V. Sex Offenses - brett clone | Brett Johnson | March 21, 2017

H2O

This is the old version of the H2O platform and is now read-only. This means you can view content but cannot create content. You can access the new platform at https://opencasebook.org. Thank you.

V. Sex Offenses - brett clone

Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson Show/Hide
  1. 1 Show/Hide More V.A. Introduction
    Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson

    To a greater degree than any of the other crimes we study in this class, the very definition of rape has been a subject of dispute and reform in recent years. Perhaps that is because the basic result element that rape law criminalizes—sexual intercourse—is not, unlike death or battery, itself considered bad. When someone intentionally kills another, there is usually little question (except in cases of self-defense) that the result is bad and that a crime may have occurred. Unlike most intentional killing, intentional sex is not inherently wrong. Indeed, in some situations, much of the evidence of rape may rest in the perceptions and interpretations of the involved parties.

    The traditional elements of rape law are: 1) sexual intercourse; 2) with force; 3) and lack of consent. Because the sexual intercourse element of rape can be difficult to distinguish from lawful, intentional behavior, rape law has struggled to create a regime that balances the punishment of wrongdoers with the protection of the rights of the accused. Originally, rape law established strict rules governing punishable behavior that were under-inclusive and strongly protected accused men: for example, a claim of rape had to include the use of physical force by the accused and physical resistance by the victim. Additionally, there was a spousal exception to rape, so that husbands could not be criminally liable for rape of their wives.

    As the cases in this section demonstrate, however, rape law reform in the past several decades has dramatically affected these requirements. Namely, feminist legal reformers have challenged and in many jurisdictions weakened or eliminated the force requirement. That has shifted more legal focus onto the question whether there was consent. Consider what problems consent itself may have as a central element of rape law.

    As you read the cases and essays in this section, consider how different formulations of rape law balance several very serious considerations of our criminal system: punishing wrongdoers; differentiating between levels of blameworthiness; and protecting the rights of defendants. What evidentiary or normative roles did the traditional rape requirements play? What are the risks of limiting or removing them? How should our system balance the risks of over-inclusivity and under-inclusivity? What social and intimate relationships between men and women do the various possible rape rules promote and change? And as always, how do these questions implicate the justifications of punishment such as retribution and deterrence?

  2. 2 Show/Hide More V.B. Statutes
    Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson
    1. 2.5 Show/Hide More Amendments to CA Penal Code Following Convictions of Brock Turner, secs. 263.1, 1203.065 (Effective Jan. 1, 2017)
      Amendments to CA Penal Code Following Convictions of Brock Turner, Effective Jan. 1, 2017, secs. 263.1, 1203.065
  3. 3 Show/Hide More V.C. Race History
    Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson
    1. 3.1 Show/Hide More Grandison v. State
      Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson

    2. 3.2 Show/Hide More Dorsey v. State
      Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson

    3. 3.3 Show/Hide More State v. Petit
      Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson

  4. 4 Show/Hide More V.D. Force
    Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson

    1. 4.1 Show/Hide More State v. Rusk
      Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson
  5. 5 Show/Hide More V.E. Consent
    Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson

    1. 5.1 Show/Hide More Commonwealth v. Fischer
      Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson
    2. 5.2 Show/Hide More Commonwealth v. Carey
      Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson

    3. 5.3 Show/Hide More Commonwealth v. Appleby
      Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson
    4. 5.4 Show/Hide More Commonwealth v. Lopez
      Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson

    5. 5.5 Show/Hide More People v. John Z.
      Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson
    6. 5.6 Show/Hide More People v. Denbo
      Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson

  6. 6 Show/Hide More V.F. Deception
    Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson

    1. 6.1 Show/Hide More Boro v. Superior Court
      Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson
    2. 6.2 Show/Hide More State v. Bolsinger
      Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson

  7. 7 Show/Hide More V.G. Registry
    Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson

  8. 8 Show/Hide More V.H. Proof
    Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson
    Criminal prosecutions, strictly speaking, are between the state and the defendant. In homicides, the victims are, for obvious reasons, absent. How should the criminal system deal with rape victims? In rape cases, the criminal system has attempted to balance the defendant’s rights to confront his accuser and prove his case with the concern for victim’s privacy and dignity. As with rape law more generally, the cases in this section pose provocative questions about where the proper balance lies, and reflect the process of law and social change.
    1. 8.3 Show/Hide More Olden v. Kentucky
      Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson

    2. 8.4 Show/Hide More People v. Jovanovic
      Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson
      Criminal Law 2016
    3. 8.5 Show/Hide More People v. Yates
      Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson

    4. 8.6 Show/Hide More Minter v. Com
      Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson

    5. 8.7 Show/Hide More State v. Rorie
      Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson

  9. 9 Show/Hide More V.I. Campus
    Original Creator: Jeannie Suk Current Version: Brett Johnson
    1. 9.4 Show/Hide More Alexandra Brodsky, "Fair Process, Not Criminal Process, Is the Right Way to Address Campus Sexual Assault," Am. Prospect (2015)
      Alexandra Brodsky, “Fair Process, Not Criminal Process, Is the Right Way to Address Campus Sexual Assault”
Close

Playlist Information

March 21, 2017

Author Stats

Brett Johnson

bjohnson

Other Playlists by Brett Johnson

Find Items

Search below to find items, then drag and drop items onto playlists you own. To add items to nested playlists, you must first expand those playlists.

SEARCH
Leitura Garamond Futura Verdana Proxima Nova Dagny Web
small medium large extra-large