undercover police officer fathers children

melissak

Stumbled across this. A number of police officers in England had long term sexual relationships with low level environmental activists and even fathered children with them. The women were not criminals.
Does this constitute rape by deception? Is officially sanctioned/funded rape a war crime in your own country. Has anything like this ever happened in this country? Don't know how to put up links.

Victor

melissak wrote: »

Does this constitute rape by deception?

Were these just adults who had sex consensually and had children? Nothing along the lines of the "he came to me in the middle of the night and I thought it was my husband"?

Is officially sanctioned/funded rape a war crime in your own country.

Was there a war?

Pat Mustard

In relation to the crime of rape, there is a general rule that fraud as to the nature and quality of the act and fraud as to the identity of the sexual partner vitiates consent.

However, fraud as to the attributes of a sexual partner does not vitiate consent. Therefore, pretending be a pilot in order to have sex with somebody or giving a false name does not vitiate consent to sex. By the same token, pretending to be an animal rights activist does not vitiate consent to sex.

See this article.

melissak

Victor wrote: »

Were these just adults who had sex consensually and had children? Nothing along the lines of the "he came to me in the middle of the night and I thought it was my husband"?


Was there a war?

They were undercover policemen on a mission pretending to be environmentalists using fake names backgrounds who formed relationships solely for the purpose of creating a cover for their operation. Their operation was to destroy the movement these women were a part of.
What constitutes war?

melissak

Pat Mustard wrote: »

In relation to the crime of rape, there is a general rule that fraud as to the nature and quality of the act and fraud as to the identity of the sexual partner vitiates consent.

However, fraud as to the attributes of a sexual partner does not vitiate consent. Therefore, pretending be a pilot in order to have sex with somebody or giving a false name does not vitiate consent to sex. By the same token, pretending to be an animal rights activist does not vitiate consent to sex.

See this article.

Not so. A woman in England got 8 years for having sex with another woman pretending to be a man. How this could happen I have no idea. I would imagine these activists would have a stronger ideological objection to sleeping with a police officer than most.

melissak

melissak wrote: »

Not so. A woman in England got 8 years for having sex with another woman pretending to be a man. How this could happen I have no idea. I would imagine these activists would have a stronger ideological objection to sleeping with a police officer than most.

If I met a man who claimed to be a multi millionaire business man, we continued to have a relationship and he fathered a child to me, then I find out its all rubbish, he is up to his eyeballs in debt & just lives like Walter Mitty. Do you think I could shout rape?

I don't think so, the definition of rape does not include fraud or deception.

LeBash

Hey Bubblypop, did I ever tell you I was a millionaire.

melissak

bubblypop wrote: »

If I met a man who claimed to be a multi millionaire business man, we continued to have a relationship and he fathered a child to me, then I find out its all rubbish, he is up to his eyeballs in debt & just lives like Walter Mitty. Do you think I could shout rape?

I don't think so, the definition of rape does not include fraud or deception.

In England it does apparently. I will look it up but I don't know how to put up links from my phone

melissak

melissak wrote: »

In England it does apparently. I will look it up but I don't know how to put up links from my phone

Well thankfully our laws are different.

I thought you didn't like belittling sexual crimes as they take away from the seriousness for the victim?

melissak

bubblypop wrote: »

If I met a man who claimed to be a multi millionaire business man, we continued to have a relationship and he fathered a child to me, then I find out its all rubbish, he is up to his eyeballs in debt & just lives like Walter Mitty. Do you think I could shout rape?

I don't think so, the definition of rape does not include fraud or deception.

In England it does apparently. I will look it up but I don't know how to put up links from my phone
Google it. Whether it SHOULD be a crime of rape, I do not know, but it is and people have been convicted.
Do you not think it is shocking that the police would do this to these women. They were not criminals.

melissak

bubblypop wrote: »

Well thankfully our laws are different.

I thought you didn't like belittling sexual crimes as they take away from the seriousness for the victim?

You think this is the same as slapping someone on the arse in a nightclub. Stop following me around to find inconsistencies in my position. It is creepy.
These men had years long relationships with these women solely for the purpose of their mission one fathered two kids and then disappeared without trace when the "job" was over
She searched for him for years believing him to be a loving husband and father.. It was an official operation. Do you think this is a trivial matter?

melissak

melissak wrote: »

In England it does apparently. I will look it up but I don't know how to put up links from my phone
Google it. Whether it SHOULD be a crime of rape, I do not know, but it is and people have been convicted.
Do you not think it is shocking that the police would do this to these women. They were not criminals.

