SUE ME

Forewarning: I'm going to raise an issue on law here that might be sensitive to some readers. If you think your clean and untainted mind cannot withstand a little aspect of SEX from the legal point of view, i strongly encourage you to stop reading before the end of this paragraph. I'm not to be held liable for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress for projecting some unsightly mental images in your mind. Discussion here are merely for academic purposes and does not hold water what-so-ever. Sue me.

It all started with the topic of 'THINKING-OUT-OF-THE-BOX"

Now i presume everyone is familiar with the term rape. Generally, on graphics, you would be picturing a male individual forcing himself onto a girl. On the technicality side, it would be the unlawful penetration of the penis into a girl/woman's vagina. That's the general presumption. Since the girl/woman is usually on the losing end (usually...), therefore by convention since the good old times rape has always been a male associated crime against woman.

Now since the whole gender equality, Europeon Convention of Human Rights, and Human Rights Act 1998, Woman-associated Organization are getting stronger by the day (remind me not to bully girls) it won't be long before soon they will start global domination and make every living creature with a protruding organ between their thighs to be their slaves.

Ok.. i went off topic there.

What i'm trying to point out is, rape can now also be a female associated crime. Yes, getting sex from woman and you sue them under rape.Woohoo!! Now get yourself a cookie.

Shit, i don't seem to be able to write a serious post without any retarded stops in between.


.................................


Now that we are clear regarding rape, we shall move on to another aspect. If any of you guys reading this was with me on my first day at FORM 4, right after me being veto-ly selected as the Class Monitor, you would remember what our beloved Form Teacher, Mrs.Francis said regarding sex:

For a minor, under the age of 18, consensus to sex is irrelevant. In layman mentally graphical explanation, this would mean, you're a 16 years o' male, you find yourself a decent 16 years o' female
(definitely long straight hair and nice lips and anything that rhymes lips for me),
you decided you wanna fill her with your fondue,
she decided to give you a ride of your life,
and you guys decided to do it at your place after school.
Both of you guys have adrenaline and endorphin pump up so high in your brain you forgot you're not wearing a latex.

" What are the chances," you ask yourself?

9 months down the road, apart from finding yourself having the need to name a bastard, a police warrant of arrest is issued and slapped at your face for Statutory Rape.

So unlike the conventional rape, the guy don't have to force himself on to a girl. They might agree on both the terms and condition, but the fact that the girl is a minor, despite the fact he is one too, renders him from raising it as a defence for statutory rape. He is fucked. Figuratively speaking. Not literally. Literally would be the 'she' in the example given.

Yesh i know what you might be thinking, unfair for minor guys ain't it? No worries, you get to sue someone too. If an adult female, somehow persuaded you into conducting a lets-explore-our-body-shall-we-practical-course, despite the fact you VOLUNTARILY did it, the adult can be sued for Statutory Rape.
But ya right, you getting some action from some hot intern teacher and you would sue her, and rid yourself of more actions to come.
What are the odds? Same as the odds of Chelsea winning Champion's League.

..............................................

So as far as i can explain at my level, those mention are what i understand about rape and statutory rape. As a finale class of June/July A-levels intake, my law lecturer, Mr.Siva just had to pull out something awesome to discuss, before leaving. The example was regarding an acquaintance of an acquaintance who defended a defendant. The case reads as follows:


"Tom is an adult male. His neighbour, Syria, a 14 year old female has just given birth to his child. Tom has been charged for Statutory Rape by the police and presented at the courts. As his lawyer, how would you advice him and to raise a defence? "


Being me, i almost shouted out loud,

"Good job, that oughta remind you to stop at 7-11 first next time."

Bearing in mind that wouldn't really contribute to my reputation in class, i gave a more subtle answer,

"He is f-ked",

with an added muting to the last word, a high leveled technique i learned from Mr.Siva when it comes to silencing profanity in classes just in case some admistrative lecturer passes by the class.

He gave an equal opportunity to everyone to give a shot at the case.

.
..
...
....
.....
......
.......
........
.........
..........

10 seconds passed. If silence amounts to acceptance, i guess everyone has agreed upon the only answer given by any student and upon majority, agreed the defendant is hereby, no longer a fucker, but a fuckee, as he is being figuratively penetrated by the law.

His lawyer, the acquaintance of my lecturer, gave a defence. Despite the fact i couldn't relatively think of one. Apparetly i wasn't fully focus lar. Is hard to focus when a chick is sitting 3 feet in front of you and wearing a one piece dress baring her shoulders. Eih, i might be a law student but heck, i'm still blardy straight male.

The defence was, Tom and Syria were at the movies.
Tom masturbated (no seriously...) and upon ejaculation, Syria wiped the ejaculation (seriously.i ain't not kidding you) at her vagina.
Now, if you can picture this at all, give yourself a pat-at-the-back for i no longer need to link you to some sites to get some idea.
There were no penetration what-so-ever.

Shocked by the defence raised by the lawyer, i actually shouted out
"Nonsense, the chances of the sperms actually being able to swim from the labia..."

Then i realised what went wrong =.-
The chances are low, don't ask how low, but they are THERE.
There was this case this girl got pregnant after swimming from a swimming pool.

Now. The judge did not buy the lawyer's story, therefore the defendant was convicted. Not that is a bad thing.

The idea is about thinking-out-of-the-box. Do understand our court system is not TRIAL BY JURY. If it was as 12 Jury Trial, there was a high chance that the Jury might be convinced that the teen was being naughty herself and was buttering her muffin by herself. More on Jury and court structure on my later updates.


For now, lets ponder on fact that every single tiny spermy that you guys 'released' through a means has an opportunity to father you a child.