Why 'sexual assault' and not 'rape'?

[JellySlice]

The woman in a PVS who gave birth unexpectedly.

Why has this man been charged with sexual assault rather than with rape?

Er. We don't know and, in the absence of fact, speculating is pointless.

I would think it's because there are no witnesses. The woman in this case can't say she has been raped. There is only the fact she has given birth which could have come about through artificial insemination.

I am open to correction though.

I wondered that too - seems fairly obvious to me

Assuming that American law only allows that charge given the circumstances surrounding the case.

I think there are two things, one is what the actual law in Arizona says is rape, and the other is that there may be enough evidence to arrest him for a lesser offence to keep him off the streets while they investigate.

This being the USA there is also the possibility of a plea bargain, and although to us this seems simple - no consent = rape it is going to be difficult to prosecute.

The victim cannot give evidence, there is no physical evidence other than the child, no one knows the date of the rape or time so there are probably no witnesses.

If he claims she responded to him whilst he was carrying out personal care and he took that to be consent and that she orgasmed then it is down to the prosecution to prove her knew new this was rape.

In some places, and I think the UK is one, if you have 'genuine belief' that you are not commiting rape then you can use that as your defence.

I wondered the exact same thing OP!

I don't know the law in Arizona, but in my state, there is no crime called "rape." There are different types of sexual assault and sexual battery, one of which is what used to be called rape. So it might be a matter of legal terms.

In some places, and I think the UK is one, if you have 'genuine belief' that you are not commiting rape then you can use that as your defence.

It's "reasonable belief" (in this country). It's not reasonable, for example, to be a HCP and think a patient in a persistent vegetative state is legally capable of consenting. To be honest, I don't think it would be considered reasonable for anybody to think they had consent in such circumstances.

Genuine belief and reasonable belief are very different. You might hold genuine beliefs about any number of things, but that would not make them reasonable.

As SenecaFalls says above there is crime of 'rape in Arizona, it's 'Sexual Assault, commonly referred to as rape',
It was in one of the newspaper articles I read on the case but I cant remember which one.

Sorry that should say 'no crime'

seneca Following your post, I did some googling and it seems that this may be the case,

It is often hard to comment on UK/US crime as it is, without the added layer of State law.

This website seems quite clear (and seems pretty legit)

apps.rainn.org/policy/policy-crime-definitions.cfm?state=Arizona&group=3

I see. Curious that the BritishBC did not explain that.

Because nobody knows the physical mechanism behind how she became pregnant. It could have been a turkey baster for all anybody knows.

So assault is easier to prove as unless it was devine intervention, somebody touched her foof.

Really OP?

How on earth wasn't that onvious to you?

obvious

It's "reasonable belief" (in this country). It's not reasonable, for example, to be a HCP and think a patient in a persistent vegetative state is legally capable of consenting. To be honest, I don't think it would be considered reasonable for anybody to think they had consent in such circumstances.

Yes, the jury need to believe beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had 'reasonable belief in consent'. Its why Ched Evans was prosecuted initially, because the jury decided that, given the circumstances, it was impossible for him to have had reasonable belief in consent.

I agree that I don't see how anyone could think that a man who was penetrating a woman who had been in a vegetative state for ten years, could ever have reasonable belief that she was consenting.

I wonder what this guys story will actually be?

How on earth wasn't that onvious to you?

Perhaps because it would never even cross my mind that someone would do such a disgusting thing as invasively assaulting a minimally conscious woman with a turkey baster full of bodily fluid?