Would this villain have to use drugs for this crime? (sexual violence warning)

[ironpony]

This is where your lack-of-research (I will refrain from using the term 'ignorance') regarding the law comes in because you are treating rape and sexual assault as two different things when rape is actually a type of sexual assault, along with others such as groping.

Additionally, as sexual assault (and most crime) falls under state and not federal jurisdiction, and the scenario in your story would certainly be state-enforced, the terminology used, the definition of 'what counts', and the response by law enforcement would differ depending on the state law. So, the place you should probably start for researching purposes is, what state is this story set in?

Be aware there are many different types of 'rape' with many different penalties. For example, the victim being drugged first ('date rape') typically carries a less harsh punishment than rape committed under threat of violence. This is because most jurisdictions have the view that a rape committed using drugs to incapacitate the victim, while still a pretty severe felony, is nonetheless not as severe than the same assault being committed, say, at gunpoint.

On the other hand, both would typically be more harshly punished (and prosecuted differently) than the statutory rape involved in otherwise consensual sex between, say, a nineteen year old and a sixteen year old (which is only statutory rape because the sixteen year old is below the age of consent.

On the other, other hand: Statutory rape can be viewed as incredibly serious if it involves sex between, say, a forty year old man and a five year old girl -- most states (and the federal government, when the crime is being enforced by the federal government, which it occasionally is -- such as if the perpetrator is in the military or whatever) distinguish between a teenager who happens to be below the age of consent and child sexual abuse. Also in most jurisdictions there are numerous exemptions and mitigating or aggravating circumstances with different forms of illicit sexual conduct, ranging from mitigating factors, such as the 'Romeo & Juliet Claus', to ones that make the rape-in-question far more worse, such as incest, or lasting injuries and disabilities sustained by the victim.

I am saying all this not because it's relevant to your scenario, but to demonstrate that if you want this to be accurate and incorporating actual legal theory as opposed to made-up law, you HAVE to make sure you identify exactly what the police are investigating and why, and then somehow connect that with all the other things that make the story tick. Otherwise, you are completely welcome to mishandle legal concepts, terminology, and procedure to your hearts content. However I would caution that with a subject such as rape that may be a risk. People don't tend to respond well to writers who ride roughshod over the truth when it comes to that sort of 'real life' material and you are talking about something you clearly don't understand very well, which might be a risk.



Right, but then my question is why is she so set on this? I know you said 'because she's angry and wants revenge' and I get that. I'm even quite accepting to the 'rape' being a part of that, as a gesture of dominance and humiliation, but I would personally -- as a reader -- expect that to be a kind of impulsive decision. I think it would be harder hitting, paint her as more evil (or whatever the adjective is), if she just sat on his dick, grinning, in a moment of mad sadism. I find the idea of anybody, least of all a woman, premeditating a sexual assault questionable, if for no other reason than it's just not that common. Rape is typically an impulsive 'crime of passion', not some thought-out scheme.

If you want my thoughts on the scene, I'll try: Sure, keep the rape, if you want, but I would not have the premise of the cops' interest be built on that. For all the reasons mentioned.

I would see this better as being a matter of her enticing him back to the apartment or wherever, plying him with alcohol/drugs, before letting loose an extended scene of horrific mental and physical abuse that culminates in her forcing him to have sex with her. You could really go to town on it, and make sure that whatever borderline-eroticism there is in the sexual aspect is eradicated by the lead-up, in which she would totally objectify and hurt him.

This has the advantage of creating a non-sexualized, convincing scene that would leave behind a huge amount of 'evidence' of what transpired and completely dispense with any chortling or doubt on the part of his colleagues. Have her burn his flesh, stab him, break his bones, set her dog on him, whatever. Have whatever transpires leave him permanently disfigured or at least in the hospital, covered in wounds and whatever and an extended recovery while his colleagues form an investigation built on a number of suspected offences. But don't focus on 'he was raped and that is so horrible' as a singular outcome.

