If consent is considered the exact same in all facets of the law, why can I go join a kick boxing class and consent to being punched in the face, yet, the police can charge my husband for assault, even if I tell them it's okay that he beat me? They are not viewed the same by the law, even if I consent to both. You know that. Consent is NOT viewed the same in all areas of law, plain and simple.
SCC Decision on Consent
- Thread starter TenPenny
- Start date
If consent is considered the exact same in all facets of the law, why can I go join a kick boxing class and consent to being punched in the face, yet, the police can charge my husband for assault, even if I tell them it's okay that he beat me? They are not viewed the same by the law, even if I consent to both. You know that. Consent is NOT viewed the same in all areas of law, plain and simple.
I like the example. The female complainant in the sexual abuse case has offered 2 stories to date... Had she approached the police immediately after the event in question and stated that she had consensually consented to all of the activities that had transpired, would her partner have ever been charged?
MMA is an excellent example though. The participants sign waivers, however, according to the SCOC, ongoing consent is a prerequsite. That said, in that fraction of time when a fighter taps-out and the aggressor was in the process of delivering blows, is there the opportunity to charge the aggressor with assault because the 'victim' withdrew consent just prior?
Of course, I'm just askin'
Of course, I'm just askin'
It would depend on the cop. Different cops view things differently, and lay charges differently. Some cops might have ignored it and called it kink. Some cops might have pressed assault charges for the choking alone.
Cops don't make the decision the crown does. She filed a complaint. They weren't caught in the act.
captain morgan just posed the question of what would happen if she went to the cops and just said 'this is what just happened, but it was all consentual'. I was answering a hypothetical, not the reality of what went down.
Fair enough... I guess that in my mind, the argument regarding consent never should have made it to the SCOC in the first place. If the activity was illegal (choking), consent would have been irrelevant.
That means she is making a complaint which goes for review to the crown, then the crown send it to a judge who issues an arrest warrant.
Paper. Paper. Paper. The whole key is paper.
She put her complaint on paper.
The papers says there was no consent.
Paper. Paper. Paper. The whole key is paper.
She put her complaint on paper.
The papers says there was no consent.