They were not criminals? So if they were that would be different?
It's not shocking at all.

These men, lived the life of environmental activists, or whatever they were, do you understand what that means?
24/7/365, they actually were activists for all intents and purposes.

Do you think they didn't form relationships with people while they lived as their friend? Do you think they didn't like the people?
If anything I feel sorry for the policemen, who clearly had relationships with people without being able to tell them the truth.

johnnyskeleton

melissak wrote: »

In England it does apparently. I will look it up but I don't know how to put up links from my phone
Google it. Whether it SHOULD be a crime of rape, I do not know, but it is and people have been convicted.
Do you not think it is shocking that the police would do this to these women. They were not criminals.

I would think it more shocking if someone choose to have a child with someone based solely on the belief that they are an environmental activist!

melissak

melissak wrote: »

You think this is the same as slapping someone on the arse in a nightclub. Stop following me around to find inconsistencies in my position. It is creepy.
These men had years long relationships with these women solely for the purpose of their mission one fathered two kids and then disappeared without trace when the "job" was over
She searched for him for years believing him to be a loving husband and father.. It was an official operation. Do you think this is a trivial matter?

You seem to think someone lying to women to get them to sleep with them is rape?
Laughable.
They're would be a lot of men in this country shaking in their boots if that was the case.

Oh, I'm hardly ' following' you. Merely pulling you up on your inconsistencies.

melissak

bubblypop wrote: »

They were not criminals? So if they were that would be different?
It's not shocking at all.

These men, lived the life of environmental activists, or whatever they were, do you understand what that means?
24/7/365, they actually were activists for all intents and purposes.

Do you think they didn't form relationships with people while they lived as their friend? Do you think they didn't like the people?
If anything I feel sorry for the policemen, who clearly had relationships with people without being able to tell them the truth.

Not the children, fathered for operational cover and abandoned suddenly one day without trace when they stopped being a useful cover. They moved on to different women and cover studies and never contacted them again. Are you familiar with the concept of informed consent? Abuse of state power?

melissak

bubblypop wrote: »

You seem to think someone lying to women to get them to sleep with them is rape?
Laughable.
They're would be a lot of men in this country shaking in their boots if that was the case.

Oh, I'm hardly ' following' you. Merely pulling you up on your inconsistencies.

I don't necessarily think so. The British judiciary does. Google it... You are adopting a foolish position to disagree with me because you are offended that i disagreed with you on another thread. You are making my opinions too important to you. I am flattered that you would go to thebother but you are not comparing like with like.

melissak

melissak wrote: »

Not the children, fathered for operational cover and abandoned suddenly one day without trace when they stopped being a useful cover. They moved on to different women and cover studies and never contacted them again. Are you familiar with the concept of informed consent? Abuse of state power?

As has been done by countless father's over many years.
Are you familiar with the concept of abandoned mothers?

Abuse of state power? Get real! These men were not sent out by the state to sleep with women!!
It's merely relationships they found themselves in at a certain time of their lives.

Now, if you're asking if morally they were wrong, then absolutely yes, morally they were totally wrong.
But that does not a rape make.

melissak

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

I would think it more shocking if someone choose to have a child with someone based solely on the belief that they are an environmental activist!

People tend to have relationships children with people who share their ideological beliefs and world views etc
They categorically wouldn't have had relationships with them if they knew they were policemen trying to infiltrate their groupdestroy their (not illegal) movemen, and hopefully find secrets that could cause them or their friends to be arrested.

melissak

melissak wrote: »

I don't necessarily think so. The British judiciary does. Google it... You are adopting a foolish position to disagree with me because you are offended that i disagreed with you on another thread. You are making my opinions too important to you. I am flattered that you would go to thebother but you are not comparing like with like.

Nope, I'm disagreeing with you because I don't agree with you.
It's not rape.
I have explained already I think it's morally wrong. But its not rape. And its not a ' abuse of state power'

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

It makes them assholes not rapists

melissak

It was an official mission. The police have conceded that it was abuse and without reservation apologised. The judge awarded them all( there were several)compensation.
Countless father's have done this.? I doubt it. I should hope the amount of people who did this are countable and that it is a small number. One man's actions acting on his own volition are held to a lower standard than state actors on sanctioned missions, as well they should be.

bubblypop wrote: »

As has been done by countless father's over many years.
Are you familiar with the concept of abandoned mothers?

Abuse of state power? Get real! These men were not sent out by the state to sleep with women!!
It's merely relationships they found themselves in at a certain time of their lives.

