Legal implication of sleeping with someone and giving false details

sexmag

Just wanted open a thread to discuss the above and if there is any law surrounding it.

If say a man(in this scenario) was to meet a girl in a club,knowingly provide her with false details about everything, right up to his name and then sleeps with her and leaves the next day, has anything illegal happened?

Say the woman becomes pregnant or gets an sti and has no way of finding this man as the Information is false, has he defrauded her or in an extreme case sexually assaulted her?

I know in the last couple of weeks a case regarding knowingly passing on sexually transmitted illnesses was found to be an assault.

Any input or discussion welcome

smelly sock

sexmag wrote: »

Just wanted open a thread to discuss the above and if there is any law surrounding it.

If say a man(in this scenario) was to meet a girl in a club,knowingly provide her with false details about everything, right up to his name and then sleeps with her and leaves the next day, has anything illegal happened?

Say the woman becomes pregnant or gets an sti and has no way of finding this man as the Information is false, has he defrauded her or in an extreme case sexually assaulted her?

I know in the last couple of weeks a case regarding knowingly passing on sexually transmitted illnesses was found to be an assault.

Any input or discussion welcome

How would she know he gave false details if she could never find him to get the correct ones?

sexmag

smelly sock wrote: »

How would she know he gave false details if she could never find him to get the correct ones?

Good point but say he is discovered after she tried to find him by going to the gardai and it was found his details were false

stimpson

sexmag wrote: »

Say the woman becomes pregnant or gets an sti and has no way of finding this man as the Information is false, has he defrauded her or in an extreme case sexually assaulted her?

I suppose it could be fraud if she was, eh, providing a paid service and had provided him with a line of credit.

Peregrinus

If you deceive somebody sufficiently you may vitiate their consent, and then sleeping with them is rape. But it has to be a deception about something very fundamental.

So, if I sleep with you, pretending (in the dark) to be your partner, or allowing you to think that I am, that's rape. But if I sleep with you telling you my name is Joe when in fact its Declan, that's not rape.

sexmag

Peregrinus wrote: »

If you deceive somebody sufficiently you may vitiate their consent, and then sleeping with them is rape. But it has to be a deception about something very fundamental.

So, if I sleep with you, pretending (in the dark) to be your partner, or allowing you to think that I am, that's rape. But if I sleep with you telling you my name is Joe when in fact its Declan, that's not rape.

What in a case where the deceiver(man in my scenario) pretends to be the a blind date they(woman)were set up on by someone she knows,this person knew all the info of the other person they were pretending to be and slept with them. Would that be deceptive enough?

sbsquarepants

sexmag wrote: »

What in a case where the deceiver(man in my scenario) pretends to be the a blind date they(woman)were set up on by someone she knows,this person knew all the info of the other person they were pretending to be and slept with them. Would that be deceptive enough?

Oh sexmag, what have you done!:D

.......

This post has been deleted.

Samuel T. Cogley

sexmag wrote: »

What in a case where the deceiver(man in my scenario) pretends to be the a blind date they(woman)were set up on by someone she knows,this person knew all the info of the other person they were pretending to be and slept with them. Would that be deceptive enough?

Unlikely. The key to this is there has to be a deception like the one mentioned above. I believe there is caselaw about pretending to be a doctor/being a doctor and carrying out a 'medical examination' which vitiated consent but the standard is quite high and rightly so; consent has little to do with the person's name and other details.

On STI's knowingly infecting someone is assult. I'm not 100% sure if that vitiates consent.

seamus

As Peregrinus says, there is a point at which the deception is so severe as to invalidate consent. Case in point is the recent case where a woman was convicted of raping another woman, because she had pretended to be a man throughout.

Where that line is, is pretty far in, though I doubt it would be possible to draw a firm one. A thread (I think it was on AH) asked if someone went and claimed to be a pilot or a doctor or another prestigious profession, would that be rape. And the answer is most likely no.

Most likely the thing being lied about would have to be the primary basis of the victim's consent and the offender would need to know this. So "I only consented because I believed it was a man" makes sense. But "I only consented because I believed he was a pilot" is less plausible, unless one can show a solid history of exclusively having sex with pilots, forsaking all others. And you would need to show that the offender knew and exploited this. Even then, it's so-so.

Fraud is very unlikely, since it implies that sexual activity is a trading relationship. That said, fraud doesn't require financial gain; personal gain is also included. It's a tricky one, since a successful conviction on the basis of fraud basically implies rape.

sbsquarepants

seamus wrote: »

. But "I only consented because I believed he was a pilot" is less plausible, unless one can show a solid history of exclusively having sex with pilots, forsaking all others. And you would need to show that the offender knew and exploited this. Even then, it's so-so.
.

What about a specific look alike, rather than just a generic pilot?

Say David Jones is the spitting image of David Beckham and actively pretends to be him to pull the starlets?

seamus

sbsquarepants wrote: »

What about a specific look alike, rather than just a generic pilot?

Say David Jones is the spitting image of David Beckham and actively pretends to be him to pull the starlets?

Yeah, perhaps. It's certainly plausible.

You'll probably find the number of people willing to admit to such shallowness very low, but theoretically someone convincingly pretending to be a specific real person, might fall into the realm of rape.

Same as if an identical twin pretended to be his brother to have sex with his sister-in-law.

Some reading here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_by_deception

Peregrinus

The cases where assuming someone else's identity for the purpose of getting sex has been found to be rape all involve assuming the identify of someone with whom the complainant was already in a committed relationship. So they all have the dimension of exploiting an existing commitment, an existing intimacy, an existing relationship

I think there's a difference between that and assuming the identify of a famous person, so that a starstruck stranger who has never met the famous person will consent to sex. Until a case actually comes before the courts we won't know if this is rape.

