Friday, April 2, 2021

Minnesota Supreme Court rules rape conviction invalid due to wording of law

 

The Minnesota State Court recently overruled a felony rape conviction because the victim was willingly intoxicated and gave consent while under the influence. Under Minnesota's state law, the standard for being mentally incapacitated only includes those who fall under the influence of alcohol without consenting to drink or otherwise consume alcohol. This decision comes to no surprise to anyone at all, but it does illustrate that a change to the Minnesota state law regarding this subject is needed. There is bipartisan support in the legislature to amend the law in order to include those that are intoxicated. It comes as a reminder that lawmakers on all levels have to be careful when drafting and creating pieces of legislation; they must pay attention to technicalities and the implications that those technicalities can have when applied to the real world as laws are applied in a literal sense.

Consider the following: 

1. What is the importance of ensuring that laws are properly written?

2.  This is something that both sides of the political aisle agree on. What are some potential issues that may occur when attempting to amend technicalities such as these? 

CBS/CNN (image source)

USAToday

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Because of rulings like this, victims of rape hesitate from speaking out about their trauma and don't receive the justice for heinous crimes against them that they so desperately deserve. An individual can not give consent while under the influence, regardless of whether or not the law agrees to this fact. Alcohol impairs judgment and coaxes people to do what they would not otherwise do. If this man took advantage of her in that intoxicated state while he was sober, he is a vile rapist. If the man himself was under the influence, that changes the perspective. I equate this situation to statutory rape cases. If a man is over the age of 18 and has intercourse with a minor, then he is a pedophilic rapist. If both parties are minors, neither one should be held responsible. Either way, the law needs to establish clear guidelines so rapists can't get off the hook with being abominable human beings.

Shreya Kumar said...

I think it is very important to write laws properly because of certain situations such as this one. When laws are not written properly people get away with so many things such as rape. A very serious issue, that constantly gets swept under the rug. As Anoush said, people are not getting justice they deserve for the crimes they commit when laws are not written properly which means things like rape will continue to happen with little consequences. I think people can take things in different ways especially in cases like this, so problems that may occur because of these issues would be who people would believe and how people should move forward/consequences.

Anonymous said...

There needs to be a solid line for laws so that people can't keep twisting the meaning of the laws to get away with breaking the laws. However when trying to amend these technicalities people may have their own thoughts of what is breaking a law and what isn't so that may take some time. I think that they should make the laws as strict as possible however since the jury and judge can decide they should then be able to realize whether or not the law was actually broken.

Anonymous said...

The wording of this law is absolutely atrocious. It is clearly designed for situations like this one in order to get the people responsible for such hideous crimes out of trouble. It is incredibly important to ensure that laws are properly written to avoid instances like this happening and solidly close up the loopholes that improper communication creates. It could be difficult, however, to solve technical issues such as this one because potentially, they could be seen as inconsequential in most scenarios. In my opinion, it is absolutely disgusting that this scenario was dismissed as easily as by the terrible wording of a law. A serious, disgusting, voluntary and intentional violation was committed, and the fact that it could be so easily disregarded in a court of law exposes how truly broken the system is at times when people need it the most.