Post: #1

Would it work here? New law in Iceland means rape accused must prove they had explicit consent

The Department of Justice in Ireland is currently reviewing sexual assault legislation and has been urged to provide greater protection for victims.
59 minutes ago 4,882 Views No Comments Share6 Tweet Email

ICELAND’S PARLIAMENT RECENTLY passed a landmark bill, which makes sexual relations with a person illegal unless you have their explicit consent.

Under the new law, consent must be clearly and voluntarily expressed.

It represents a shift in the country’s legislation, as it places the consent burden on the accused – rather than the court focusing on whether the victim said ‘no’ or tried to fight back, the accused will have to prove the other person consented.

The legislation passed unanimously in the parliament on 23 March now states that:

Any person who has sexual intercourse or other sexual relations with a person without his or her consent shall be guilty of rape and shall be imprisoned for a minimum of one year and a maximum of 16 years.

Consent is considered present if it is expressed by free will. Consent is not considered present if violence, threats, or other unlawful coercion is used. ‘Violence’ here refers to the deprivation of independence by means of confinement, drugs, or other comparable means.

It is also considered rape and shall result in the same punishment as specified in the first paragraph of this Article to employ false pretences or utilize a persons‘s lack of understanding concerning circumstances, or exploit a person’s psychiatric disorder or other mental handicap in order to have sexual intercourse or other sexual relations with him or her, or the fact that, for other reasons, he or she is not in a condition to be able to resist the action or to understand its significance.
Jón Steindór Valdmarsson, an opposition MP in Iceland’s Reform party, proposed the legislative change. His party only has four seats in the parliament, but his bill received overwhelming support.

He told TheJournal.ie it is an important amendment to Icelandic law as it makes it “clear and explicit that sexual intercourse or other sexual relations with a person without his or her consent is rape”.

“I believe this change will have significant impact and is an important step in reducing sex-related violence against women.”

Sweden is also proposing a radical change of its laws around consent. The government has proposed the introduction of two new offences, ‘negligent rape’ and ‘negligent sexual abuse’, with a maximum prison sentence of four years.

“The negligence aspect focuses on the fact that the other person did not participate voluntarily. This means that it will be possible to convict more people of abuse than at present, for example, when someone should be aware of the risk that the other person is not participating voluntarily but still engages in a sexual act with that person,” the Swedish government said in December last year.

“It sends out the message that everyone is entitled to control their own sexual engagement and no one can be entitled to have sex with another person under any circumstances without her consent expressed by free will.”

It is proposed that the legislative amendments enter into force on 1 July this year.

Burden of proof

Following the public interest and commentary after the Belfast rape trial last month, Minister for Justice Charlie Flanagan launched a review of the legal protection offered to complainants in sexual assault cases.

The Department of Justice said legal representation for victims is one issue that will be examined as part of this review.

“Among the other issues that will be examined are the existing legislation, maintaining the integrity of the trial process in Irish law, what offences might be covered and within what legal aid framework it might be provided,” a spokesperson said.

Chief executive of the Dublin Rape Crisis Centre Noeline Blackwell said the inclusion of legal representation for complainants in rape cases is welcome, as it will provide a more equal opportunity for both sides where consent is contested.

However, she said she hopes the Minister will also take the opportunity with this review to look at legislative changes and initiatives other countries, like Iceland, have introduced to tackle levels of sexual assault.

“This would be shifting the onus of proof and that is quite the stretch for our system as it stands right now,” she said of the Icelandic law.

“Shifting the onus from the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the complainant did not consent to putting the burden on the person accused to prove they got consent.

“That would be a very big step for our common law system to take. Here a person is innocent until proven guilty, in the Icelandic legislation, it moves more towards guilty until proven innocent.”

Blackwell said this would be an “enormous” change to Ireland’s criminal law and could raise constitutional questions.

“But in the review, it’s worth looking at – this is where we could go. Is there a middle ground?”

Consent in Ireland

Last year, the Irish government inserted a specific definition of consent into criminal law.

It states that a person consents to a sexual act if he or she freely and voluntarily agrees to engage in that act.

Under the definition, a person does not consent if they:

Permit the act to take place because of the application of force, or a threat;
Are asleep or unconscious;
Are incapable of consenting because of alcohol or drugs;
Are suffering from a physical disability which prevents them from communicating consent;
Are mistaken as to the identity of the other person;
Are unlawfully detained at the time.
This definition, according to Blackwell, does not go far enough and often does not stand up in court because of perceived grey areas around consent.

“The thing we keep saying is if there is a grey area, don’t do it. If you can’t be sure consent is freely given, don’t do it. But of course it does happen. That’s the problem where there is a conflict of evidence.

