Is it rape?

Can't we argue that legally, If prostitution in Philadelphia is legal, then sex with a prostitute becomes a service in which case the judge may be right. In a moral/social scale, it IS rape. But seeing how the legal system is all about definitions and loopholes, could the judge be right?GazaAli

If the service was provided and the guy ran off, then maybe - but this was being forced at gunpoint against her will.

[QUOTE="_R34LiTY_"]

Well, since you provided a very good summary of the situation, I'm going to have to say it's Love.

mrmusicman247

Which is why the summary you provided is very spot on!!

In a moral/social scale, it IS rape. GazaAli

the judge is obviously biased because she was a prostitute, people like that shouldn't be in a public job

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]Can't we argue that legally, If prostitution in Philadelphia is legal, then sex with a prostitute becomes a service in which case the judge may be right. In a moral/social scale, it IS rape. But seeing how the legal system is all about definitions and loopholes, could the judge be right?Ravensmash

If the service was provided and the guy ran off, then maybe - but this was being forced at gunpoint against her will.

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]In a moral/social scale, it IS rape. ghoklebutter

That's rape and I hope the judge is ousted for that ruling.

On a side note, is prostitution legal in Philadelphia? If not I think this ruling might have made it so.

[QUOTE="Ravensmash"]

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]Can't we argue that legally, If prostitution in Philadelphia is legal, then sex with a prostitute becomes a service in which case the judge may be right. In a moral/social scale, it IS rape. But seeing how the legal system is all about definitions and loopholes, could the judge be right?GazaAli

If the service was provided and the guy ran off, then maybe - but this was being forced at gunpoint against her will.

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"]

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]In a moral/social scale, it IS rape. GazaAli

[QUOTE="GazaAli"][QUOTE="Ravensmash"] Nope. Because this case still lacks any form of consent on behalf of the female, and legally that is defined as rape or sexual assault.

If the service was provided and the guy ran off, then maybe - but this was being forced at gunpoint against her will.

Ravensmash

Of course, I'm sure that even though she consented before he pulled the gun on her, she didn't once he threatened her life. That judge is terrible.

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]I believe that you can retain the right to refuse service to anyone.Serraph105

>Hooker shows up at dude's house
>Dude and Hooker go at it.
>Hooker and Dude's friend (#1) go at it.
>Hooker wants cash
>Hooker gets gun to her head, and Dude's friends show up.

At least that's how the article made it seem.
and

[The Judge] left intact charges of armed robbery for theft of services against Gindraw. Article

Maybe for his friends it was rape, but for the first two, the judge's ruling seems fair.

I can see both sides of it...

Yeah that is rape, no doubt. Being forced at gunpoint to have sex with several men is probably multiple rape, not sure if that is a legal term but whatever. Judge was a douche.

It's both things.

Cant it be both rape and theft of services in theory?TwoFace-BS

prostitute at gun point

that is rape

It's rape.

That judge is a dumbsh*t, overthinking something wayyyyyyy to obvious.

Of course it is rape. You cant force someone to have sex with you regardless of their profession. No consent means rape. Period.

>Hooker shows up at dude's house
>Dude and Hooker go at it.
>Hooker and Dude's friend (#1) go at it.
>Hooker wants cash
>Hooker gets gun to her head, and Dude's friends show up.

Nibroc420

i think it was more like

>hooker shows up at dude's house where dude and his dude friends are

>dude says "have sex with all of us"

>hooker asks for money

>dude says no and pulls out gun and threatens her

>hooker has sex with all of them against her will.

but that's just my opinion

I'm personally amazed that so far 22%, or approximately one person out of every four, thinks that holding a gun to someone's head and forcing them to have sex with multiple different people doesn't qualify as rape just because the woman was a prostitute.nocoolnamejim

Perhaps there were a few like me that chose legit because they were going by the topic title, not the poll title. Surely I can't be the only one lacking reading skills.

Hopefully.

It's not rape. He just didn't pay for her services, and left. dumb whore, you get the money first. I agree with the judge.

*2nd read around I retract.

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"]

>Hooker shows up at dude's house
>Dude and Hooker go at it.
>Hooker and Dude's friend (#1) go at it.
>Hooker wants cash
>Hooker gets gun to her head, and Dude's friends show up.

mrmusicman247

i think it was more like

>hooker shows up at dude's house where dude and his dude friends are

>dude says "have sex with all of us"

>hooker asks for money

>dude says no and pulls out gun and threatens her

>hooker has sex with all of them against her will.

but that's just my opinion

Yeah that's how I read it because I assume most prostitutes would want to be paid up front? Doesn't really make sense to be paid after.

