With respect to the acquittal of a taxi driver in Halifax committing sexual assault- and assault indeed it was- the judge erred on ruling that the victim, barely conscious much less aware of her surroundings, claiming that she was nonetheless able to provide “consent.”
Technically it was a ruling on legal grounds, determining that alcohol wasn’t a deterrent. But while that may in SOME cases be true, we must for a minute use the Reasonable Person test to ask what would a reasonable person assume of the victim’s condition at the time of assault. Furthermore, a taxi driver is has a function of TRUST i.e. to arrive home safely, that clearly he violated. People seldom willingly offer themselves to strangers, much less drivers in their own cab.
Now we have womens’ groups in an uproar, claiming once again that ALL women are victims (unable to consent in ANY circumstance) and ALL men are rapists. If that WERE true, all sexual acts would be forms of rape. But yet they quote Marilyn French “All men are rapists and that’s all that they are”, and “women are incapable of meaningful consent”.
My argument is that it was NOT the case for the Judge to bring up rule on alcohol limiting consent, when the case present was on the intent of the rapist and the state of mind and capacity of the victim.