Reply to Has Charles Allen commented recently on the criminal code re-write?

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Has Charles Allen commented recently on the criminal code re-write?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Will probably be voted on after the election and will likely keep it quiet until then.

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/us-attorneys-office-testifies-hearing-revised-criminal-code-act-2021[/quote]

Glad you posted this. I’m no fan of the USAO and they and their plea deals and under-charging have a lot to answer to this city for, but their testimony on this should be read by all DC residents. Much of what the Council is proposing to do here is straight up bananas.[/quote]

How so? What are some of the changes in the rewrite that you think are bananas?[/quote]

As disturbing as it sounds, some of the "reforms" are basically pro-rape and pro-sexual assault:

[i]The RCCA proposes adding the modifier “sexually” to certain conduct before it can constitute a “sexual act” or “sexual contact,” such that certain behavior would only constitute a sexual offense if the defendant has a “sexual” intent. See RCCA §§ 22A-101(118)(c), 22A-101(119)(B)(ii).[6]

However, adding the modifier “sexually” would constitute an ill-advised change from current law, as it would unduly limit situations where the defendant’s conduct should qualify as a sexual act or sexual contact. Sexual violence can be about power and control, not sex or sexual gratification. When committing a sexual offense, a defendant may be motivated by a desire to be violent or to assert power over a victim, not necessarily to be sexually aroused. [b]For example, if, at a fraternity or sorority hazing, a defendant publicly penetrated another person with an object, the defendant may not have been acting with a sexual desire, but may have been acting with an intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, or degrade the victim.[/b] This would and should constitute a sexual offense. Further, even where a victim clearly experiences a sexual violation, it is often difficult, if not impossible, to prove that a defendant committed the offense for a sexual reason. [b]For example, if a defendant grabs the vagina, breast, or buttocks of a stranger, that victim likely will feel sexually violated, and the conduct should constitute a sexual offense. Absent evidence of the defendant having an erection or outwardly manifesting sexual pleasure through words or actions—which is rare in many cases, particularly those involving sudden, brief, sexual assaults of strangers—the government may not be able to prove that the defendant’s actions were sexually arousing or gratifying.[/b] The government, however, would be able to show that, at a minimum, the defendant intended to humiliate, degrade, or harass the victim.[/i]

[/quote]

So basically if you get grabbed on the Metro you now have to prove the pervert was hiding a boner under his trenchcoat or else it doesn't count.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics