Moral question, a prostitute was forced into having sex by gunpoint, is it ... (more in details)?

Question

Hopefully people will read the details.

Theft of a service or rape?

A woman judge said it was theft of a service:
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/home_region/20071031_Phila__Bar_slams_judge_in_rape_case.html

What do you think? Read the article, take a minute to ponder, then answer.

What are the implications of making it a theft of service? Will it discourage women from prostituion?

What are the implication of keeping it rape?

Was the judge right or wrong?

If a maid was forced to clean a house by gunpoint what is that? Would this situation be similiar?

Then again, rape is defined as forced sex on an unwilling participant. I'm sure the lady was unwilling when she saw that gun.

I will refrain from giving my opinion at the moment but I'm curious to see how other people think.

What do you think?

My own verdict is this:

It is both. Those men should be charged with both to make the punishment. But it is rape.

If it was only a matter of not paying her afterwards, which is not the case, then it would be theft.

Free will is the key here I believe, so it now becomes rape.

Certainly maybe she shouldn't be prostituting herself but maybe she doesn't know what her other options are.

This judge failed to apply the moral principle of love. She only saw this woman as a business selling goods.

This same line of thinking is what defined slaves as property too...

Answer 1

Discourage? There is nothing to be discouraged. This is about bodily choice, human rights and dignity always, ALWAYS trump legal definitions. Rape, pure and simple.

Answer 2

"Theft of services????" I have always wondered how one can sustain a criminal charge against someone who loses something they had illegally in the first place. If prostitution were legal, then the above ruling might hold legal water. The charges should have been rape and assault with a deadly weapon (gunpoint!). The whole "theft of services" thing should be left out of a prostitution case unless it is a legal service.

This reminds me of something I heard with regard to possession of marijuana cases (I can't verify this but it is a similar concept). Apparently there is a several thousand dollar "tax stamp" that one must have from the government in order to sell marijuana, and if you don't have it, you can be charged with "selling without a federal license." Since when was selling marijuana legal? It is legal trickery to apply these legal "business" definitions to illegal practices, as if the only thing a prostitute has lost is "services" or the double charge of "sale without a license" and "possession with intent to sell" for a marijuana grower (oh yeah, I hear they add in the weight of dirt when estimating the "amount seized" as well. Last I checked, there is no crime in possessing dirt).

Please forgive the slight off-topic rant; there are many legalistic disingenuities that irritate me, and your example is only the latest. Rape is rape, pure and simple. If a husband forced a wife to have sex at gunpoint, the wife has recourse against the husband. Can you imagine such a thing being defined as "theft of wifely duties?" Wife-beaters could get away with "damage of contracted goods." This also ties into recovery of damages for dogs and cats killed by the melamine problem in canned foods recently. One can only recover their value as "property," and yet there are anti-animal cruelty laws. How can you be cruel to a chair? One can't have it both ways, but the legal system can. IMO, if you can have cruelty laws, the animals are NOT reducible to mere property.

Thanks for this information. It is the latest in a string of dehumanizing legal practice that sets very bad precedent!

Edit: Deke, I believe that case was the 1993 "condom rape case" http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0CE2DF173FF936A25756C0A965958260 The assailant got 40 years, so I think the defense's contention didn't hold water there (good thing, too!)

Answer 3

The woman was raped. Plain and simple. I don't care if you walk through Time Square butt naked, if someone forces you to have sex with them, you didn't ask for it, you didn't deserve it and it certainly wouldn't be *theft of service*, it would be rape.

Women blame themselves for rape enough as it is, people like this judge only discourage women from coming forward, not discourage prostitution. Prostitutes are desperate people in most cases, or addicts of some sort...this judge is not going to reach out to those kinds of people doing this. Its an injustice and it makes me sick, to be honest.

Answer 4

If you are willing to do a little research you will discover that the vast majority of women/men involved in prostitution were sexually assaulted as children. As far as women are concerned, those sexually abused in childhood tend to go one of two directions, open promiscuity or avoidance of sexual activity.