Oh okay thanks. Well my screenplay is set in a nameless city, as I thought that would be best, because then it can be shot in any city without having to fake it for another, like some movies do when they are set in any city, USA, so to speak, if that makes sense. But does it matter if it falls under state or federal law to the story, if she gets away with it though?

As for what I want the story to be about, I want it to be about a man who is sexually assaulted by this woman, and wants justice, but she gets away with it, so he then wants to seek justice or revenge by other means. But I feel in order for her to get away with her crimes, not just this one, but other ones she commits as well, she will have to pre-plan them to be smart. If she is also smart and pre-planning about it, it also makes the story more simple though, cause then she won't leave any evidence behind if she does this out of impulse. But on other hand, if the cops will not take this crime very seriously, then I guess that works out in the stories, favor if I want her to get away with it?

[luckyscars]

Oh okay thanks. Well my screenplay is set in a nameless city, as I thought that would be best, because then it can be shot in any city without having to fake it for another, like some movies do when they are set in any city, USA, so to speak, if that makes sense. But does it matter if it falls under state or federal law to the story, if she gets away with it though?

It does if you want to incorporate real laws, because the US is a dual-sovereignty country with a lot of differences in how most crimes are coded and therefore investigated and the terminology used. The definition I used, for example, regarding rape was from the DOJ but it's a guideline and one that is of tenuous relevance as rape is rarely prosecuted as a federal crime. So yes, if you want to actually do real research into law and how it is enforced, using a state's legal coding as a template (regardless of whether the state itself features in the story) is necessary.

As for what I want the story to be about, I want it to be about a man who is sexually assaulted by this woman, and wants justice, but she gets away with it, so he then wants to seek justice or revenge by other means. But I feel in order for her to get away with her crimes, not just this one, but other ones she commits as well, she will have to pre-plan them to be smart. If she is also smart and pre-planning about it, it also makes the story more simple though, cause then she won't leave any evidence behind if she does this out of impulse. But on other hand, if the cops will not take this crime very seriously, then I guess that works out in the stories, favor if I want her to get away with it?

So, again, you need to figure out exactly what crime it is (as 'sexual assault' without qualification is not a crime but a label-of-convenience) and how that would typically be investigated, if it would be at all, within the jurisdiction whose legal framework you are using. You are far too focused at this point on the moral issues in play and not nearly enough on the legal technicalities for me to consider this anything close to a police procedural.

[ironpony]

Oh okay, well in order for me to figure that, when you say sexual assault without qualification is not a crime, what do you mean by 'qualification' in this context?

[luckyscars]

Oh okay, well in order for me to figure that, when you say sexual assault without qualification is not a crime, what do you mean by 'qualification' in this context?

What I said...

This is where your lack-of-research (I will refrain from using the term 'ignorance') regarding the law comes in because you are treating rape and sexual assault as two different things when rape is actually a type of sexual assault, along with others such as groping.

Be aware there are many different types of 'rape' with many different penalties. For example, the victim being drugged first ('date rape') typically carries a less harsh punishment than rape committed under threat of violence. This is because most jurisdictions have the view that a rape committed using drugs to incapacitate the victim, while still a pretty severe felony, is nonetheless not as severe than the same assault being committed, say, at gunpoint.

On the other hand, both would typically be more harshly punished (and prosecuted differently) than the statutory rape involved in otherwise consensual sex between, say, a nineteen year old and a sixteen year old (which is only statutory rape because the sixteen year old is below the age of consent.

On the other, other hand: Statutory rape can be viewed as incredibly serious if it involves sex between, say, a forty year old man and a five year old girl -- most states (and the federal government, when the crime is being enforced by the federal government, which it occasionally is -- such as if the perpetrator is in the military or whatever) distinguish between a teenager who happens to be below the age of consent and child sexual abuse. Also in most jurisdictions there are numerous exemptions and mitigating or aggravating circumstances with different forms of illicit sexual conduct, ranging from mitigating factors, such as the 'Romeo & Juliet Claus', to ones that make the rape-in-question far more worse, such as incest, or lasting injuries and disabilities sustained by the victim.

I am saying all this not because it's relevant to your scenario, but to demonstrate that if you want this to be accurate and incorporating actual legal theory as opposed to made-up law, you HAVE to make sure you identify exactly what the police are investigating and why, and then somehow connect that with all the other things that make the story tick. Otherwise, you are completely welcome to mishandle legal concepts, terminology, and procedure to your hearts content. However I would caution that with a subject such as rape that may be a risk. People don't tend to respond well to writers who ride roughshod over the truth when it comes to that sort of 'real life' material and you are talking about something you clearly don't understand very well, which might be a risk.

[indianroads]

<threadjack>

On the other hand, both would typically be more harshly punished (and prosecuted differently) than the statutory rape involved in otherwise consensual sex between, say, a nineteen year old and a sixteen year old (which is only statutory rape because the sixteen year old is below the age of consent.

Short vent here:
The son of a friend of my partner (follow that?) fit exactly that scenario. The girl told him that she was 19 - I've seen pictures of her, and she looked it... and could have passed for older (what are they feeding kids these days?). Her mother turned him in - and he has been on the sex offender list for almost 10 years (soon to get off we hope). He's had to take classes ($$$) and it has hurt his career.

Are boys supposed to ask for an ID these days?
</threadjack>

[ironpony]

Okay thanks, well it says here in this article, that the in the US, the term rape now applies to either gender according to the attorney general. However, does this apply to all states then, it doesn't say:

https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa...efinition-rape

[Sir-KP]

(what are they feeding kids these days?)

KFC


But seriously though, there are a lot of old-looking teenagers in my country as well.

[luckyscars]

Okay thanks, well it says here in this article, that the in the US, the term rape now applies to either gender according to the attorney general. However, does this apply to all states then, it doesn't say:

https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa...efinition-rape

Doesn't matter. It still requires penetration under that same definition. I don't know if you are aware of this, but most women aren't very good at penetrating things. It's a lack-of-penis issue.

Recognizing men can be raped doesn't invalidate. As for why they dispensed with the victim needing to be female, it's obvious: Men can rape men. Which involves penetration.

FYI: Everything in law mandated by the federal government applies to states by default. Because it's the federal government.

Literally all of this was covered extensively in earlier posts, including that same link. You would probably find these threads of yours better received if you had the basic courtesy of reading posts before replying.

[ironpony]

Doesn't matter. It still requires penetration under that same definition. I don't know if you are aware of this, but most women aren't very good at penetrating things. It's a lack-of-penis issue.

Recognizing men can be raped doesn't invalidate. As for why they dispensed with the victim needing to be female, it's obvious: Men can rape men. Which involves penetration.

FYI: Everything in law mandated by the federal government applies to states by default. Because it's the federal government.

Literally all of this was covered extensively in earlier posts, including that same link. You would probably find these threads of yours better received if you had the basic courtesy of reading posts before replying.

Oh okay I see. Sorry, I see what you mean now after reading it. I should have read it more, sorry.

Well in my story then, the crime would be sexual assault and not rape then, since the way I wrote it, was that she forces him into herself. Does that change anything in the story then, like how the police would investigate it? If they wouldn't make a big deal out of it, even if the victim was a police officer, than I guess that works for my story, since I wanted the villain to get away with it? But would they still make a big deal out of it, even a drug like rohypnol was used, and can be part of the evidence now?

[luckyscars]

Well in my story then, the crime would be sexual assault and not rape then, since the way I wrote it, was that she forces him into herself. Does that change anything in the story then, like how the police would investigate it?

I'm just going to start responding by quoting the posts I've already written to you earlier in the thread, since you don't seem to want to actually read the answers to your earlier questions.

This is where your lack-of-research (I will refrain from using the term 'ignorance') regarding the law comes in because you are treating rape and sexual assault as two different things when rape is actually one type of sexual assault