In a 4-3 decision, the high court ruled that despite evidence the 26-year-old woman cannot speak and has little body movement, there was no evidence she could not communicate her refusal to have sex with the defendant, Richard Fourtin Jr. As a result of the ruling, Fourtin goes free and cannot be tried for the case again.

Read more: http://www.ctpost.com/news/article/Supr ... z2AFgTIXyp

Has anyone called Dexter?

Ha, awesome show. I actually edited out part of my post calling for vigilante justice.

Moving past the extreme absurdity of the defense's case on its very face it would seem that it could have easily been toppled.

Essentially, the court has upheld sex as an "opt out" model. If you don't say no anything can be done to you. I would disagree with that immediately, but let's grant the defense that so we can move on to the next issue. Do we not find people guilty for rape in cases where the victim was unconscious and thus unable to provide consent? We do, and that establishes a precedent that, in fact, sex is not characterized by an opt out model, but rather an opt in model. The absence of denial does not equal consent, but it has been established that the absence of consent can and does open the door for a criminal charge and a finding of guilty.

I'm not sure where these judges earned their law degrees, the Caribbean, the Philippines, wherever it was they didn't get their money's worth because they are clueless. I doubt this case would have survived in an intro to law class at a community college.

I sincerely hope that each one of them, very soon, will get jumped, knocked out and brutally raped either vaginally or anally as is possible. Based upon their own ruling they will have no case, but aggravated assault.

I completely follow your logic, but I think laying it out that way, publicly especially, you might make it harder for the deaf girls to get laid. I mean if I think there's a chance a girl who's deaf can give me the googlie eye, and have some fun, then claim she never "gave consent", Im just not goin there to start with. Don't get me wrong, I totally agree with your assessment that sex be an opt in, not opt out activity, but how do you provide consent when you cant provide consent? Do we need to form sex contracts, to be signed by both parties? That negates the "I told him to stop after we started" argument, contract was signed. Bit of stretching on my part there for effect, but still.....how do you handle consent in those instances?

Learn the sign for

Put http://www.signingsavvy.com/sign/PUT/4234/1
It http://www.signingsavvy.com/sign/IT/1602/1
In http://www.signingsavvy.com/sign/IN/596/1
Your http://www.signingsavvy.com/sign/YOUR/501/1
Butt? http://www.signingsavvy.com/sign/BUTT/5203/1

Or

Do http://www.signingsavvy.com/sign/DO/549/1
Me http://www.signingsavvy.com/sign/ME/3864/1
Baby http://www.signingsavvy.com/sign/BABY/4/1

Or maybe hang this from your belt?