Sex Crimes, Sex Offenders Is there such a thing as rape by fraud?

[ElleMD]

Whatever the law might be in TN and AL are irrelevant as this was in SC.


A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the first degree if the actor engages in sexual battery with the victim and if any one or more of the following circumstances are proven:

• (a) The actor uses aggravated force to accomplish sexual battery.
• (b) The victim submits to sexual battery by the actor under circumstances where the victim is also the victim of forcible confinement, kidnapping, trafficking in persons, robbery, extortion, burglary, housebreaking, or any other similar offense or act.
• (c) The actor causes the victim, without the victim's consent, to become mentally incapacitated or physically helpless by administering, distributing, dispensing, delivering, or causing to be administered, distributed, dispensed, or delivered a controlled substance, a controlled substance analogue, or any intoxicating substance. S.C. Code Ann. § 16-3-652.

"Aggravated force" means that the actor uses physical force or physical violence of a high and aggravated nature to overcome the victim or includes the threat of the use of a deadly weapon. S.C. Code Ann. § 16-3-651.

• (1) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the third degree if the actor engages in sexual battery with the victim and if any one or more of the following circumstances are proven:
• (a) The actor uses force or coercion to accomplish the sexual battery in the absence of aggravating circumstances.
• (b) The actor knows or has reason to know that the victim is mentally defective, mentally incapacitated, or physically helpless and aggravated force or aggravated coercion was not used to accomplish sexual battery. S.C. Code Ann. § 16-3-654.

None of this is present in the above scenario.

 

[ElleMD]

If you admit there is no case here, I'm not sure what your purpose was in posting. This is a LEGAL advice board. We are here to provide LEGAL advice.

 

[Highwayman]

How many times do I have to say...

You were asked to provide a statute or statutes that support your position. You still have not done so.

 

[zddoodah]

A civil action for emotional distress. That was pretty clear in my statement. Or perhaps you don't comprehend that people can sue for emotional distress?

"Emotional distress" is a form of damages; it is not a cause of action. Intentional and negligent infliction of emotion distress are causes of action. However, the conduct described is not the sort of "extreme and outrageous" conduct that such causes of action require.

You seem to think you're the judge and jury. You're not. The judge is the arbiter of law. The jury is the arbiter of fact. You are neither, although you pretend to be.

I'm not sure to whom this is directed, but no one here believes he or she is a judge or a jury; nor is anyone pretending to be either. Pretending to be either of those things would be pretty silly because there is no legal action pending (much less a trial, which is the only time a jury would be empaneled). We're all a bunch of anonymous folks posting on an internet message board, and no one here thinks otherwise.

If this case were tried in a rape by fraud hearing, the jury would determine whether the accused manipulated or did not manipulate his way into sex with the victim.

I'm not sure what you're basing this on. In your initial post in this thread, you purported to speak to the laws of two states other than the state referenced by the OP. I asked you to cite law for either of those states, but you ignored that reasonable request. You also didn't bother commenting on the hypothetical I posed in my post #10 in this thread, which illustrates the silliness of what you're advocating.

this case would not be likely to go to trial.

Based on the facts provided (as summarized in my prior post (#7) in this thread), the case wouldn't even be filed, much less go to trial. The reason for that is that the facts given don't support the existence of probable cause, much less constitute evidence that could sustain a conviction. If a case were filed based on the facts known to us, it would be quickly dismissed and the prosecutor probably reprimanded by the court. It may very well be the case that other facts exist that might change these conclusions, but I have no interest in addressing hypotheticals.

 

[mightymoose]

Incorrect. All non-consensual sex is a crime. Consent is "freely given, knowledgeable and informed agreement." Sex by deception is a sexual assault. You simply don't get it.

There was no information given that there was sex without consent- only regret that it occurred afterward. Regretting it later because your boyfriend found another floozy does not make it rape. That's beyond silly.

