Babaamaajimowinan (Telling of news in different places)
Babaamaajimowinan (Telling of news in different places)
Justice Paul Thissen wrote the unanimous decision, saying the lower court's definition of mentally incapacitated in the case "unreasonably strains and stretches the plain text of the statute" because the victim was drunk before she met her attacker.
In Minnesota, a person who is sexually assaulted while intoxicated isn't considered "mentally incapacitated" if he or she consumed alcohol or drugs voluntarily, according to a new state Supreme Court decision that could have far-reaching consequences for rape victims.
The state's highest court released the opinion Wednesday, also granting Francios Momolu Khalil, a man convicted of criminal sexual conduct, a new trial. In 2017, Khalil picked up a woman who had been refused entry from a Dinkytown bar for being too intoxicated. Khalil offered to take her to a party, but instead brought her back to his north Minneapolis home. She passed out and woke up to Khalil raping her.
A jury found Khalil guilty of third-degree criminal sexual misconduct, determining the victim was mentally incapacitated from alcohol and a prescription narcotic.
Reader Comments(2)
bulletsgirl writes:
When is individual responsibilty going to finally prevail? Of course she didn't 'intend' to get rapef that night. She DID, however, 1. consume a quantity of alcohol in conjunction with prescription meds that was obviously not prudent. 2. NOT decide to go home and sleep it off, after being denied access to a place because she was too incapacitated. 3. CHOSE to accept a ride to ANOTHER PARTY (for more alcohol /drugs)? Whe will she be responsible for her decisions AND those consequences?
03/28/2021, 9:13 am
Ava writes:
So being so drunk as to be unconscious...unable to speak...is automatic consent to any one to have sex with that person? Are you kidding??? If a person is too drunk to drive, they are too drunk to consent to sex.
03/27/2021, 6:14 pm