Now this is actually a question I came up with from a movie I was watching the other night, it was actually a decent movie. If a adult, meaning over the age of consent willing rapes (shows the intent, leaves evidence, as well is tried AND convicted) a person UNDER the age of a consent. Will he/she be tried for Rape, as well Statutory Rape?
I actually wish I could remember the name of the movie so I could share it. Continentally, since these would be tried in a criminal court, would it be possible to take both cases to CIVIL court, and get the dead beat to pay for damages, or does that actually violate the amendment that states you can’t be tried for the same crime twice?
2006-08-08 09:08:10 · 6 answers · asked by D 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
While it depends on the state you are in, most states no longer use the offenses of rape and statutory rape. Those are just the common name for the offense properly known as Sexual Assault. In Texas, at least, sexual assault is the charge for any person where there is no consent to have sex, either because the victim is not willing or because the victim is below the age of consent. Actually, if the victim is young enough, it is aggravated sexual assault, which would be higher than just the sexual assault (or historical term rape).
The link below will show you all of the ways that sexual assault can be charged in Texas, including a person being under age, a person who declined, a person who could not consent for mental reasons, a person who was too intoxicated, or drugged, etc. It starts with sexual assault, and if you scroll down, you will see the aggravated sexual assault charge.
So, in the case you mention, there would only be one charge for the one act.
As to your second question, the prohibition on double jeopardy (being tried twice) does not apply to civil cases. The two are not related at all, and yes, the victim could indeed sue the suspect, whether he is convicted or not. Recent history can show this clearly, with such cases as OJ and Blake. Both people were tried and then sued. I will note that there are very few cases where a person gets sued after being convicted, simply because there is usually not much money to be received from a jail inmate.
2006-08-08 14:30:06 · answer #1 · answered by Steve R 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It depends. There is no double jeopardy when you have two statutes that require different facts be proved. For example, if someone forcibly rapes a fourteen year old at gunpoint, you could theoretically be charged with first-degree rape (or that state's version of it) and statutory rape because first-degree rape would require the state prove a gun was used and statutory rape would require the state prove the victim was under the age of consent, but you would not need to prove these things the other way around. However, if you have a rape statute that's worded almost exactly the same as a statutory rape statute, with the exception of the age requirement, the rape charge would be a lesser included offense provided it was a lesser felony.
As far as civil cases go, it would not be double jeopardy to go to criminal court, and then go to civil court because the burden of proof is different. In criminal cases the burden is "beyond a reasonable doubt" and in civil cases the burden is "by a preponderance of the evidence." You have to prove more in a criminal court, so whether you win or lose there, you can still take the case to civil court. However, it does not work in reverse if you lose the civil case. If you can't even prove something by a preponderance of the evidence, there's no way you can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, so it's not allowed.
2006-08-08 18:41:58 · answer #2 · answered by Amanda K 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Generally not. Since the crime of rape carries a more serious penalty than statutory rape, and any conviction would lead to a concurrent sentence, it would be a waste of time.
Your second question, the answer is yes, you may sue in civil court for monetary damages, after a criminal trial. It is not double jeopardy. And the burden of proof is much less in civil court.
2006-08-08 16:14:53 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
That would depend on whether it was forceful or not. Statutory is having sex with a minor, because the law (varying from state to state) determines minors unable to consent to sex.
2006-08-08 16:14:03 · answer #4 · answered by Meh 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
two statutes may actually mean two crimes, which is why there is "rape" and "statutory rape". you should look it up in the state you live in, because it may vary across state lines.
don't rely on movies to teach you the law. it is funky enough already.
2006-08-08 16:18:27 · answer #5 · answered by uncle osbert 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes
2006-08-08 16:13:03 · answer #6 · answered by idontkno 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