Other "deceit" cases, much discussed in recent years:

If a woman gets a man to consent to sex with her by saying she is on the pill, when in fact she is not, is there a remedy? Does it matter whether she falls pregnant or not?

If a person obtains consent to sex by saying that they have been tested for STDs and are clear, when in fact they have not been tested (or they have, and know they are infected) is there a remedy? Does it matter whether the complainant becomes infected or not?

In some countries (including Sweden, as Julian Assange has discovered to his considerable inconvenience) there's a lesser offence than rape, where there is consent to sex but the consent is consider to be withdrawn, or to become invalid, because of circumstances such as, as alleged in Assange's case, not wearing a condom when you obtained consent on the basis that you would wear one.

padz

Interesting thread, if the relationship developed to some degree with the false identity intact its hard to know what way it would fall, particularly if person putting forward a false identity was married,...not sure where we are on bigamy or alienation of affections or if it could be argued

padz

100e Fine.....

Det Garda Foley said the accused married a fellow Latvian in Limerick in August 2005 before civil registrar Luoie Quirke.

In July 2009, she married Mr Baig, a native of Pakistan, in the same office, having made a declaration that she was not married.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/woman-pleads-guilty-to-bigamy-charge-434424.html

ohnonotgmail

padz wrote: »

Interesting thread, if the relationship developed to some degree with the false identity intact its hard to know what way it would fall, particularly if person putting forward a false identity was married,...not sure where we are on bigamy or alienation of affections or if it could be argued

I'm not sure how somebody already married entering into a relationship with a third party could be construed as bigamy.

ohnonotgmail

Peregrinus wrote: »

The cases where assuming someone else's identity for the purpose of getting sex has been found to be rape all involve assuming the identify of someone with whom the complainant was already in a committed relationship. So they all have the dimension of exploiting an existing commitment, an existing intimacy, an existing relationship

I think there's a difference between that and assuming the identify of a famous person, so that a starstruck stranger who has never met the famous person will consent to sex. Until a case actually comes before the courts we won't know if this is rape.

Other "deceit" cases, much discussed in recent years:

If a woman gets a man to consent to sex with her by saying she is on the pill, when in fact she is not, is there a remedy? Does it matter whether she falls pregnant or not?

If a person obtains consent to sex by saying that they have been tested for STDs and are clear, when in fact they have not been tested (or they have, and know they are infected) is there a remedy? Does it matter whether the complainant becomes infected or not?

In some countries (including Sweden, as Julian Assange has discovered to his considerable inconvenience) there's a lesser offence than rape, where there is consent to sex but the consent is consider to be withdrawn, or to become invalid, because of circumstances such as, as alleged in Assange's case, not wearing a condom when you obtained consent on the basis that you would wear one.

Wasnt there a case recently where somebody was convicted for having sex while they knew they had an STD?

Peregrinus

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Wasnt there a case recently where somebody was convicted for having sex while they knew they had an STD?

From memory, the conviction was not for rape or any sexual offence, but for an assault offence.

padz

'I'm not sure how somebody already married entering into a relationship with a third party could be construed as bigamy.'


fraud/attempted bigamy....if the third party believed or was promised marriage, it would have to be to a degree to getting engaged only to find out the other person was already married & created a false identity

ohnonotgmail

padz wrote: »

'I'm not sure how somebody already married entering into a relationship with a third party could be construed as bigamy.'


fraud/attempted bigamy....if the third party believed or was promised marriage, it would have to be to a degree to getting engaged only to find out the other person was already married & created a false identity

no such offence as attempted bigamy that i am aware of. even getting engaged while married to another is not bigamy. Breach of promise to marry was abolished nearly 40 years ago

padz

yes in the usa, pleading to attempted bigamy is accepted, also the alienation of affections.....here they want to put forward 'gross negligence rape'

Peregrinus

Bigamy in Irish law involves actually going through a marriage ceremony, while still married to someone else. I've never heard of a prosecution for attempted bigamy, but I think that offence could only be committed if you tried to go through a marriage ceremony, but were prevented (most likely by somebody objecting). Simply indicating to somebody that you intend to marry them, even if you fail at the same time to mention that you are already married to someone else, is not an offence.

Mr. Incognito

I know a lad back in the day who pretended to be an Irish international rugby player.

The women, who knew feck all about rugby would regularly sleep with him to brag to their mates they slept with so and so.

Never ceased to amaze me how shallow people are.

GM228

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

On STI's knowingly infecting someone is assult. I'm not 100% sure if that vitiates consent.

We discussed that very topic previously, you may find this post interesting STC.

GM228 wrote: »

A partners consent whilst not knowing about the infection may not apply based on Regina vs Dee [1884] IR 468 if the full facts of the act are not known to either party before the act or as per a UK case R vs Williams [1923] 1 KB 340, consent may not apply when both parties are not fully aware of what the other is doing - i.e intentionally infecting another (assuming that's the aim of the act?), both parties must fully comprehend the nature of the act and the risks they are consenting to.

As per R vs Tabassum [2000] 2 Cr App R 328, consent to sex in itself may not provide a defence as the consent is simply for sex, not the risk of contracting a disease - the consent is for the nature of the act, not the quality of the act.

GM228

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Wasnt there a case recently where somebody was convicted for having sex while they knew they had an STD?

https://independent.ie/irish-news/courts/seven-women-may-have-been-deliberately-infected-with-hiv-37113117.html