 

[zddoodah]

Standardizing the rape statutes throughout the US to state: "Non-consensual sex is sexual assault: Consent is freely given, knowledgeable and informed agreement," will address all types of rape and put and end to rape mentality, including violent rape.

The notion that "standardizing the rape statutes [in the way suggested] will . . . put and [sic] end to . . . violent rape" might be the silliest thing I've read all year (and not only because this thread has nothing to do with violent rape).

 

[leslie82]

My ex and I last had sex on Oct 26th. This was 2 days after he got the notice that the CDV charges I had against him in 2016 had been completely expunged from his records. He then left on Nov 2nd with a woman he had an affair with in Feb. Thinking about it now, I believe the two of them had conspired all along to get me to drop the CDV charges, especially since he left 7 days after he was free and clear of them. When we were together, we were planning a wedding along with other things, but he has this woman believing we were not in a relationship since earlier in the summer. I now feel that I was used and thrown away to get the charges dropped and for a motorcycle that I bought that is still in my name. I just don't know if there is anything criminal that I might be able to report.

No that is not "rape" in any form. You willingly had sex with him. Did he coerce you? Threaten you? Were you incapacitated? If not then it's not rape. You just got scammed like so many people have by someone.

My ex husband scammed me quite a lot especially after our divorce. He's gotten a small fortune out of me. There's nothing illegal about how he did it. I was just a stupid idiot who listened to my heart over my brain. Now when he actually stole my car when I told him he couldn't take it then I called the police. He hasn't had a driver's license since his 4th DUI and won't get one until he's like 42. He took my car, threatened to slam it into a wall if I didn't give him $100 for drugs and gas. So I called the police. They showed up and said it was "unauthorized use of a vehicle" because I know who took it. So he got arrested for that since he came back when the cops were still there. That was illegal.

You have nothing to report to police that they could arrest him for. Be glad he took off...block him on everything you can and don't let him back into your life.

 

[leslie82]

I know what to do about the motorcycle and am in that process.

So, not even if the sex was very strongly coerced with texts to support?

At the time you had sex - did any of these things happen: (rape definition in SC)

Engaging in sexual battery with the victim and if:

• The actor used aggravated force to accomplish sexual battery;
• The victim submits to sexual battery by the actor under circumstances where the victim is also the victim of forcible confinement, kidnapping, trafficking in persons, robbery, extortion, burglary, housebreaking, or any other similar offense or act; or
• The actor causes the victim, without the victim's consent, to become mentally incapacitated or physically helpless by administering, distributing, dispensing, delivering, or causing to be administered, distributed, dispensed, or delivered a controlled substance, a controlled substance analogue, or any intoxicating substance.

If none of this happened it is not rape. You have something called regret.

 

[leslie82]

Yes, you were harmed in a case of sexual assault by deception. Problem is, most states will not prosecute. If you lived in Alabama it would be a class B misdemeanor. In Tennessee, it's a felony.

People on this thread who are telling you that you had "consensual sex" that you later regretted simply don't understand the meaning of consent. It's not unusual. Most of society does not understand the meaning of consent, and they're no different.

Often, people equate "consent" to "agreement." It's not. It's "Freely Given, Knowledgeable and Informed Agreement." You were duped, not knowledgeable and informed. Claiming you consented in your circumstance, is an oxymoron. You "assented" and the offender knew you were merely "assenting" (agreeing on the face of it) while "consenting" is required in all sexual conduct. You were tricked into thinking your assent was consent. He knew what he was doing, and it was his behavior, not yours, that makes what he did a crime.

If you have suffered severe emotional distress as a result of his behavior, try to locate an attorney who will bring a civil action. Problem is, in order for an attorney to take your case, they need to see a pay day at the end. That can only happen if the offender has assets.

The likelihood you'll be able to seek justice is unlikely, even though you were, indeed, sexually assaulted by this man. You have good reason to be extremely upset at what transpired. I wish there was something more that could be done for you. I hope that more penal codes will enact specific language to clearly define consent and identify that all non-consensual sex, which is the type of sex you had with him, is a sexual assault.

