Cambridge University students face pubic hair removal, anal rape with a bottle, and blindfolded same - Polidicks

[QUOTE][B]Reactions of law students at Cambridge University “varied from incredulity to mild amusement” as they sat an exam which asked them to consider the legality of scenarios which included tricking a man into receiving oral sex from another man. [/B]The question asked: -Sandra is President of The Vizards, a College drinking society. She is organising the initiation of new members. After a great deal of alcohol has been drunk, the members of the society form a circle around Billy, Gilbert and Richard who are to be initiated. (i) Sandra blindfolds Billy and tells him that Tracey will suck his penis. Jonny does so. (ii) Sandra penetrates Gilbert’s anus with a bottle. Although Gilbert appears to resist, and has to be held down by Tracey, he actually enjoys the experience. (iii) Sandra waxes Richard’s pubic hair and pulls it off with such force that she removes a significant part of his skin. The wound becomes infected, but Richard is so embarrassed that he does not get medical help and dies. Consider what offences, if any, have been committed.[/QUOTE] Source: [URL]http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/06/03/cambridge-university-law-students-face-graphic-sex-offence-question/[/URL]

[quote]Sandra waxes Richard’s pubic hair and pulls it off with such force that she removes a significant part of his skin. The wound becomes infected, but Richard is so embarrassed that he does not get medical help [B]and dies.[/B][/quote] Pretty dark.

That title got me good.

Was the professor drunk when making this test?

[QUOTE=Thom12255;40887569]Pretty dark.[/QUOTE] Pretty hilarious I think :v:

TBH, I would laugh my ass off if I saw this question on a law exam.

actually, sounds like something me or most of the people in my school would scribble in over a text book like drawing dicks on history photos in textbooks

sounds like my friday night

Maybe the lecturer who wrote the exam had a bad experience being initiated into a drinking society long ago...

[QUOTE=Thom12255;40887569]Pretty dark.[/QUOTE] what the fuck? [editline]4th June 2013[/editline] But yeah otherwise pretty hilarious question.

seriously though; they should make less serious and more funnier exams. I remember doing a history test which involved incredibly silly questions which just made you laugh and relax, thus making it more enjoyable and making you concentrate more.

[QUOTE=sltungle;40887848]Maybe the lecturer who wrote the exam had a bad experience being initiated into a drinking society long ago...[/QUOTE] Well they can't of been poor old Richard..

THIS, is how you get your students attention during class :v:

Rape and unintended murder of a man? Hilarious. If the victim in this situation was a female, everyone would be upset.

it's just like one of my japanese animes

Crazy party last night.

I'm at Cambridge and I can confirm that all these things have happened to me. Especially the last one.

To answer the actual question, aren't they all rape? Or are there different types of rape that need to be accounted for? Like, could the last one be sexual assault? Along with manslaughter? I have so many questions.

[QUOTE=Unisath;40888492]To answer the actual question, aren't they all rape? Or are there different types of rape that need to be accounted for? Like, could the last one be sexual assault? Along with manslaughter? I have so many questions.[/QUOTE] Depending on other variables, none of them may be rape, or at least the first two could be. They're kind of vague, and we get back to the issue of drunks consenting again.

[QUOTE=Thom12255;40887569]Pretty dark.[/QUOTE] Where's that video from Metalocalypse of Nathan learning math? "...Sandra has thirteen tacks in her eyes, and fifteen tacks in her neck. If she removes three from her spine....."

[QUOTE=Unisath;40888492]To answer the actual question, aren't they all rape? Or are there different types of rape that need to be accounted for? Like, could the last one be sexual assault? Along with manslaughter? I have so many questions.[/QUOTE] According to the comments, by someone claiming to be a former student, this is the right answer [QUOTE]Parts i and ii could incur liability under the sexual offences Act 2003. Whether or not there is liability would hinge on consent. Part iii is a causation/remoteness issue. Applying the various tests of causation I would expect there could be liability for constructive manslaughter. Depends very much whether you interpret the waxing as an “operating and substantial cause” of his death…[/QUOTE] So based on my understanding it could all be technically legal, providing consent is true and waxing isn't considered the major cause of death.

Nothing like a rape edition of "fuck, marry, kill" to lighten your law review exam.

