“In Oklahoma, the definition of ‘rape’ includes a victim being unable to consent to sex because they are too intoxicated or unconscious. But this definition of ‘rape’ doesn’t include oral rape. That falls under the definition of ‘forcible oral sodomy,’ and that definition doesn’t actually include incapacitation in its list of examples of what ‘forcible’ means.
‘We will not, in order to justify prosecution of a person for an offense, enlarge a statute beyond the fair meaning of its language,’ the appeals court wrote in an ‘unpublished’ ruling not designed to set a precedent.
— Vox.com’s Emily Crockett explaining a recent Oklahoma appeals court ruling upholding the exoneration of a 17-year-old boy who basically skull-fucked a 16-year-old girl who was too drunk to stand. The boy claims it was girl consensual, the intoxicated girl says she doesn’t remember anything from that night — his DNA was later found on her.
Although the ruling is “not designed to set a precedent,” Benjamin Fu — Tulsa County assistant district attorney and director of the office’s special victims unit — calls the ruling “insane,” “dangerous” and “offensive”, and worries that the court’s narrow interpretation of the law will allow “others convicted under similar circumstances to be freed if they appeal.”
(featured image via Judyboo — person pictured is NOT the alleged rape victim in question. The alleged victim’s name has been kept secret by the courts to protect her identity)