Court: Cops illegally taped nursing home sex

What about HER right to privacy? To not be RAPED while she lies helpless and feeling who-knows-what? It's disgusting, HE IS DISGUSTING. The staff were RIGHT to alert the police to abuse of a patient, and if it was to protect HER than isn't that what's important? He was RAPING her, don't you people understand that? RAPING a helpless patient!

How do you or they know it was rape or not consensual? Did you ask her? My wife wouldn't care. I don't think I'd do that, though. But to each his/her own...

This country, and you, are just uptight about sex.

An unconscious person cannot give consent. It IS rape by the letter of the law.

Ew much? He raped her, does that not compute?

thank you foxy lady for a well reasoned response

No, they were protecting HER rights. If you were comatose and the hospital set up a camera to prevent someone RAPING you, would you later weep that your rights were violated by the hospital that protect you? Think about this people, he was RAPING her.

Not necessarily. It is only rape in YOUR eyes. It is her position that matters. My wife wouldn't care.

If your wife couldn't give consent, it would be rape.

Wakkosmom,

Just because people are married, doesn't mean that there isn't such a thing as the "raping of a wife".

Years ago, I was married to a man who would beat me, then rape me. Once, I asked him why he did that to me. His reply was, "You are my wife and I can have it when I want it." He raped me. No ands, ifs, or buts about it. Needless to say, after only 2 and a half MONTHS of marriage, I divorced him.

I am perplexed at this case. On one hand, I think that he should be in trouble for having sex with her without her consent. On the other, I think that if her own sister is saying that her sister would approve of this, then it must be ok. I know that my sister would raise holy hell if she knew that I wouldn't be comfortable with that. But if she knew that I would be okay with it, she would say the same as this woman's sister.

I would have to applaud the police. At least they were attempting to get to the truth. Think about this before you blame the police....If all the police had to go on, at the time, was the nurses and caregivers at the nursing home saying that the husband was having sex with a comatose wife who cannot give her consent, then they were correct to do what they did. They went through the proper channels to get the warrant and place equipment in order to see if, in fact, the husband was indeed having sex with his comatose wife. Once they had the proof that he WAS, then the sister came forward and said that her sister would have approved and that she didn't think that there was a criminal issue. That would be when this whole thing snowballed.

But had the police NOT have tried to do what they are sworn to do, all of you would be criticizing that they didn't do enough to stop it. So before you jump to criticize, put yourself in their shoes. What would you have done? I would venture to say you would have done the same thing that the officers did, with the information that they had at the time.

What part of "no consent" don't you understand? Do you seriously think it's okay to have sex with comatose people or those who aren't aware?

Perplexed, your personal situation does not relate to this situation. I am sure that almost everything that comes down the pike that looks like your situation you relate it somehow to keep justifying your reactions to it.

First, it was his wife. She consented to maritial relations with her husband by entering in to the marriage, knowing full well that it was her responsibility "solely" to satisfy her husband sexual needs, within reason.

Does that mean that her husband has to ask her for sex every time? I would say yes, it is the gentleman thing to do, under normal circumstances. But this is not normal circumstances.

Sometimes desperate circumstances call for desperate measures. The court agreed that this man did not "rape" his "wife." So STFU and stop imposing your poison from your past onto others! Understood?

it is not the "gentleman" thing to do. it is the legal thing to do. marriage is NOT a binding contract to be forced into sex at any time of the day. the court didn't agree that he didn't rape his wife. the court agreed that his privacy was violated int he taping of that sex. VERY different. If the police can otherwise prove that he RAPED his wife, with out the tape, he can be convicted of RAPE.

It's frightening that people still think wives are there only for sex.

It is not a matter of the wife being there for sex only; it is a matter of the wife obliging her husband needs sexually. Again, as I pointed out before there is "no proof" that the wife would deny her husband sexual gratification. You distorted what I said, big surprise, NOT!

He RAPED her, that's no love.

We do not know if his wife would have consented or not but they were in a marriage, which is a contractual agreement. One that says it is the responsibility of both spouses to satisfy each other sexually.

To assume that she would or did not consent is ludicrous! Her husband obviously wanted to feel close to her and needed his sexual needs met. If he slept with a stranger you would say he cheated on his wife even though she would be in a comatose state and wouldn't have known about it.

thanks, Lucy.

We should assume she would consent, especially when her sister has that opinion.

The government should butt out!! Or at least do some research and try to determine what she would have thought about the situation. She was MARRIED to him! Did they have a good marriage? Did they have sexual relations when she was cognisant? Her sister apparently thinks so.

Our country, and this Aether person, is just hung up on sex and can't keep from overreacting to it.

it doesn't legally matter if her sister has the same opinion! she has to consent. you can no more assume she would have consented than that she wouldn't have consented.

If i was in a coma, and woke up, and found out my husband had sex with me, i'd file charges and diviorce him. desperate times call for masterbation, not rape.

A comatose person has no duties to anybody. Period.

