No doesn’t mean no if you got yourself drunk…. I think?
Minnesota Supreme Court rules willing alcohol consumption justifies rape.
In a unanimous 6-0 decision, the Minnesota Supreme Court on Wednesday overturned the conviction of Francois Monulu Khalil for third-degree criminal sexual misconduct after over a year in prison, ruling that he was incapable of sexually assaulting the victim since she had willingly consumed alcohol prior to meeting him. The two met in May of 2017 after the woman, who was 20 at the time, was denied entry to a bar after the bouncer deemed her too intoxicated. Khalil and two other men invited her and a friend to “a party,” but no such gathering existed.
She testified that she blacked out and woke up on a couch finding the man who she had just met sexually assaulting her. According to court records, once she had woken up and seen that Khalil was allegedly raping her, she told him she didn’t want to have sex, at which point he allegedly replied: “But you’re so hot and you turn me on.”
Hordes of horny men are now heading for Minnesota and watching girls drink at bars until they are drunk.
Nothing good happens in bars, women with any degree of common sense should stay out of them.
If you live in a liberal run lunatic asylum seriously think about moving ASAP. They are going to actively protect criminal minorities over anyone they victimize no matter how heinous the crime.
Was it because the perp is a Muslim? Asking for a friend . . .
probably… this sounds like a ruling out of Afghanistan
I take issue with the original article’s title “…Court rules willing alcohol consumption justifies rape.” I’m confident that is NOT what the court ruled.
Having said that, this particular defense sounds like a loop hole needing to be closed, for sure!
Is it okay to rob a guy who got himself drunk?
Take his car?
I would ask the judge –
Hey, your honor. What if you got drunk and woke up with Khalil’s dick in your mouth?
If you know what happens to your mind when you are drunk then don’t drink until you are drunk!
If women are not responsible when they are drunk, why are men?
Exactly, Bob.
It’s unequal protection under the law.
I knew Minnesota was fucked up, but this takes it to a new level.
Idiocracy is now running the court system.
I bet most of them know her intimately.
I remember when the leftists fought this reasoning tooth and nail. Hollywood jumped in with “The Accused”. Now the left is sacrificing women, children, caucasians . . .
MN is off the rails.
>>>Nothing good happens in bars, women with any degree of common sense should stay out of them.
Men, too.
Moslem trumps womanhood.
Minnesota’s full up of Scandinavian stock, isn’t it?
Going the same way as Sweden, Norway, and Finland? Let the filthy ragheads in to rape, murder, and, eventually, breed you out?
izlamo delenda est …
Cuomo’s defense narrative is taking shape.
The law in place was supposed to be a clarification of feminist idiocy.
Apparently the intent of the law was that a person — meaning woman — is not incapacitated to consent if voluntarily drunk because that would make a ridiculous number of men including spouses and boyfriends into rapists long after the fact if later-divorcing or vengeful wives and girlfriends ever had been drinking with them before having sex). So a fix was needed to the stupid feminist consent ideas which also obnoxiously treat drunk men and women differently.
Apparently she “consented” to go with the guy, and arguably (no one else was there) was seemingly going along with things to a point, later saying that she “blacked out”. Apparently the guy didn’t force her into his car or beat her up, etc.
The MN Supreme said that he could be charged with misdemeanor sexual misbehavior.
This kind of thing is never clear and that seems about right. This isn’t about robbing someone, or taking advantage of a maybe drunk person in order to do what is ALWAYS an illegal act.
Something ain’t right here. More info/context required
So, you can’t get the woman drunk, and then rape her, but if she is already drunk, she is fair game?
BREAKING NEWS: Miniature-Soda Supreme Court says “woman who dressed like a skanky slut ‘asked for it’ and deserved to be raped”
Question: was the rapist the same guy from Blazing Saddles who said “rape” twice?
And Bill Cosby gets his apology and sentence commutation when?
Oh, only after he changes his name to Muhammed Achmed Alibill Cossain and renounces his past attempt to hold the black community accountable.