Rape is legal in NC

I work for a data-centered law research company. This court case already has negative proceedings following it.

In other words, the precedent has been set by a higher court than at this state level. Therefore, all lower courts must follow it.

Old b8

So, are u guys defending them saying yes then changing their minds as you are midway/finished? I'm just curious as to who made this thread...

>having sex
>girl says "now i dont want it"
>she starts screaming
>girl next door call the cops
>cops come
>she says "quick he raped me"
>boi get to jail

Attached: 1459668046907.jpg (480x398, 15K)

1 / ?

On defendant's petition for discretionary review of the unpublished opinion of the Court of Appeals, 38 N.C. App. 628, 248 S.E. 2d 474 (1978) (Webb, J., concurred in by Vaughn and Arnold J.J.), which found no error in the judgment of Thornburg, J., entered in the 3 January 1978 Criminal Session of Mecklenburg Superior Court.
The defendant was charged, in an indictment proper in form, with second degree rape.

At trial the evidence for the State tended to show the following:

On the evening of 16 May 1977 the defendant called Beverly Michelle Hester on the phone and asked her to go out with him on a date the following day. Beverly and the defendant had previously been introduced. They had talked on the phone regularly but had never before gone out together.

At about 2:30 p.m. on 17 May 1977 the defendant and his friend Michael Stinson picked up Beverly and her friend Patricia Simpson at the Hester home. They all went to Michael's apartment. The defendant, Michael and Patricia drank some beer and wine and smoked some marijuana; Beverly did not. The television was on, and there was loud music playing on the stereo.

At about 6:00 p.m. the defendant asked Beverly [***2] to go upstairs with him because he had something to show her. She went upstairs to a bedroom and sat on the bed. The defendant closed the door. At that point he tried to take off Beverly's pants. She said no, and the defendant replied that she had ten minutes to take her clothes off or he would beat her. Beverly started walking toward the door, and the defendant hit her in the face with his hand. She fell on the bed crying and tried to call her friend Patricia "but I [Beverly] knew she wouldn't hear me because of the loud music." The defendant then said that "by the time [Patricia] got up the steps my [Beverly's] head would be through the wall." The defendant stood over Beverly with his arm raised as if he were going to hit her again; Beverly undressed because she was scared.

>being this fucking dumb
I bet you don't get the "subtle" humor in sitcoms either.

2 / 3

The defendant knocked Beverly on the bed and forced her to have anal intercourse. The defendant then made her perform oral sex on him "or he would kill me [Beverly]." Thereafter he made Beverly have sexual intercourse with him even though she begged him not to because she was a virgin. During the course of the sexual act Beverly started shaking and complaining of severe stomach pains. The defendant [***3] became scared. He got off her and called her friend Patricia. Patricia came to the bedroom and dressed Beverly, who was crying and kept asking to be taken to the hospital. Beverly testified she could not tell her friend what had happened because the defendant was constantly present and she was afraid of him.

The defendant, Michael and Patricia all took Beverly to the hospital, and Beverly's parents were called. Beverly first reported that she had been raped when she saw her mother at the hospital.

Dr. Chambers, who examined Beverly on the night of 17 May 1977, testified that there were bruises and puffiness on the right side of her face. The doctor also stated that "vaginal conditions showed evidence of recent trauma. The hymen ring had been torn recently."

The evidence for the defendant tended to show the following:

The defendant had met Beverly Hester in January of 1977. She had gotten defendant's phone number from a friend of his and had called him nearly every day. Mrs. Alexander, defendant's mother, testified that she remembered "a Beverly" calling her home and asking for the defendant. The defendant stated that Beverly had set up the date for 17 May 1977.

The article (from a year ago) is being shared around twitter and nobody read the actual article, just the headline and they are getting mad thinking NC just made a law legalizing rape when in fact it stems from a court case from 1977 in which a woman changed her mind. They are blaming conservative voters and making out like it just happened because of trump.

