- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
- You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
- You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
- If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "Forced oral sex isn't a crime if the victim is unconscious rules Oklahoma court"
Collapse
-
Originally posted by WTFH View PostOh yeah, and you can always tell them that it's good for their complexion...
Leave a comment:
-
Oh yeah, and you can always tell them that it's good for their complexion...
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by NickFitz View PostA stupid law and a stupid interpretation thereof: apparently it hinges on a technicality, in that though state law does classify sexual activity with a drunk unconscious victim as rape, it only mentions vaginal and anal penetration, not oral.
I read that even the defence lawyer has said that the authorities were stupid to use the charge they did, as there was another possible charge under different sexual assault legislation, for which their client would almost certainly have been convicted.
Leave a comment:
-
-
Originally posted by Bee View PostGreat.
Just tell the kids to drunk the girls and will be ok to rape them.
Stupid laws, stupid people.
I read that even the defence lawyer has said that the authorities were stupid to use the charge they did, as there was another possible charge under different sexual assault legislation, for which their client would almost certainly have been convicted.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Bee View PostGreat.
Just tell the kids to drunk the girls and will be ok to rape them.
Stupid laws, stupid people.
HTH BIDI
Leave a comment:
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Leave a comment: