₦airaland Forum

Ok

Goat

Terrible

Ok

Mass assembly rather

Hmmm

Ok

Wow

Ok

[s]

BigBabyJesus:
Get out of here with your pilpul.

Intoxication does not make one immune from conviction if intoxicated during the course of a crime..

Where she wasn't deliberatly drugged without her knowing it becomes rape . But since she willingly got high on her own she can't claim lack of consent in her state.

[/s]

Okay. Thank you.

[s]

soundOsonic:
You know nothing. He was under the influence of alcohol, she was also under the influence of alcohol. Both were under the influence of alcohol and they both had sex.
He can also charge the girl for rape too as he was under the influence of alcohol.
Your point is counterintuitive.
If both parties are under the influence of a substance, you can't say it is rape.

Also if the girl were to be asked if he was drunk and she says "NO he wasn't" this also prove she was quite aware of things happening around her hence, she wasnt drunk as at the time of sex.

Any rape case that involves you getting drunk on your own accord without being forced to get high isn't a strong case. Chances of winning are very low especially if the person involve hasn't being charged for anything before.

No evidence to prove she was raped. Her pants obviously wasn't torn as a clear sign of violence, nor are clothes.
She failed to report the case 24 hours after the incident
She reported to work the next day proof that she wasn't threatened not to talk.
The court can prove her accusation is based as a revenge for her getting sacked.

So many holes in her case

[/s]

Ignorance and arrogance. I will forgive your naivety because clearly, you are not a lawyer, hence, lacks the minutest understanding of the topic. Good luck.

Ok

Ok

Ok

Ok

Ok

Ok

Sundrus:
why she no report the incident after the alcohol clear from her eyes the next day . case no dey there abeg.

Ok

Temmylee02:
shoooooooooooooooots

Issokay

This argument for make brain if only one side is drunk and the other isn't but nah two of them get drunk so no case.

My argument is in order. It matters not, whether the man was drunk during the act. It is a non-issue. The crime of rape is to protect women, who are considered the vulnerable gender. Once it is established that the woman was under the influence of alcohol or any substance, the man will be knocked for it. It may sound illogical to you, but that's the law.

Jbleenk:
Mind u I said the sex wouldn’t have happened if we were in our right senses. I was under the influence, too. Isn’t that a valid argument on my part?

Drunkenness is not a defense to rape. You will only be nailing your own casket if you bring that argument to court. Even if you prove that you were drunk, it won't avail you.

My advice: don't tell the court that the lady was drunk nor you. Whatever you do, don't acknowledge that the woman was drunk. No consensual sex can be had in such a state.

Yes, that was rape. She was under the influence of alcohol, hence, not capable of giving a valid consent at that point in time. You can't now say that the sex was consensual. You took advantage of her at her weakest point. This would be my argument if I am representing the lady.

Ok

Good

Chai

Lol

Ok

Dunno

Ok