>Mecklenburg Superior Court.
>Mecklenburg
>Burg

Attached: 453453354345.png (532x557, 46K)

how 2 immigrate?

3/3

While [***4] they were at Michael's apartment on 17 May 1977, the defendant said "come on, let's go upstairs" to Beverly, and she went with him. While in the bedroom they talked for about thirty or forty minutes. Beverly then took off her clothes, the defendant took off his clothes, and they had sexual intercouse. Beverly had told the defendant she was a virgin, but the defendant thought she was "just kidding."

During the act of intercourse, Beverly started yelling about stomach pains, so the defendant asked Patricia to come upstairs to help her. Thereafter, they all took Beverly to the hospital. Defendant denied ever having slapped Beverly, and he denied forcing her to have intercourse with him.

The judge submitted the charge of second degree rape to the jury, and they found the defendant guilty. He was sentenced to imprisonment for ten years. The Court of Appeals found no error in defendant's trial, and this Court granted his petition for discretionary review.

>From the judge: It is true that consent can be withdrawn. This concept ordinarily applies, however, to those situations in which there is evidence of more than one act of intercourse between the prosecutrix and the accused. If the particular act of intercourse was without her consent, the offense is rape without regard to the consent given for prior acts to third persons or the defendant.

>How the fuck do you prove this?
well that is the problem and perhaps why NC law doesn't make it an offence

Because her face was fucking swollen and bruised all over lmao read the case I posted.

i can't believe my state is this based

Decades ago California tried post penetration rape, and even they couldn't justify it and removed the law.

>in the moment call girl “dirty slut” and she takes offence
>she get’s up and puts clothes on
>storms out of the room
>I calmly get dressed and grab my car keys
>go to local police station and inform them of the nights proceedings
>girl gets a knock at her door
>officers tell the girl she has two options
>let me finish
>or get taken to court, in which case she will most probably be ordered by court to “finish me off”

American legal system based af

>Live in NC
>read this post
>slowly look over at my wife
Game time

Attached: B825F261-F444-4AEE-B898-14E214637A75.jpg (378x434, 40K)

>be having sex with girl
>you're 5 thrusts away from valhalla
>here it COMES
>"user I think"
>you can feel your penis locked and loaded like a Mongolian trebuchet filled with corpses pointed at 14th century Caffa
>"i changed my"
>the pulley is loosed and the payload is on its way and there's no going back
>"my mind"

Have fun going to jail for life, rapist.

I would watch that trial with popcorn

you are a fookin muppet mate, nanny state for the UK suits you idiots

if the penis leaves the vagina even for a split second, that's it. the guy is shit out of luck.

>bong logic

Have fun NC bro.

Attached: 2A92B3D1-4A5E-483E-808E-DD3BC05F2793.jpg (341x700, 51K)

Sorry sweetie, regret does not constitute rape.

I have a very large and flexible penis. It hurt when she slammed her door out of anger when she got home. That’s how I found her address to give to the police

We just followed my cock

t.

Attached: Stretchy boi.png (1499x1992, 1.73M)

These fucking people really exist? I have never met anyone like this in real life.

Attached: 61B8EA7F-B534-4C9C-8094-CC3E4F576317.jpg (750x944, 362K)

My cover is blown

DELETE THIS

>drumpf is responsible for a court ruling from 1977
Confirmed he is a time travel person.

#metoo

If the woman touch the penis she cannot say no.
IT IS TOO LATE.

A law that says a woman can "revoke consent" while in the middle of the act of sexual intercourse is so absolutely mind-bogglingly insane that it's hard to put into words.

"Sorry sweaty, just because I initiated sex doesn't mean you're not a rapist, mmkay, because I withdrew consent after you were inside me and now you're going to jail where you will be actually raped for real and you deserve it for being a rapist piece of shit."

nobody asked for your sisters diary entry for today

the snake eating its own tail forever and ever

Attached: 1501402650828.jpg (1024x708, 250K)

pound me too

He was 31 at the time. You didn’t know he was a judge before he got into realestate? Pleb

kek

God damn i fucking hate women.