[QUOTE=elfbarf;40887958]Rape and unintended murder of a man? Hilarious. If the victim in this situation was a female, everyone would be upset.[/QUOTE] no i'm pretty sure if the question on the exam had the context of "woman gets her pubes waxed and dies from infection because of stupid posh kids' societal initiation" it would still be pretty funny

[QUOTE=Unisath;40888492]To answer the actual question, aren't they all rape? Or are there different types of rape that need to be accounted for? Like, could the last one be sexual assault? Along with manslaughter? I have so many questions.[/QUOTE] That's the whole point of the question. It wants you to examine the following things: 1. Does the inclusion of alcohol change the ability of those involved (both parties) to make decisions? 2. Does the "receiving oral" have any relevance to the crime? 3. Is Sandra penetrating Gilbert's anus rape? He appeared to resist, and even had to be held down. Does him liking it have any factor in determining this? 4. Does Sandra know the dangers of waxing? Was the intent for Sandra to cause the most amount of pain possible? Sandra[I] probably [/I]didn't intend for Richard to die, or did she? Was Richard held down? These are just some of the questions that need to be addressed to answer the question "did a criminal offense occur?". From my understanding, the following are key points; 1. Providing alcohol to others with the intent to take advantage of them 2. The 'bottle rape' is most certainly rape in this case, considering the use of alcohol, and the fact he resisted and needed to be held down. 3. Sandra was most certainly was hoping to inflict pain on Richard, and it appears she did not attempt to seek medical attention for him even though the wound appeared to be serious. Manslaughter or murder can be ruled out. [editline]3rd June 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Simski;40887879]THIS, is how you get your students attention during class :v:[/QUOTE] It's a fantastic question to ask! These sort-of things do happen, and it's very difficult to determine what crimes have been committed because of how odd they are.

Essentially my answer would go like this (law student, but in a european continental system) couple of things that have to be kinda answered first a) how old were the perps b) were sexual acts like this expected c) what kind of resistance was present - was there a vocal no, or fighting back d) what kind of actual damage was done to richard and how much easily could it have been prevented how old were the victims as well and the answer if I sort of answer to myself - some sexual activity expected, all offered some consent and gilbert tried to fight it off (had to be held down) essentially I would say more or less this a) no crime happens b) rape c) possibly nothing. But it might be bodily injury with result of death large amount of fault on the side of the damaged - the thing here is, that the waxing and skin damage is a relatively minor injury and he was not prevented from seeking help at all. had he sought help, which is the thing an everyman would usually do, he would not have died. But that said - Every law school gives similar case studies from time to time. [QUOTE=Simski;40887879]THIS, is how you get your students attention during class :v:[/QUOTE] When you see a case like this for the first time. But they love making stuff like this in crim. And roman law case examples tend to be even weirder.

i thought this was some kind of terrifying hazing ritual

[QUOTE=elfbarf;40887958]Rape and unintended murder of a man? Hilarious. If the victim in this situation was a female, everyone would be upset.[/QUOTE] iirc, some laws state that rape is only rape if penetration by penis. This would probably be a trick question. Isn't someone on fp a lawyer who can check this?

And that's just the initiation ritual to chess club.

[QUOTE=LtKyle2;40888902]iirc, some laws state that rape is only rape if penetration by penis. This would probably be a trick question. Isn't someone on fp a lawyer who can check this?[/QUOTE] In most western countries you basically have two views of rape. a) only direct stimulation of genitals of one of the two people by force. (stuff like raping someone with a stick, dildo or finger would still count, as well as forced oral sex on the perpetrators penis). Or on a victim that is unable to defend themselves. - Completely KO, drunk and similar. In this legal system you will have a different crime for unwanted sexual contact without the use of force. Similarly to the difference between assault and battery. b) any unwanted sexual interaction. Regardless of the use of force. Now most laws in regards to rape are written neutrally but there used to be old Judicature which kinda did imply that rape was only male on female. But that has been changing for the past twenty or more years. It was mostly due to the views that the use of force was impossible for a female and a bunch of other stuff. But it wasn't due to legal reasons as much as due to Judicature argumentation. That said, I am certain some older laws would imply this as well.

[QUOTE=Bobsters34;40887801]sounds like my friday night[/QUOTE] I'm sorry that your anus was penetrated by a bottle...