Man cleared of rape after having sex with a woman who thought he was someone else

[Felascloak]

metro.co.uk/2016/05/12/woman-realised-she-was-having-sex-with-wrong-man-so-accused-him-of-rape-5876504/

I feel really bad for this woman (although I think if I was on the jury I probably would have thought there was a chance he believed he had consent). The headline implies she was unreasonably upset when she found the person having sex with her wasn't who she thought and so "falsely accused" him. Poor woman probably feels totally violated.
Also, what kind of man shags a woman who's gone home with a different guy, when that guy has just left the room for a minute. Ugh. He says he didn't even want to

Try the link again
metro.co.uk/2016/05/12/woman-realised-she-was-having-sex-with-wrong-man-so-accused-him-of-rape-5876504/

There was a different case in the papers on the same day - it reminded me of this case

Really sorry for the sun link. It took ages to find this story
www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/7147748/Judge-blasts-rapist-who-saw-his-attack-on-sleeping-woman-as-lads-banter.html

Haha the first link I found to the original story was the DM. No fucking way was I using that one!
I read the other story too. As he pleaded not guilty, would love to know his defence. The absolute knob.

In the Sun link, its the ultimate in objectification really, that he didn't see it as rape because the intent was to stop his mate having sex with her not for him to have sex with her. Because god forbid she should have the final say in who she has sex with (that's the same as the first story actually). I don't know if becoming more feminist as I grow older is affecting the way I see things, but I really feel like society is going backwards with how it views women's role in sex. Sex seems to be viewed as something that is done to women, and they are passive in it. Huh.

There are two different stories I think they have been muddled up. One was found guilty one wasn't.

Well its tricky what to say really, as the guy in the first case was found not guilty. I saw a certain similarity thats all

Yes me too fritz

Makes me think of the thread on MN where a woman was raped by her own husband ... she asked him to use a condom, he didn't. Would probably not stand a chance in court, too.

It seems that if a woman wants to have a chance to have the men who rape her punished, her best chance is not to consent to sex with men, ever.

I would suggest a worldwide sex strike for a year or so, to make men understand that the law needs to be updated, asap ... if I had any hopes of mobilizing enough women.

Presumably it seemed that she was giving enthusiastic consent, and that as the two men were very different, she knew that Sam Obeghe was not Zack Garrigan.
Hence the not guilty of rape verdict.

I think so thesolitary or at the least he could have reasonably believed that to be the case.
However I think a woman, pissed, who's gone to bed with someone who's momentarily left the room to get via grateful could easily think the man who got into bed with her was the man who'd just left the room and not someone else.
Also it's just icky that the guy involved thought nothing of having sex with her I'm those circumstances

I don't think it's fair to say she "falsely accused him" as if she was being vindictive in this case. She obviously didn't consent, he believed she did though which means he's not guilty of rape
Horrible for her though

I really don't understand this. I understand why she had sex with him but why was he having sex with her?

I agree, the whole thing sounds a horrible situation to be in.

What do some men think of women, to genuinely believe she consented!

That she was a woman who wanted sex?
Hence the enthusiastic consent.

Bu her boyfriend was off getting viagra (which I find bizarre for other reasons ). Why would he assume she was happy to have sex with him.
I suppose if the idea she'd got them mixed up never even crossed his mind then that's a reasonable assumption but just seems so odd.

I want sex. Does that make it OK for all men to assume they can have sex with me?

It's the old premise that a woman who wants sex with one man is happy to have sex with another .

There is no way he could have thought she had consented to him other than in his own twisted little head. He knew exactly what he was doing.

Exactly
She wanted sex
She wasnt bothered about with who

Who thinks that???

Yep quite.
That's why I'm uncomfortable with it. I too think he's not guilty because of the beyond all reasonable doubt thing. But the fact he thought she was happy to have sex with him in those circumstances is bizarre.
Mr cock blocker obviously gave no thought whatsoever to his victim

That mr cockblocker actually used that as his defense is even more baffling

Yes its ched Evansey isn't t
will this get deleted
ok

Yup

Bloody hell. That first story is really stupid, he must have known she was not interested in sex with him, she was saying the other man's name!

The second story is just horrendous.