|
|
Пишет farnabaz (![[info]](http://lj.rossia.org/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} farnabaz)@ 2008-06-02 14:55:00 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Охота на белого гетеросексуального мужчину
Новые законы Австралии об изнасиловании
===============
New South Wales Consolidated Acts
========================================
By Janet Fife-Yeomans
October 18, 2007 12:00am
A TOUGH, "no means no" rape law will be passed next week by the State Government.
The law will define for the first time the meaning of consent - and make it clear that being drunk, or under the influence of drugs, does not constitute consent, Premier Morris Iemma said yesterday.
It also will close a loophole that has led to accused rapists being acquitted after claiming they had mistakenly thought a woman had consented - in some cases merely because she had not offered physical resistance.
"Defining consent in black and white ensures the courts don't confuse consent with submission," Mr Iemma said.
Juries will have to take into consideration what a man did or did not do to make sure the woman agreed to sex.
"The Bill will introduce an 'objective fault test', which means the accused can no longer use the defence they thought they had the victim's consent if the circumstances appear unreasonable," Mr Iemma said.
The latest reform to the state's rape laws follows a campaign by The Daily Telegraph _ Justice For Women Now.
A simple statutory definition of consent was one of the key aims of the campaign, to give sexual assault victims equal justice and to encourage more women to report assaults.
The changes come despite opposition from judges and lawyers, who objected to the recommendation, made by the Government's Sexual Assault Task Force.
NSW Director of Public Prosecutions Nicholas Cowdery QC supported a simple definition of consent.
"The current law of consent is difficult and complicated for jurors to understand and is open to argument and potential abuse by the defence," Mr Iemma said.
"Sexual assault is a shocking crime that can scar victims for life and it demands the strongest punishment for offenders."
The law will make it clear that a person may not have the freedom to consent if they are asleep, unconscious, threatened with violence or unlawfully detained.
It is the latest in a series of reforms to ease the trauma on rape victims, including moves to stop defence barristers intimidating them in the witness box and allowing evidence to be given via closed circuit television.
"We are really happy that the law includes those three clear words, that consent can only be given freely, voluntarily and by someone who has the capacity to do so," said NSW Rape Crisis Centre manager Karen Willis.
"It makes it clear that if a person achieves consent by trickery, lies, manipulation, drugs and alcohol, then it is not consent."
Anne Cossins, a member of the sexual assault task force, said she hoped the new definition would be affirmed in sex education in schools.
========================================
"(4) Negation of consent A person does not consent to sexual intercourse:
(a) if the person does not have the capacity to consent to the sexual intercourse, including because of age or cognitive incapacity, or
(b) if the person does not have the opportunity to consent to the sexual intercourse because the person is unconscious or asleep, or
(c) if the person consents to the sexual intercourse because of threats of force or terror (whether the threats are against, or the terror is instilled in, that person or any other person), or
(d) if the person consents to the sexual intercourse because the person is unlawfully detained.
-------
(6) The grounds on which it may be established that a person does not consent to sexual intercourse include:
(a) if the person has sexual intercourse while substantially intoxicated by alcohol or any drug, or
(b) if the person has sexual intercourse because of intimidatory or coercive conduct, or other threat, that does not involve a threat of force, or
(c) if the person has sexual intercourse because of the abuse of a position of authority or trust.
Один из резонных комментариев---
"Пообещать жениться а потом бросить теперь тоже считается изнасилованием"
Моральность, иптыть !
Новые законы Австралии об изнасиловании
===============
New South Wales Consolidated Acts
========================================
By Janet Fife-Yeomans
October 18, 2007 12:00am
A TOUGH, "no means no" rape law will be passed next week by the State Government.
The law will define for the first time the meaning of consent - and make it clear that being drunk, or under the influence of drugs, does not constitute consent, Premier Morris Iemma said yesterday.
It also will close a loophole that has led to accused rapists being acquitted after claiming they had mistakenly thought a woman had consented - in some cases merely because she had not offered physical resistance.
"Defining consent in black and white ensures the courts don't confuse consent with submission," Mr Iemma said.
Juries will have to take into consideration what a man did or did not do to make sure the woman agreed to sex.
"The Bill will introduce an 'objective fault test', which means the accused can no longer use the defence they thought they had the victim's consent if the circumstances appear unreasonable," Mr Iemma said.
The latest reform to the state's rape laws follows a campaign by The Daily Telegraph _ Justice For Women Now.
A simple statutory definition of consent was one of the key aims of the campaign, to give sexual assault victims equal justice and to encourage more women to report assaults.
The changes come despite opposition from judges and lawyers, who objected to the recommendation, made by the Government's Sexual Assault Task Force.
NSW Director of Public Prosecutions Nicholas Cowdery QC supported a simple definition of consent.
"The current law of consent is difficult and complicated for jurors to understand and is open to argument and potential abuse by the defence," Mr Iemma said.
"Sexual assault is a shocking crime that can scar victims for life and it demands the strongest punishment for offenders."
The law will make it clear that a person may not have the freedom to consent if they are asleep, unconscious, threatened with violence or unlawfully detained.
It is the latest in a series of reforms to ease the trauma on rape victims, including moves to stop defence barristers intimidating them in the witness box and allowing evidence to be given via closed circuit television.
"We are really happy that the law includes those three clear words, that consent can only be given freely, voluntarily and by someone who has the capacity to do so," said NSW Rape Crisis Centre manager Karen Willis.
"It makes it clear that if a person achieves consent by trickery, lies, manipulation, drugs and alcohol, then it is not consent."
Anne Cossins, a member of the sexual assault task force, said she hoped the new definition would be affirmed in sex education in schools.
========================================
"(4) Negation of consent A person does not consent to sexual intercourse:
(a) if the person does not have the capacity to consent to the sexual intercourse, including because of age or cognitive incapacity, or
(b) if the person does not have the opportunity to consent to the sexual intercourse because the person is unconscious or asleep, or
(c) if the person consents to the sexual intercourse because of threats of force or terror (whether the threats are against, or the terror is instilled in, that person or any other person), or
(d) if the person consents to the sexual intercourse because the person is unlawfully detained.
-------
(6) The grounds on which it may be established that a person does not consent to sexual intercourse include:
(a) if the person has sexual intercourse while substantially intoxicated by alcohol or any drug, or
(b) if the person has sexual intercourse because of intimidatory or coercive conduct, or other threat, that does not involve a threat of force, or
(c) if the person has sexual intercourse because of the abuse of a position of authority or trust.
Один из резонных комментариев---
"Пообещать жениться а потом бросить теперь тоже считается изнасилованием"
Моральность, иптыть !