It comes down to that in rape cases where there is a question – the accused says the complainant did consent, the complainant says they didn’t. That’s why it’s important for both sides to have their own legal representation, so they can both produce evidence.
In our system, if the accused can plant reasonably doubt in the mind of the jury that either the complainant consented or that the accused could not know they didn’t consent, the jury must acquit.
Trauma

Another initiative that has been suggested is a specialised court to deal only with sexual offences, like the model in the South African justice system.

These courts are staffed by specially trained individuals and studies have found significantly higher conviction rates compared to those delivered by non-specialist courts.

A report by the European Parliament noted that these courts “assist victim-survivors of rape by reducing their trauma, including the potential secondary trauma of the criminal justice process, and help to prevent rape by making it more likely that rapists will be convicted and held to account”.

Blackwell said that while it is worth looking at, an entirely separate court may not be necessary in Ireland, which has comparatively much lower rates of rape than South Africa.

One aspect of these courts that Ireland’s system could take stock of, however, is the education of the legal profession – including judges – and of juries about the realities of sexual assault.

This could easily be introduced if complainants had their own legal counsel, she said, as they could call expert witnesses to speak about the impact of this crime on victims.

“We need them in court to talk about how people are traumatised, to give evidence as a matter of science and fact and law that remembrance is affected by trauma – this is a fact. This kind of evidence is not heard in every single sexual violence case,” Blackwell said.

“In every case of whiplash, for example, medical evidence is produced. It strikes me as more and more odd that we don’t allow it in all cases of sexual assault or domestic violence.

“That’s all up for discussion now. What I know from people who go to court who we deal with is that with the current system they feel utterly isolated.”

Source: http://www.thejournal.ie/iceland-consent...3-Apr2018/

Post: #2

With a population of only ~350K, didn't know sexual assault could be so rampant in Iceland as to require such measures...

Post: #3

(04-07-2018 07:31 PM)CynicalContrarian Wrote:  With a population of only ~350K, didn't know sexual assault could be so rampant in Iceland as to require such measures...

I think my graduating high school class had that many... (Graduates, not sexual assaults, just saying)

Post: #4

(04-07-2018 07:40 PM)Dulceácido Wrote:  

(04-07-2018 07:31 PM)CynicalContrarian Wrote:  With a population of only ~350K, didn't know sexual assault could be so rampant in Iceland as to require such measures...

I think my graduating high school class had that many... (Graduates, not sexual assaults, just saying)

Was your high school located inside of an amazon warehouse?

Post: #5

It would seem this law is for both genders, no?

Both people have to express consent.

I’m keeping up with this thread to see how things play out.

Surely men will be treated equally.

Post: #6

It seems the Nordic/Germanic countries are being used as social experiments or willing sacrificial lambs on the alter of progress (Marxism).

This will end well as history has shown us before.

Also Iceland is/has taken in refugees and one such fellow spread HIV amongst their women to the tune of 30 or more?

Post: #7

If this law gets media attention to the point where the THOTs hear about it then the new apex jerkboy game will be to get a skintight white t-shirt with some basic legal consent boilerplate on it and the name, date and signature fields left open.

Anyway. The political shiv is pretty obvious, though painfully pointless at this stage.

Special courts. Special judges. Guilty until proven innocent. This is Soviet gulag country.

I got a kick out of this, though.

Quote:Sweden is also proposing a radical change of its laws around consent. The government has proposed the introduction of two new offences, ‘negligent rape’ and ‘negligent sexual abuse’, with a maximum prison sentence of four years.

“The negligence aspect focuses on the fact that the other person did not participate voluntarily. This means that it will be possible to convict more people of abuse than at present, for example, when someone should be aware of the risk that the other person is not participating voluntarily but still engages in a sexual act with that person,” the Swedish government said in December last year.

Fucking Sweden. What a God damned meme nation. They could call this "The Starfish Clause", where you can be fucking a girl and because she's lazy it counts as rape.

"Your honour, I contend that my client's pelvic gyrations testified to by the defendant were in fact due to an upset of the gastric tract and cannot be taken into evidence as voluntary participation."

Post: #8

Don't Bang Iceland.

Post: #9

So, it's her word against her word.

Post: #10

(04-07-2018 08:51 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  It seems the Nordic/Germanic countries are being used as social experiments or willing sacrificial lambs on the alter of progress (Marxism).

This will end well as history has shown us before.

Also Iceland is/has taken in refugees and one such fellow spread HIV amongst their women to the tune of 30 or more?

Interesting, point me to where Marx talks about gender politics

Post: #11

Islamic consent law - If a woman remains alone with a man or a group of men she has given consent to sexual intercourse.

