Blow me Oklahoma

[Big RR]

Sue--I really don't know; they clearly included an unconscious section in the rape law (that the court case I cited discusses), so leaving it out in the sodomy statute may well have been deliberate. Ordinarily, when another similar statute includes one or more additional classes of offenses, I would think the interpretation would be to exclude them from the statutes that do not include them. Coupling that with the appellate court's statement in 1996 that, as applied to rape, unconsciousness is not included in "unsoundness of mind" and the fact that the legislature did not act in the 20 years since that decision was rendered, it could clearly be argued that the legislature chose to leave the law as it was and use the appellate court's definition of 'Unsoundness". Indeed, if the legislature said (in the rape statute) that the rape of an unconscious woman is a lower degree of rape (punishable by a lesser sentence) than forcible (or first degree) rape, is there any reason to presume that they would not have done the same with sodomy had they intended that sodomizing an unconscious woman would be a crime.

So did the legislature intend forcible sodomy to include an offense of this type? I think there are more arguments that lead toward this conclusion than against it. I would bet there is a misdemeanor sodomy law that might cover this sort of sodomizing.

[Joe Guy]

According to Black's Law Dictionary, an unsound mind is "a person who is incapable of managing himself or his affairs."

It says, "The term includes insane persons, idiots and imbeciles"

So could that mean that by stating 'any unsoundness of mind' it could be interpreted as meaning one or more of the above?

If the law said 'temporary or permanent unsoundness of mind' that would make a difference, wouldn't it?

[Scooter]

Perhaps they mimicked the language from the first degree rape clauses not realizing that the distinctions made between first and second degree rape would require the language to be construed narrowly when applied to forcible oral sex. Criminal defendants can't be made to pay the price for the legislature's sloppiness. Should someone who is merely sleeping be characterized as being of unsound mind because they are unable to consent? Or should it require striking the qualifiers out of the statute so that it encompasses all situations where the victim was unable to consent?

[Gob]

I agree. It's unacceptable that a judge ruled that it's Okie to have sex with an unconscious person.

Diversion: I once worked with a Cornish couple who were, to be polite, "naive".

One day Claire announced, rather excitedly that she was pregnant.

One of our nurse mates asked; "That's a surprise, we all know you cannot stand Rob touching you in any way you think "icky" or "rude"".

Completely unashamed, Claire replied; "It must have happened one of "those times" when I was asleep."