Hacker News Reader

Comment by DaWeasel | Hacker News Reader

How is that rape ?

I don’t agree with this reasoning, but you could argue that she consented to a relationship with Mark Stone, and not Mark Kennedy.

If the Gayle Newland case [1] is rape, then the Mark Stone / Mark Kennedy case should be too.

I don't know whether either should be considered as rape, I'm just amazed how inconsistent the law can be.

[1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-34901925

What about witness protection then ? I lie about my identity so me having sex with anybody is a rape ? Even if they agreed to have sex with me after they've learn to know me ?

The man she was having sex with was not the man she consented to have sex with.

when i'm drunk and meet women, i'm definitely not the man they think i am, due the profound effect alcohol has on my self esteem, social anxiety, and charisma.

Yes it was. When he was with her, he was Mark Stone. Mark Stone might not share very many characteristics with Mark Kennedy - who lived a totally different life.

She consented to have sex with him, that's it. No, it's not right, but it's definitely not rape either. Calling it rape is just wrong and does injustice to real rape victims.

>> When he was with her, he was Mark Stone.

More accurately, he was Mark Kennedy pretending to be someone called Mark Stone. Saying he was Mark Stone didn't magically make him Mark Stone.

>> She consented to have sex with him, that's it.

Because she didn't know he was an undercover policeman. He obtained her consent by abusing his authority as a police officer. His superiors also abused their authority by ordering or permitting this to happen. They took away her ability to make an informed decision about whether she wanted to enter into a sexual relationship with that man.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com