Scandinavian consent law - If a man remains alone with a woman or with a group of women he has given consent to be sentenced as a rapist.

Post: #12

The ”no fun”-brigade strikes again...

Post: #13

(04-07-2018 07:31 PM)CynicalContrarian Wrote:  With a population of only ~350K, didn't know sexual assault could be so rampant in Iceland as to require such measures...

It's not, but by god we will make it so.

It is absolutely sick that a successful, peaceful society which has already given everything to women - including unparalleled safety - is unhappy that they don't have enough rapes, so they change laws to make more "rapes" on paper.

What many women want far more that a peaceful, crime free existence is to see the punishment and suffering of men. If they are not getting enough of that to satisfy their deeply held desires then they will keep changing the laws to make it happen. There simply cannot be any circumstance allowed wherein men are happily living life carefree, because that must mean they are getting away with something.

Post: #14

^
Bit o' sarcasm on my part cause the underlying premise seemed so far fetched.
I wouldn't expect everyone in Iceland to know everyone else. Especially when a region / town / country goes past the 50K mark.
Yet it would be easier to gain a reputation with that no. of people as opposed to the 10's of millions in other regions.

Post: #15

The Norwegian parliament will vote on this the 10th of April also. The craziness continues it seems. The real agenda is to further atomize gender relations and thereby reduce fertility rates even further. It`s working also. My country again saw the largest drop in fertility ever recorded last year, from 1.7 children to 1.61 in just one year! Of course this number includes children born to non-European women, which of course have many more children than the natives.

In addition to all this mother`s are getting older every year, which means genetic mutations and "weak" kids that will not reproduce. Single motherhood is fast becoming the norm rather than the exception, and egg donation/in vitro fertilization will soon be allowed. So old women will give birth to genetically weak children that also lack a father. And in addition you have a poor diet and way to much time in front of screens leading to obesity etc. Marxist-Feminist indoctrination from age 1 also, that`s when women on average dump their child into a State institution in Norway.

Simply put...we`re screwed!

Post: #16

Thanks for the input, this makes me angry. They are talking about it here, hope that's as far as it will go. By the definitions outlined in this legislation it will technically be possible for a man to be put in prison if his wife was drunk on their wedding night. Consent is revoked only if the woman gets drunk, no mention of mans state of inebriation mentioned. We have officially entered the twilight zone.

Post: #17

^
As always - "the ends justify the means."

They never intended to play fair & they'll use whatever sinister means they can to achieve their goals.

Post: #18

I re watched some of the ww2 documentary The World at War, where there was an air of lawlessness in Europe and women got raped for real with no repercussions.

What has gotten into women today? Never had it so good yet its not enough, never will be. I've about had it, you can only push a rational man so far, what's the end goal? Why are we changing the rules to fk men over?

We are their brothers, husbands, fathers, do they not get what this means for men and how unfair it is? Seriously you can only be so stupid, this isn't right in anyone's mind surely. I can't imagine where we end up with guilty until proven innocent laws, its not balanced, fair or equal, its wrong.

If lceland do this we are all at risk, l can't imagine this type of future for all of us if this goes global, even a legal contract prior to the act is null and void if she gets drunk.

I'm beyond disgusted, rape is not regret, rape is violent penetration against somebody's will, not this, this is persecution of men and lm appaulled.

Post: #19

A hottie spots a guy she wants to get get it on with in the club. She motions him outside to a private area. He sits in a chair, she turns around and sways her ass in his face and pulls down her pants while he pulls out his dick. She backs up on it and bounces up and down like crazy. He cums.

Not a word was spoken the entire time.

Who is the rapist?

On a different note, if I were a multibillionaire with unlimited Fuck You money, I would offer a free trip to Thailand to all Icelandic men (approx. 175k?) for a month and drown them in poon. Then I would give them lifetime pensions to never work again and watch that feminized country fall apart.

Post: #20

How l wish you were said billionaire, ld move

Post: #21

Iceland... truly a feminist paradise... aborting all the children with down's syndrome and fighting the patriarchy and male rape culture (which if it exists, I'm pretty sure is non-existent in Iceland). Hell, do they even have a standing army?

Post: #22

Damn. Every day I'm glad that I'm married and my wife has an insane sex drive.

Stories like this make me fear for the well being of my sons in the future.

Post: #23

(04-08-2018 06:59 PM)armenia4ever Wrote:  Damn. Every day I'm glad that I'm married and my wife has an insane sex drive.

Post: #24

A mere accusation now and you are financially ruined, coupled with guilty until proven innocent, its hell on earth is what it is.

Post: #25

Seems that article is about both Ireland and Iceland. That was a bit confusing to read