Judicial Precedent on Rape

evil-monkey

I'm writing a paper and I need some help with some of the legal aspects necessary for me to support the point I am trying to make.

I am looking for any cases that set a judicial precedent for;

1. A woman raping a man (our laws certainly seem to suggest that a rape victim can only be female).

2. Rape without physical contact (more important to the paper).

Basically, in relation to the second one, I'm looking for either a case, or any work that some you may know of, that suggests rape may include conceptions that didn't involve penetration or even physical contact.

Thanks in advance for any help (don't have a background in law)

seamus

You won't get an example of the second one in Ireland, as legally defined rape requires penetration to have occured.

However, you may find an example of a sexual assault charge or conviction where no physical contact took place.

Hooch

evil-monkey wrote: »

I'm writing a paper and I need some help with some of the legal aspects necessary for me to support the point I am trying to make.

I am looking for any cases that set a judicial precedent for;

1. A woman raping a man (our laws certainly seem to suggest that a rape victim can only be female).

2. Rape without physical contact (more important to the paper).

Basically, in relation to the second one, I'm looking for either a case, or any work that some you may know of, that suggests rape may include conceptions that didn't involve penetration or even physical contact.

Thanks in advance for any help (don't have a background in law)

Im no legal eagle....however

1. It is set in law that the victim may only be a woman. A man can only be raped under section 4.,

2. You cannot be raped without physical contact......

Tom Young

Can Tom O'Malley's book out from the Law section of your library.

the_wheel_turns

evil-monkey wrote: »

2. Rape without physical contact (more important to the paper).

Basically, in relation to the second one, I'm looking for either a case, or any work that some you may know of, that suggests rape may include conceptions that didn't involve penetration or even physical contact.

It clearly isn't rape if physical contact has not occurred?

I don't know what you understand by 'conception' - a woman becoming pregnant on foot of a rape is immaterial.

If a woman somehow conceived without 'physical contact' and without her consent, this would certainly fall well outside the bounds of 'rape' - because it isn't rape.

Tom Young

Eh? ..

MagicSean

The only non-physiacl impregnation I know of was the immaculate conception. Pretty sure you couldn't class it as a rape though.

NoQuarter

the_wheel_turns wrote: »

I don't know what you understand by 'conception' - a woman becoming pregnant on foot of a rape is immaterial.

I would assume by "conception" he meant a notion or an idea!

pwd

urban myths

http://www.snopes.com/pregnant/pregnant.asp

I can think of other interpretations of what you mean, but if they're so demented they're not even on snopes, I think I'll keep them to myself

Victor

Note the setting aside of the verdict and the libel damages.

http://www.rte.ie/news/1999/0611/nun.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nora_Wall