- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Madison Brooks Case - A Discussion Regarding Alcohol and Consent
Posted on 1/30/23 at 2:05 pm to ScorpioMan006
Posted on 1/30/23 at 2:05 pm to ScorpioMan006
quote:
to reaffirm every few minutes
Will probably make her want to change her mind
1
Posted on 1/30/23 at 2:10 pm to 0x15E
What I find interesting is the law can say someone was too drunk to consent to sex, in other words they are not responsible for their decisions, but if that same person gets behind the wheel they are found to have willfully broken the law.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 2:11 pm to BuckyCheese
Two people are required for sex
Only one for drunk driving
Only one for drunk driving
Posted on 1/30/23 at 2:39 pm to Proximo
Two people are required for sex"
Some will say this isn't true
Some will say this isn't true
Posted on 1/30/23 at 2:41 pm to BuckyCheese
quote:
What I find interesting is the law can say someone was too drunk to consent to sex, in other words they are not responsible for their decisions, but if that same person gets behind the wheel they are found to have willfully broken the law.
this is what I have been saying. Being impaired means you make bad decisions.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 2:46 pm to ScorpioMan006
quote:
The defense will try to claim consent while of course the family and the prosecution will emphasize that as Madison Brooks was well above the legal limit she could not legally consent to sex.
The "legal limit" is for operating vehicles - not consenting to sexual activity. Louisiana law does not recognize a "legal limit" for consent, nor does it hold that any consumption of alcohol prevents consent. It's a "knew or should have known" statute.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 2:57 pm to ScorpioMan006
quote:
Sadly this is probably the case. Any time it's rape it's ”immediately believe the woman" and "the guy is instantly at fault" instead of waiting for the facts to come out at trial.
Except in this situation she’s dead and can’t testify for herself. We’re left with the video evidence confirming to a large extent what her blood alcohol level indicated-the fact she was too impaired to consent.
Her assailants can plead whatever defense their counsel deems suitable.
I doubt too drunk to consent to their own intentional actions will work. Actions they claimed to have asked permission indicating they knew what they wanted to do, what they did, and an apparent understanding that they needed permission.
They also knew she was too impaired to walk much less do anything more complicated including telling them where she lived.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 3:02 pm to tigerskin
quote:
I hear you. Was just messing with you a little based on the wording
I did kind of hang that one right over the plate
Posted on 1/30/23 at 3:06 pm to BuckyCheese
quote:
What I find interesting is the law can say someone was too drunk to consent to sex, in other words they are not responsible for their decisions, but if that same person gets behind the wheel they are found to have willfully broken the law.
Because you can be preyed upon while having sex, particularly if you're drunk beyond the ability to make reasonable decisions, or remember what occurred.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 3:43 pm to ScorpioMan006
Being very drunk is not a legal excuse for driving under the influence, as in you can't say, "I was too drunk to know I shouldn't be driving."
I would think that reading of law would also be applicable to a drunk guy having sex with a girl who was too drunk to understand what he was doing to her.
He is still responsible for his actions while drunk.
Would be interesting if the drunk girl initiated the non-consent given sex.
I would think that reading of law would also be applicable to a drunk guy having sex with a girl who was too drunk to understand what he was doing to her.
He is still responsible for his actions while drunk.
Would be interesting if the drunk girl initiated the non-consent given sex.
This post was edited on 1/30/23 at 3:44 pm
Posted on 1/30/23 at 3:56 pm to ScorpioMan006
I wonder if perhaps a better response than the escort one might have been to counsel your son to not "engage" with women he doesn't know well or have a relationship with. Treat her with kindness and respect, don't drink beyond your limits. I would think this would keep most allegations of date rape at bay. One night drunken hookups with strangers is like playing Russian Roulette
Posted on 1/30/23 at 7:53 pm to MeridianDog
quote:
I would think that reading of law would also be applicable to a drunk guy having sex with a girl who was too drunk to understand what he was doing to her.
If he is “incapable of understanding the act” from drunkenness, he’s going to be too drunk to have intercourse, certainly not anal.
If she isn’t and performs a sex act on him, and his condition was knowable to her, she has committed third degree rape.
Page 7 of 7
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News