. Whether or not the courts will agree to hear the case, or simply dismiss it as frivolous is another thing.

 

Even if they agree to hear the case, that does not mean it is winnable.

 

Also, in a fraud case, how do you prove that this guy did not tell this woman he was married, and she is now lying because she is an emotionally unstable jilted lover?

 

Were their witnesses in their bed while they had sex?

 

We're both saying that the difficulty is proof/evidence. I won't even get into everything else about your contracts assertions and arguments. OP presented the issue of fraud. You raised contracts but I don't see its being relevant.

[JustGettingBy]

How about instead of changing the law, people work towards a cultural shift where it's not seen as acceptable for a man or woman to lie or be deceptive in order to get someone to have sex with them?

 

Would be nice, if its achievable.

[Shining One]

How about instead of changing the law, people work towards a cultural shift where it's not seen as acceptable for a man or woman to lie or be deceptive in order to get someone to have sex with them?

Why only target deception in order to get sex? What about all of the other deceptive behaviors in dating?

 

With that being said, I agree that a cultural shift to make ALL forms of deception in dating unacceptable would be the best course. Unfortunately, our society has no incentive to be honest. Both men and women are deceptive because it yields better results than not being deceptive. Being deceptive needs to have a cost that makes it impractical or being honest needs to yield better results than being dishonest.

[katiegrl]

Why only target deception in order to get sex? What about all of the other deceptive behaviors in dating?

 

With that being said, I agree that a cultural shift to make ALL forms of deception in dating unacceptable would be the best course. Unfortunately, our society has no incentive to be honest. Both men and women are deceptive because it yields better results than not being deceptive. Being deceptive needs to have a cost that makes it impractical or being honest needs to yield better results than being dishonest.

 

IMO it's people themselves who make deception so prevalent in our society...

 

It's people who often see deception but choose to ignore, justify, excuse, shuffle under the carpet.

 

So many people wearing those proverbial blinders... and allowing themselves to be deceived.

 

Instead of nipping it in the bud immediately... by paying attention, taking off the blinders, and WALKING AWAY.

 

People (both men and women) will continue to deceive each other for no other reason than they can.

 

Most people make it just so easy for others to deceive them, and as long as this continues, deception will NEVER end.

 

We teach people how to treat us.

 

We need to stop teaching our partners (or whomever) that it is OKAY for them to deceive us.

 

As I said, first sign, first red flag, WALK AWAY.