If you take what I wrote into the account, it is quite likely the woman who offered her services for money was sexually abused as a child and acts, in part, out of that damage. (I am not attempting to excuse prostitution, or justify it as a source of income)

The judges decision was cruel and callous. No matter what, if a woman says NO, then sexual behavior must stop. This is also true if a man says to stop. Sex must be consensual, or there is a crime involved.

I will try not to get annoyed with your question about treating it as theft of service to cut down on prostitution. NO, it will not cut down on prostitution. Until men stop being willing to pay for sex, prostitution will exist. The same goes for women who pay and for same gender people who solicit sex for hire.

There are countries where children are sold as sexual slaves; it probably happens here also. No child was ever born wanting to perform sexual acts. Many children who run away from home, no matter what their reasons are, become forced into prostitution to survive on the streets. If it is degrading to sell ones self for money, how horrid is it to be forced into sex as an act of rape?

This issue is personal for me, in that I was sexually abused by several relatives, a dentist, a teacher, my first pastor and by a teen age boy. I went the opposite way from a prostitue. I have suffered a lot and spent time and money seeking healing so that I can be at peace. Anyone who is forced to do anything sexual, against their will, especially a child, is being damaged in a cruel, devastating way.

I don't do much philosophical thinking on this issue! I feel sick in my heart for all who have been victimized in such a personal and spiritual way. It attacks their very personhood and worth. I believe a person can become healed, but the scars never go away.

Answer 5

To me it is rape pure and simple. It does not matter if she is a prostitute and if she did agree to have sex. The point is she changed her mind and was forced to have sex so it is rape, not theft of service. Theft of service would be having sex before being paid then the man refuses to pay.

Anytime a woman says NO, it is rape. Even if she is at an orgy having consensual sex with many men but says no to just one and he forces her, then it is rape, pure and simple.

A woman can consent, get undressed and change her mind just before. No, means no PERIOD.


The problem of enforcement comes in when women consent, then afterwords regrets consenting and cries rape. This hurts legitimate rape victims.
BB

Answer 6

I'd say that the men should be charged with rape and theft of service. True, the problem lies in the fact that the service is sex and that sex legally, whether it's being sold or not, has to be consensual.

I don't think that forcing a maid to clean at gunpoint is similar, as that just involves the service.

It should also be noted that rape in not just a sexual act, it is an act of violence and in this case appears to be premeditated violence in that he did come with a gun and no money.

Answer 7

I live in PA, and people are extremely upset by this ruling. I think it's encouraging that the DA's office is re-filing rape charges against these men. This judge should start looking for another job now -- if anyone will hire her. Maybe she can wash cars with the former Maryland Administrative Law Judge who sued his drycleaner for millions because they temporarily lost his favorite pants (he was fired the other day).

This was definately a rape, no question about it.

EDIT: Emporer, as a general principle of law, a DA cannot charge someone because they have stolen what is, in and of itself, illegal. That's why you never see people being charged with stealing drugs from dealers. Prostitution is illegal. Therefore, the judge should have ruled against the defenses' motion to change the charge.

Answer 8

The United States refuses to acknowledge prostitution as a legal profession (except for the states of Nevada and Rhode Island), so how could a U.S. court of law make such a ruling. Even if prostitution was legal, forcing a woman to have sex is always rape, whether she is used to getting paid for sex or not. Rape is rape!

Answer 9

a rape is a rape wheather with pros or any other lady
i read the article and i feel that it must be considered as rape.
she was pros but is she is made to do sex with four men by gunpoint. then no doubt it is gangrape.. when any constituion defines the punishmnet of rape it doesnt define that the punishment will consider the profession of victim

in married life.. husband and wife makes physical relation with each other but if husband do it forcefully with wife then no doubt it is rape
so i dont think it is just theft of service

Answer 10

Theft of service would be to receive the service then not pay.
Rape on the other hand is to forcefully take something from someone or something without consent.

In a marriage for example, sexual intimacy is exchanged freely (normally) but if one of the partners used a weapon to force the other partner to have sex, isn't it rape?

Answer 11

It is both theft of a service and rape. You can pin multiple charges on a person. You're not limited to just one. It's a shame that the woman can also be arrested for what it is legal to give freely. If prostitution were legal, the woman would have more protection and options.

To quote Carlin: Selling is legal. Sex is legal. So why isn't selling sex legal?