this may be my only public post for the rest of the year ..
as also seen in \
Maryland Court: Woman Can't Say No After Start Of Sex
ANNAPOLIS, Md. -- An appellate court said Maryland's rape law is clear -- no doesn't mean no when it follows a yes and intercourse has begun.
A three-judge panel of the Court of Special Appeals Monday threw out a rape conviction saying that a trial judge in Montgomery County erred when he refused to answer the jury's question on that very point.
The appeals court said that when the jury asked the trial judge if a woman could withdraw her consent after the start of sex, the jury should have been told she could not. The ruling said the law is not ambiguous and is a tenet of common-law.
The decision startled activists who believe people have the right to say no at any time. Jennifer Pollitt Hill of the Maryland Coalition Against Sexual Assault called the law "insulting and dangerous."
Montgomery Delegate Jean Cryor said the Women's Caucus of the General Assembly would likely examine the decision during the next legislative session.
flintultrasparc's lj thank you for bringing this to my attention
A Woman's Prerogative
WARNING: Some of the commentary in this LJ post gets into specifics of the case and people might want to avoid reading that.
feministing.com commentary
Happy Feminist: Maryland Court's Interpretation of Rape Law is Predicated on the Notion of Women as Chattel
I am beyond outraged as a victim, and a liberal who cannot comprehend a judge just fucking with a woman's choices or their bodies for that matter ;
I was actually told yesterday that the local sexual assault task force just got all their funding taken away from them...NOW I FUCKING KNOW PART OF THE REASON WHY