Now, if you're asking if morally they were wrong, then absolutely yes, morally they were totally wrong.
But that does not a rape make.

trixychic

As this link shows, rape is without consent. There is no way these people could call rape. They had consentual sex with others. People lie all the time. It doesn't make it rape.
https://rainn.org/get-information/types-of-sexual-assault/was-it-rape

melissak

LexieOnRale wrote: »

It makes them assholes not rapists

But prople in England have been convicted of rape by deception. I didn't say I agree with the law, I am just interested in the legalities and looking for an opinion from someone fluent in legalese..

esforum

melissak wrote: »

Not the children, fathered for operational cover and abandoned suddenly one day without trace when they stopped being a useful cover. They moved on to different women and cover studies and never contacted them again. Are you familiar with the concept of informed consent??

theres no suggestion that the relationship wasnt built on genuine feelings. i dont condone the behaviour to either mother or child but you cant state that the police officer had no emotional connections only that he chose career over family. sadly a more common event than it should be

melissak wrote: »

Abuse of state power?

how? what power did he abuse? isnt your whole outrage based on the fact that he at no stage admitted being a cop?

in regards the uk, no i dont think the fraud section is covered here. the fraud must relate to either the intended act or reason for the act as per section 76, sexual offences act 2003. im not 100% but i believe this section was at least in part as a result of cases involving the deliberate infecting of partners with std's

in regards false identity, its very clear in the act that this refers to pretending to be the husband and section 74 defines consent as "For the purposes of this Part, a person consents if he agrees by choice, and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice." the women could say yes or no or left the relationship. they had sufficient information to consent as a persons career or financial backing is not grounds either way. imagine cases were women only want to sleep with rich footballers and get duped, couldnt it be equally argued that the women decieved?

i am curious, do you consider james bond to be raping women in his films? or arnie in true lies to be raping his wife?

melissak

trixychic wrote: »

As this link shows, rape is without consent. There is no way these people could call rape. They had consentual sex with others. People lie all the time. It doesn't make it rape.
https://rainn.org/get-information/types-of-sexual-assault/was-it-rape

Morally perhaps. A precedent has been set in the UK. Rape by deception is an accepted crime. I can't put up links because I am technologically retarded but Google rape by deception

trixychic

melissak wrote: »

Morally perhaps. A precedent has been set in the UK. Rape by deception is an accepted crime. I can't put up links because I am technologically retarded but Google rape by deception

That is ridiculous. So many ppl go out every weekend and lie to ppl to get what they want. Are all of these "rapist"? No way. That is a farce. If consent is given it is not rape.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

melissak wrote: »

But prople in England have been convicted of rape by deception. I didn't say I agree with the law, I am just interested in the legalities and looking for an opinion from someone fluent in legalese..

This is an Irish forum and so most of us are Irish and talking about Irish law. It isn't rape where there has been consent.

melissak

esforum wrote: »

theres no suggestion that the relationship wasnt built on genuine feelings. i dont condone the behaviour to either mother or child but you cant state that the police officer had no emotional connections only that he chose career over family. sadly a more common event than it should be


how? what power did he abuse? isnt your whole outrage based on the fact that he at no stage admitted being a cop?

It was an official mission that targeted innocent women to sabotage their activities and ruin their lives when they had done nothing wrong but be flagged by their investigation as vulnerable enough to be targeted by them.

melissak

melissak wrote: »

It was an official mission that targeted innocent women to sabotage their activities and ruin their lives when they had done nothing wrong but be flagged by their investigation as vulnerable enough to be targeted by them.

One of them abandoned his kids and immediately struck up a relationship on the other side of the country with another activist for another mission. Deep feelings for his kids there. He never saw them again for years to this story broke

melissak

LexieOnRale wrote: »

This is an Irish forum and so most of us are Irish and talking about Irish law. It isn't rape where there has been consent.

Are we not permitted to discuss international cases on this forum. I will read the charter.I'm not that familiar with this forum tbh

REXER

melissak wrote: »

One of them abandoned his kids and immediately struck up a relationship on the other side of the country with another activist for another mission. Deep feelings for his kids there. He never saw them again for years to this story broke

I agree with you on this, it's the state fcuking with peoples heads! :eek:

ArmaniJeanss

melissak wrote: »

Morally perhaps. A precedent has been set in the UK. Rape by deception is an accepted crime.

That case was a woman pretending to be a man and having sex with another woman, the latter not aware of what was happening.
Its hugely different to a man pretending to be, say a pilot to have sex with a woman, and surely nonsense to suggest the first case sets any sort of precedent for it.

melissak

trixychic wrote: »

That is ridiculous. So many ppl go out every weekend and lie to ppl to get what they want. Are all of these "rapist"? No way. That is a farce. If consent is given it is not rape.

Perhaps or perhaps not. I am looking for legalities not moral opinions. If I wanted moral I would have put it in ah not legal.

trixychic

REXER wrote: »

I agree with you on this, it's the state fcuking with peoples heads! :eek:

I agree that it was wrong and a complete fcuking from the state... It was out of line but it is not rape.

trixychic

melissak wrote: »

Perhaps or perhaps not. I am looking for legalities not moral opinions. If I wanted moral I would have put it in ah not legal.

Legally in ireland it is not rape. If you wanted legalities of the UK I think perhaps your on the wrong site.

I must say as a survivor of child abuse I find your statement very wrong. I know what it is to give consent and to not. You asked legally is it rape. Here in ireland if you give consent then no it is not rape.

Maybe the forum your looking for is foreign affairs??

melissak

melissak wrote: »

Morally perhaps. A precedent has been set in the UK. Rape by deception is an accepted crime. I can't put up links because I am technologically retarded but Google rape by deception

There is no precedent here set by the UK.
The law here defines rape, and it has nothing to do with lying to people!!

Look, those men, particular the one who didn't see his kids again, are dicks. Clearly.
But so are thousands of men the world over.
They didn't rape those women, the women willingly slept with those men.

You can't turn around after and say' he said he was a vegetarian humanitarian aid worker, but turns out he's a meat eating roadsweeper' that doesn't make him a rapist!

Victor

melissak wrote: »

What constitutes war?

Wikipedia describes was as "War is a state of armed conflict between societies. It is generally characterized by extreme collective aggression, destruction, and usually high mortality."

Police operations usually aren't described as a war. Based on the above description, what you describe doesn't have any of those characteristics. You are perhaps being naive and belittling of the suffering of war victims. That said, rape is the context of a war, is a war crime.

Pat Mustard

melissak wrote: »

Not so. A woman in England got 8 years for having sex with another woman pretending to be a man. How this could happen I have no idea. I would imagine these activists would have a stronger ideological objection to sleeping with a police officer than most.

Charlton, Bolger and McDermott's book has a commentary stating that pretending to be a solicitor will not vitiate consent.

Pat Mustard

melissak wrote: »

Are we not permitted to discuss international cases on this forum. I will read the charter.I'm not that familiar with this forum tbh

You can discuss international cases, of course.

However, you know that in this country, UK cases will have persuasive rather than binding authority.

melissak

Victor wrote: »

Wikipedia describes was as "War is a state of armed conflict between societies. It is generally characterized by extreme collective aggression, destruction, and usually high mortality."

Police operations usually aren't described as a war. Based on the above description, what you describe doesn't have any of those characteristics. You are perhaps being naive and belittling of the suffering of war victims. That said, rape is the context of a war, is a war crime.

Google" dirty war"

melissak

Pat Mustard wrote: »

Charlton, Bolger and McDermott's book has a commentary stating that pretending to be a solicitor will not vitiate consent.

Someone was convicted for pretending to be a doctor. Where is the line?

melissak

Victor wrote: »

Wikipedia describes was as "War is a state of armed conflict between societies. It is generally characterized by extreme collective aggression, destruction, and usually high mortality."

Police operations usually aren't described as a war. Based on the above description, what you describe doesn't have any of those characteristics. You are perhaps being naive and belittling of the suffering of war victims. That said, rape is the context of a war, is a war crime.

I am not trying to belittle anyone. I am looking for someone with a legal background to clarify it.

Paz-CCFC

If A impersonates another real person, B, and C has sex with him on that grounds, then it vitiates consent. Unless A has reasonable grounds for believing C really did consent without any mistake. The People (DPP) v C [2001] 3 IR 345.

The main argument for fraud/deception is the qualitative nature. Getting someone to have sex because you tricked them into thinking it was a surgical procedure (R v Flattery (1877) 2 QBD 410) or that it would improve their singing (R v Williams [1923] 1 KB 340) would vitiate consent. (These cases are English, but I think they'd be accepted here). However, pretending that you were married - via a fake ceremony - does not vitiate it (Papadimitropoulos v R (1957) 98 CLR 249 - Aus High Court case). McAuley & McCutcheon state that the distinguishing factor between these two types of cases was that, in the former, the victims did not know that they were actually engaging in sex. Whereas, in the latter, the alleged victim knew well that she was.

So, in the OP's example, if the policeman tricked the activist into thinking that the act going to save all the trees or the planet or something like that rather than being sex, that would vitiate her consent. But if she knew that they were having sex, but was just mistaken in terms of the other person's occupation, then that wouldn't vitiate it.

Pat Mustard

melissak wrote: »

Someone was convicted for pretending to be a doctor. Where is the line?

There is a major difference between someone pretending to be a doctor to impress somebody else in a nightclub and pretending to be a doctor in the context of a medical examination. Do you have the facts of that case or a link?

melissak

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

That case was a woman pretending to be a man and having sex with another woman, the latter not aware of what was happening.
Its hugely different to a man pretending to be, say a pilot to have sex with a woman, and surely nonsense to suggest the first case sets any sort of precedent for it.

If rape by deception is accepted as a thing in court is it not a thing. I imagine this case predates the precedent being set but if it were to happen again would it apply

melissak

Pat Mustard wrote: »

There is a major difference between someone pretending to be a doctor to impress somebody else in a nightclub and pretending to be a doctor in the context of a medical examination. Do you have the facts of that case or a link?

Sorry. I don't know how to put up links. It was in Israel I think. He pretended to be a doctor and convinced her it would help her singing voice or vocal cords or something similar
I will look it up now
Edit to add previous poster put the case up.

melissak

Thank you for your response. What about the woman who pretended to be a man and got 8 years?

Paz-CCFC wrote: »

If A impersonates another real person, B, and C has sex with him on that grounds, then it vitiates consent. Unless A has reasonable grounds for believing C really did consent without any mistake. The People (DPP) v C [2001] 3 IR 345.

The main argument for fraud/deception is the qualitative nature. Getting someone to have sex because you tricked them into thinking it was a surgical procedure (R v Flattery (1877) 2 QBD 410) or that it would improve their singing (R v Williams [1923] 1 KB 340) would vitiate consent. (These cases are English, but I think they'd be accepted here). However, pretending that you were married - via a fake ceremony - does not vitiate it (Papadimitropoulos v R (1957) 98 CLR 249 - Aus High Court case). McAuley & McCutcheon state that the distinguishing factor between these two types of cases was that, in the former, the victims did not know that they were actually engaging in sex. Whereas, in the latter, the alleged victim knew well that she was.

So, in the OP's example, if the policeman tricked the activist into thinking that the act going to save all the trees or the planet or something like that rather than being sex, that would vitiate her consent. But if she knew that they were having sex, but was just mistaken in terms of the other person's occupation, then that wouldn't vitiate it.

Little CuChulainn

melissak wrote: »

Thank you for your response. What about the woman who pretended to be a man and got 8 years?

Are you just ignoring all the posts you don't like? Do you not see the difference between someone lying about their circumstances and lying about their gender? Do you not understand how finding out that the person you slept with is a cop is different from finding out you've just been tricked into having sex with someone of the same gender?

Paz-CCFC

melissak wrote: »

Sorry. I don't know how to put up links. It was in Israel I think. He pretended to be a doctor and convinced her it would help her singing voice or vocal cords or something similar
I will look it up now

I posted up a similar case (possibly the one you were thinking of), R v Williams. In that case, the victim didn't know that she was having sex, she thought that it was a medical procedure. That was strong enough to vitiate the consent.

melissak wrote: »

Thank you for your response. What about the woman who pretended to be a man and got 8 years?

Deceit as to gender can, "depending on the circumstances", vitiate consent (R v McNally [2013] EWCA Crim 1051 at para 27 - English Court of Appeal case).

melissak

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Are you just ignoring all the posts you don't like? Do you not see the difference between someone lying about their circumstances and lying about their gender? Do you not understand how finding out that the person you slept with is a cop is different from finding out you've just been tricked into having sex with someone of the same gender?

I do not understand why gender would be an issue more than everything else about him. Especially in these days of gender equality I would consider this more wronGetting and I wonder why one aspect of your identity is more valid than another.

melissak

melissak wrote: »

I do not understand why gender would be an issue more than everything else about him. Especially in these days of gender equality I would consider this more wronGetting and I wonder why one aspect of your identity is more valid than another.

Not just slept with a cop. This would not be an issue. Married in some cases. 10 years relationship in another. I am just wondering about whether it could be brought to a court outside England as it was the state that was responsible and there would be a bias. Hence the rape question