Rape is sex againstsomeone's will. period. Judge needs a dictionary.

it doesn't say if the gun was used for force her to have sex or merely used for foreplay :P

Fightingfan

Even if it was just for foreplay or whatever - which is an absurd speculation in this context - he forced her to have sex with him and other people. Whether it was truly at gunpoint is irrelevant since he and his friends nevertheless raped her.

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"]

>Hooker shows up at dude's house
>Dude and Hooker go at it.
>Hooker and Dude's friend (#1) go at it.
>Hooker wants cash
>Hooker gets gun to her head, and Dude's friends show up.

mrmusicman247

i think it was more like

>hooker shows up at dude's house where dude and his dude friends are

>dude says "have sex with all of us"

>hooker asks for money

>dude says no and pulls out gun and threatens her

>hooker has sex with all of them against her will.

but that's just my opinion

it's not like the events would have happened any different if he had pointed a wad of cash at her instead of a gun. everything would have happened the exact same way.dooly420

[QUOTE="dooly420"]it's not like the events would have happened any different if he had pointed a wad of cash at her instead of a gun. everything would have happened the exact same way.ghoklebutter

It's not rape. He just didn't pay for her services, and left. dumb whore, you get the money first. I agree with the judge.

*2nd read around I retract.

Fightingfan

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"]I'm personally amazed that so far 22%, or approximately one person out of every four, thinks that holding a gun to someone's head and forcing them to have sex with multiple different people doesn't qualify as rape just because the woman was a prostitute.zeldaluff

Perhaps there were a few like me that chose legit because they were going by the topic title, not the poll title. Surely I can't be the only one lacking reading skills.

Hopefully.

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]Can't we argue that legally, If prostitution in Philadelphia is legal, then sex with a prostitute becomes a service in which case the judge may be right. In a moral/social scale, it IS rape. But seeing how the legal system is all about definitions and loopholes, could the judge be right?Ravensmash

If the service was provided and the guy ran off, then maybe - but this was being forced at gunpoint against her will.

See, this is where people failed to read the linked to article. If you had read it, you would have seen that she had consented to sex to begin with and there was an agreed to price. Once the original sex act was complete, the man pulled again and said that he would not pay for it. That right there is theft of services. Once he had her at gunpoint, he forced her to have sex with him again and then others. That is rape.

This is why it is actually both and not just rape.

[QUOTE="zeldaluff"]

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"]I'm personally amazed that so far 22%, or approximately one person out of every four, thinks that holding a gun to someone's head and forcing them to have sex with multiple different people doesn't qualify as rape just because the woman was a prostitute.nocoolnamejim

Perhaps there were a few like me that chose legit because they were going by the topic title, not the poll title. Surely I can't be the only one lacking reading skills.

Hopefully.

The poll is poorly constructed. I cannot answer it due to it being so vague and not having more sane answers such as yes, no or both.

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"][QUOTE="dooly420"]it's not like the events would have happened any different if he had pointed a wad of cash at her instead of a gun. everything would have happened the exact same way.dooly420

Under the circumstances i wouldnt protest if they ruled it as theft of services and sexual assualt aswell as possible kidnapping.

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"][QUOTE="dooly420"]it's not like the events would have happened any different if he had pointed a wad of cash at her instead of a gun. everything would have happened the exact same way.dooly420

Obviously there are risks of the trade. That doesn't mean that the perpetrator's crime was justified.

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="zeldaluff"]

Perhaps there were a few like me that chose legit because they were going by the topic title, not the poll title. Surely I can't be the only one lacking reading skills.

Hopefully.

WhiteKnight77

The poll is poorly constructed. I cannot answer it due to it being so vague and not having more sane answers such as yes, no or both.

[QUOTE="Ravensmash"]

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]Can't we argue that legally, If prostitution in Philadelphia is legal, then sex with a prostitute becomes a service in which case the judge may be right. In a moral/social scale, it IS rape. But seeing how the legal system is all about definitions and loopholes, could the judge be right?WhiteKnight77

If the service was provided and the guy ran off, then maybe - but this was being forced at gunpoint against her will.

See, this is where people failed to read the linked to article. If you had read it, you would have seen that she had consented to sex to begin with and there was an agreed to price. Once the original sex act was complete, the man pulled again and said that he would not pay for it. That right there is theft of services. Once he had her at gunpoint, he forced her to have sex with him again and then others. That is rape.

This is why it is actually both and not just rape.

it's not like the events would have happened any different if he had pointed a wad of cash at her instead of a gun. everything would have happened the exact same way.dooly420