4 ms·

I think, tbf, that was more about dodging the question of child support than rape. I don't think any of the women targeted by undercover police officers are pur

• coldtea 9y ago
  >I don't think any of the women targeted by undercover police officers are pursuing rape cases. Why wouldn't you think that? In fact, they are doing exactly that: "11 women (...) are currently suing the police after being tricked into having sexual relationships with men later revealed to be undercover officers (...)". Especially when the "women targeted by undercover police officers" are not some hardened terrorists living undercover themselves (who'd avoid going to courts at all costs), but people e.g. belonging to some environmental activists group or some left wing protesters, etc.
  • Joeboy 9y ago
    They are pursuing cases, but they are not rape cases. I believe they're human rights and other cases.
  • John_KZ 9y ago
    That's really fucked up.
• quietbritishjim 9y ago
  The idea of prosecuting for rape definitely came up, but English law defines "rape" too narrowly for deceiving someone into giving consent to count. Interestingly, there is one exception: deceiving someone about what your gender is in order to convince them to have sex with you, and there has even been a prosecution: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_by_deception https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_by_deception