Change
I'm too tired to blog articulately at the moment. Grocery shopping was draining. I forget how much it sucks to go on a weekend. E gads. I tried to be zen about it so as not to get all worked up (not because I worry about freaking out on people, which I should, but because I don't like how it makes me feel in both the physical and metaphysical senses) but it was like dipshits getting in the way of other dipshits which makes a huge dipshit clusterfuck mess day in CT. I managed to not get too worked up but boy it took a whole lot out of me.
What's caught my attention since returning home and what I spent a good deal of time talking about with my sister on the phone tonight is the issue of the recent reaffirmation that rape through deception is legal in MA, and the broader issue of the legal definition of rape in Massachusetts (I'll get back to the financial aid thing, I hope).
I hate that the rapist walked, but I hate it more that the Massachusetts law is so poor. I do think the court is right that the state legislature should do their job and fix the damned law. They've had quite some time to address the disturbingly narrow rape definition on the books. And why haven't they? Rants abound - none of them well researched enough to bear posting at the moment.
For now I'll just say I am delighted to see a couple of lawmakers stepping up to fix this.
(from The Republican)
State legislators to act on rape decision
By Dan Ring
BOSTON - Outraged over a ruling by the state's highest court in a Hampden County case, state legislators are crafting a bill to broaden the definition of rape to include sex obtained with a fraudulent identity.
The state Supreme Judicial Court on Thursday threw out a rape charge against a Westfield man, Alvin Suliveres, 44, who was accused of duping his brother's girlfriend into having sex by impersonating his brother during the night.
The court said it is not a crime when consent to sex is obtained through fraud or deceit. The court said that in order to convict someone of rape, the act must be by force and against the will of the victim.
...
Two former assistant district attorneys, Sen. Stephen J. Buoniconti, D-West Springfield, and Rep. Peter J. Koutoujian, D-Waltham, said they will file a bill that would change the definition of rape to include sex obtained through an impersonation or possibly through other frauds.
The legislators are working with Jane Doe Inc. on the language for the proposed bill.
...
"Here, we have a rape of a victim - sex not consented to - and we can't pursue that," Koutoujian said. "It simply doesn't make sense."
Buoniconti, a Hampden assistant district attorney from 1996 to 2001, said he was appalled by the court ruling.
"I don't think anybody thought there was a loophole like that in the statute," he said.
If you live in MA, you have an opportunity to be part of ensuring the definition of rape is changed to close this loophole. Please write to Senator Stephen J. Buoniconti and Representative Peter J. Koutoujian and thank them for addressing the outdated definition of rape in Massachusetts (cc it to your local legislators) . If you know people who live in MA, ask them to write to these legislators and express their support for the proposed bill.
What's that? You're feeling the familiar sucking inertia of cynical voter alienation? Do you know who your state legislators are? You go find that out, spend a term looking them over, track a couple of bills you like, take a tour of the State House, maybe attend a legislative committee public hearing, meet your legislators, and then vote as an informed voter in the next election. When you've done all that, you come back and tell me if you think it doesn't matter what you do. I'm open to that idea, but only from someone who has actually made a point of being an active participant in their government rather than a spectator.
Thank you to Catlady for the link and discussion of the issue of consent.
1 comment:
What a relief that it occurred to these legislators that this ruling was, y'know, the stuff of horror movies.
Glad to see MA step up. I think this case was so revolting and so apparently wrong that something finally clicked. I can't imagine how the victim feels. Even if legislation changes as a result of crafting a new bill, justice ain't retroactive.
Post a Comment