>no law that says "Hymen. You break it, you buy it."
I think I just got an idea

Attached: al-bundy-4.jpg (1920x1080, 75K)

uroboros

I thought only flags with foliage on them could post like that, T.B.H.

actually substantive post incoming

The reason that rape is so morally repugnant is that it infringes on possibly the most personal and sensitive properties of a person, his sexuality (as in sexual being, not orientation). Rape devoid of sexual content is simple kidnapping which, depending on force involved and duration of incident, might only land you a few months in jail. Imagine you accost a woman on the subway, hold her still with your arms, and then rub her hat with your fingers for 5 minutes. This is chargeable as kidnapping if you prevent her from moving for 5 minutes, but no judge in his right mind would spend you to jail for 10 minutes. Yet if you prevented a woman from moving for 5 minutes while rubbing her genitals instead of her hat, you absolutely deserve 10+ (more like 30+) years in prison. Both the hat and the genitals are properties of the person, but the invasion of privacy regarding the genitals is a maximally worse invasion.

Now imagine two unique scenarios:
>a married man has sex with his wife every day at 6pm for 10 years straight. One day, in the middle of sex, the woman proclaims "I do not want to have sex anymore, please get off". He does not get off and continues for 5 more minutes.
>a man accosts a woman in an alley and does the above, but without the woman ever giving consent. What quality of crime did he commit?

It's clear that in the first one, there is no element of the "sacred" or "private" being broken. But in the latter, there is. Liberals, the simplistic creatures they are, would have us believe that the same moral residue is present in each case. But clearly, the former is worthy of a misdemeanor whereas the latter is worthy of public hanging.

you don't, and you'll find they only claim to revoke consent when he doesn't call them back

Never heard of it. But its no surprise, my state is based

rape like racism is just a tool to destroy as many people's lives as possible until we stop entertaining these retards

To expand, the man has already entered the "private" area of the individual. The idea that spending 5 more minutes within this "area" qualifies as rape is absurd, provided that no force is involved. It's like the difference between breaking into a person's home at night, and being asked to leave a house at 6:15pm when you'v been invited to the house from 6:00pm to 6:30pm every day for a year, but spending an extra 5 minutes in the residence.

I’m gonna lawfag this a little bit: but at the federal level (i have neither the time nor patience to go through every fucking state definition) rape is defined as the act of lenetrating an unwilling participant. So if penetration has already occurred - and if the “victim” were at this point to withdraw consent - penetration now stands as the default state of being. Thus, no unwilling act of penetration occurs, thus no rape.

>How the fuck do you prove this?

Her word is all the proof you should need.

I hope when you die it is a slow agonizing death. Only that will make up for the stupidity you spread across the globe.

Tbh raping women is really fun. Try grabbing your gf and facefucking her, or just start going really rough, and when she asks you to stop, don't. Then say you were too into it later and make her apologize for not making it clear she wanted you to stop.

You are fucking retarded. You need more than just that, women are vindictive harpies and some would have your life ruined for a small slight against them.

Your unique scenarios did not convey your point. I got your point. But your examples were terrible. A wife telling her husband to stop and he physically restrains her and continues for 5 min? That’s rape my friend. Whether that had sex at that time everyday or not

>has cock grabbed
>no hole to 'penetrate'
>therefore no rape
>go for puss
>finger slips in
>rape
the federal definition is retarded.

But, that is rape. Even Jow Forums should agree with that. Obviously if she regrets afterwards, it doesn't count. However if she's saying "no" or "stop" and he keeps on going, that's rape.

That’s terrible but funny

Nice rape-splaining

4D IQ law

Nice Gender studies degree, liberal fag.

It is rape. But very hard to prove in court. You would need physical evidence such as signs of a struggle, fingernail marks, bruises and so on. A chick fucking a dude, saying no, then LETTING him finish is a totally different situation. That’s what this law is for. You are just too stupid to look past a headline

>pussy starts to tear
Why is it crying?

>sexisex girl
>be in bed
>Sanjay the Great ploughing through the Ganges River creating vibrant tantric waves
>girl says "pls Pajeet stop"
>don't
>proceed to extinguish the Great Fire of the Rear-end with Sita's cow-friendly milkers
>"oh yes stop pls"
>don't
>reach climax together as Sita screams "NOOOO" while Pajeet screams "YEAAAAA"
>she crawls over body
>"I got scared that you was gonna stop when I said no"
>nothing scares the Curry King

Attached: cool-indian-man.jpg (250x372, 32K)

Good post, the Australian brainlet doesn't quite understand.

Both of your scenarios are clear cut cases of rape. I think you disproved your own points.

You literally can't prove the first, retard.

>supports forcibly raping your wife

Looks at flag

Checks out

He gave us the evidence in the example retard. Not a version or a perspective

Wrong. Even if someone consents to something, if it causes grievous bodily harm that's another matter completely. I can consent to someone driving my car, but if they run over me with the same car, it doesn't magically make it "ok" because I said it was fine they drive my car. This argument is pure shit.

Hahaha. The pic and MFW combo made my lose my shit.

Enjoy this right-wing tradthottie as a thank you.

Attached: tmp_31133-15301661973612169402721672808227.jpg (640x800, 87K)

>”I do not want to have sex anymore, please get off". He does not get off and continues for 5 more minutes.

He does not get off!!!!!
He forcibly continues without consent
Are you really that stupid?

this is why you should only fuck your wife, only marry a woman with a good strong libido, and only marry a woman who would not fuck you over by calling the cops.
a good wife would never betray you to the fucking government.

My nut > her feelings

I lived in Lenoir for a year, good times.

It just struck me that I may have fallen victim to Poe's law, but I honestly can't tell any more.

YESSSSSSS. this is a big win actually.

Try that in court, you won't get shit.
>Y-yes my husband raped me! We were having sex and midway I said no and he just kept going!
All the Husband would have to say is.
>No she didn't

Nice one

Give him a black eye and take a photo. If it works with the kiddie diddlers it can work for the rape victim. If he hurts her back hospital visit is even more evidence.

Bottom line is always have a hidden camera recording, just in case.

>THIS IS RAPE
>IM SORRY IM NOT CENSORING IT BUT IT NEEDS TO BE SEEN.
Isn't that what a trigger warning is?

>>a married man has sex with his wife every day at 6pm for 10 years straight. One day, in the middle of sex, the woman proclaims "I do not want to have sex anymore, please get off". He does not get off and continues for 5 more minutes.
I think you mean "He continues for five more minutes and then gets off."

Please read
Again, he gave us the evidence in the example. He did not give us a victims testimony. He did not give us the defendants statements. He did not give us the attorneys argument. He gave us clear cut parameters in a case. The details of which are of his invention so we can assume they are received as 100% fact.

Why do I have to explain this to you? Do you do this on purpose? To dismiss an argument? Or do you just do it to convolute the conversation? Or is it to get the other party on the defensive position? I believe it’s the last one. You’re looking for any negative response you can. Even if it infers a lack of intelligence and understanding on your own part. Truly a cowardly act

Thank God I'm gay.

Did she call you back for a second date?

just make her sign a contract i d say. you are never too sure these days

then what if he says NO first then says " OK I LIKE IT ACTUALLY " . is it still rape you fucking faggot ?

Is gas cheaper than rope? Asking for a friend

Holy fuck this can't be real.

Wanna come visit me at lovely beach house in North Carolina?

they didnt read literally the first sentence. fuckin libtards -10 iq

Attached: Screenshot_20180707-224747.jpg (1080x1920, 500K)