No she wasn't. I posted the legal definition of rape in SC which is where she stated this took place. Nothing she said falls under that definition. It is 100% consensual the sex she had. I was a Sexual Assault Response Coordinator and VA for 2 1/2 years in the military. I know all about all this stuff. It was not "sexual assault by deception." That doesn't exist. It's regret sex. That's what it is and those cases are what harm the people who are ACTUALLY sexually assaulted.

She was knowledgeable and informed - she had to have known what a shady pos her ex is and yet she still slept with hm. Just like I knew and know my ex husband is a shady little liar and I would have sex with him time and again even after our divorce. Even when he cheated on me. I was never once sexually assaulted by him because he lied to me. The only time that it came close to sexual assault is after he beat me up one time and then he wanted to have sex and I said no and he was trying to get into my pants but then he quit and moved away from me. If he had sex with me then after I told him no that would have been rape.

I don't know where you get your information from but it's wrong. She was NOT sexually assaulted by her ex in the instance she stated. Yes she can be upset that he lied to her - but that happens. People (men and women) will lie or exaggerate things to have sex with someone.

YOU seem to think you are judge and jury. You're giving out blatantly false information that has no basis in any law in this country. If this case made it in front of a judge by some miracle, it wouldn't get too far. There is no prosecutor in the country who would file charges based on the information provided. None. Any defense lawyer would easily get rape charges in this case dismissed if some prosecutor did file them. They would also tear her apart on the stand. There is absolutely zero information in her post that would allow for a rape or sexual assault charge especially in SC.

Here are states that have any type of sexual misconduct laws that include fraud:

State Penal Codes - STOP ROMANCE SCAMS!

She isn't in TN or CA or any of the other states in that list and even IF she was, it still would be hard as hell to prove fraud.

Yes she could always take him to civil court. You can sue anyone for anything...that doesn't mean you will win. It sounds like he doesn't have a pot to piss in so it would cost her more than she probably already has lost to take him to civil court for emotional distress.

You say you've been sexually assaulted three times by "different methods" but after reading your posts makes me wonder about that...

No one has said only "violent rape survivors" should claim harm. But when you willingly have sex with someone and then regret it later on that is NOT rape. That is regret in making a horrible choice. Regret sex is not rape. A cheating boyfriend or girlfriend who has sex with you then leaves you after is not rape. That person is just an asshole.

Your little comparison is apples and oranges to sexual assault. You need some serious mental help.

 

[leslie82]

How many times do I have to say, "This is not a case that could be tried." But you are making the assumption that his leaving had nothing to do with getting what he wanted from her. If that's what he was up to, he sexually assaulted her. If it was not, and he simply woke up one day and decided to change his mind, his behavior was not an assault. You and I will never know. And a prosecutor would have a difficult time proving he did anything nefarious. So again, this case would not be tried in a court of law.

OMFG you are the stupidest person who I have seen comment anywhere today. So every time someone has sex with a partner and then breaks up with them, it's rape? You're a lunatic. She WAS NOT SEXUALLY ASSAULTED!! Not at the event she described. She was with a cheating asshole. That's it.

So every time say a wife cheated on her husband and then finally left him she raped him if she had sex with him while having an affair? LOL that is extremely ignorant and incorrect.

 

[hrforme]

The notion that "standardizing the rape statutes [in the way suggested] will . . . put and [sic] end to . . . violent rape" might be the silliest thing I've read all year (and not only because this thread has nothing to do with violent rape).

Honestly this whole line by Joyce sounds like a crusade on what the law "should" be rather than what it actually is... and no, I don't think my rapist would have stopped due to a standardization of the rape statutes.....

 

[cbg]

I think we've beaten this horse quite long enough.

Move along, people. Nothing to see here.