The court didn't say that the man didn't rape his wife. The Court said that the evidence used against the man was obtained illegally and therefore was inadmissable in court. Since that was the only SOLID evidence against the man and it couldn't be used, the case was thrown out. It didn't even get to the point where they would determine whether or not he was raping/abusing his wife. Here is the fact, according the the law of this land, it is considered rape if there is no consent, even if that person is unable to give consent. i.e. date rape when Rohypnol is involved. Furthermore, there is such a thing as spousal rape. Just because he is her husband, doesn't give him the right to treat her like some kind of machine so he can get off. The mere fact that he is having sex with a comatose person really just eludes to some kind of sexual compulsion on his part....

biggerthebetter, "A comatose person has no duties to anybody. Period"

According to who?? Was the woman divorced because she was in a coma??

So not trying to be funny, but there has got to be a better way to put it then "getting off on the charges"

Maybe they should raise a flag, but it doesn't have to be prosecuted.

They could talk to her family, see what the family thinks, see if they should get the guy some counseling, tell him, worst case, that he needs to stop what he is doing rather than waste a bunch of tax dollars trying to prosecute him. Don't they have something better to do?

THANK YOU, I thought no one on this site had a brain. What is with all these idiots condoning RAPE?

So if she wakes up and says she was fine with it was it still rape?

No, lorent, but if she wakes up and says it was NOT okay he's going to jail.

ANYONE who thinks because they are married to someone that gives them the RIGHT to have sex with them is either so sadly messed up in the head or is in an abusive relationship where your right to say NO is not recognized.
So next time your husband says time to have sex and you are not in the mood ladies, just remember, according to people here, he HAS THE RIGHT, oh and MY FAV, is JUST EXPRESSING HIS LOVE. Sex is NOT love, my god are you all 16 yr old boys trying to convince your girlfriend to put out, its the greatest expression of love....oh please!
Express your love with a poem sicko. Buy flowers, MAKE A DONATION TO CHARITY IN HER NAME. Having SEX with your comatose wife is not love, thats an inability to control your actions.

Thanks for the comment.

My wife wouldn't care, but I wouldn't do it.

She'd be wondering why I didn't go find some conscious woman to play with!!!!

Mike, let's assume YOU are good looking enough to be able to get it from someone conscious and start from there...

I'm sure the catheters and IV's weren't bothering her, so why not just poke her a bit more with his penis, right? WRONG, it was rape. What is wrong with you sicko people thinking it's OKAY?

What is wrong with you thinking it is not okay?

Yeah we can tell you know a lot about the female body. I don't mean to be crude but there is a little bit of difference between the way a person's body responds to stimulus when they are asleep and when they are COMATOSE. Obviously you wake up when your wife is on top of you and that is when you give your consent through your actions.

Who knows what physical damage he actually could have done just because of lack of natural female reactions that allow that sort of thing to be comfortable for women. (Trying to say this politely.) That and/or clean up were probably the reason the nursing home noticed. Maybe not malicious intent but surely selfish.

Yes consent is required married or not. Yes you may claim my property but I am not your property.

Married people have sex with each other not to each other.

If you've woken in the middle of the night because your partner was aroused, you are lucky because you were able to wake up. Imagine not being able to wake up and not having a voice to say if you wanted to or not. You still enjoy the freedom of choice and not complete involuntary submission to someone else's will.

Are women prudes who don't want to be raped while unconscious? I hope you realize that being unconscious in a coma is little different than being drugged and date raped--the woman has no ability to consent and the man just does what he wants to do.

For all those who think he's admirable for 'staying' with her rather than going for some other women--do you really think that he's admirable for screwing a non-responsive body kept alive by machines? If this is his only option for sex, what kind of loser is he anyway? Can't handle a woman while she's awake and kicking?

My husband is a kind human being who doesn't need written directions to know that this is criminal.

What if the unconscious woman feels intense pain from the sex but cannot say? You people are insane and disgusting.

THANK YOU, everyone here seems retarded - he was raping his wife and they're all "aw, a love story".
YEAH RIGHT, must be love...

Wow, why don't you two go volunteer at the old folks home to give sweet lovin' to the immobile and comatose? Sounds like it's right up your moral alley. No foolin'.

hahhahahahahahah

Thanks Mimi

that is what my wife would say!

The point is the government should have tried to figure out what she wanted, no assume the prudish position of a lot of people in our society. Worst case scenario, they tell him he can't do that any more. Not make a court case out of it. Idiots!

Good for you. Another thing to be discussed between partners. I know what my wife would think. She wouldn't mind at all, just like you don't.

The fact that the woman was in a coma and unable to respond negates the fact that her sister thought it was okay. the whole world could think it was okay and it would still be LEGALLY wrong. it does not matter what your bible says because our legal system is NOT based on that bible.

Also... isn't there something about sex being for child bearing purposes? isn't that why gays can't get married? was he trying to impregnate her?

good point, hellio!!!

"Also... isn't there something about sex being for child bearing purposes?"

poor reference...there is more to the bible than the one misquoted scripture reference you point out.

the whole world could think it was okay and it would still be LEGALLY wrong. it does not matter what your bible says because our legal system is NOT based on that bible.

Actually, you raise a good point though here. I was not aware that having sex with your spouse was against the law. If this law is posted at the nursing home and this man was aware of it and went against it then yes, I suppose I would have to take a different stand even if it went against my personal beliefs. While I realize that "ignorance is not an excuse of the law" this situation is very different than raping a woman on the street or robbing a bank... everyone knows that is wrong.

You know why raping a woman on the street is wrong? because she doens't consent. You know why having sex with a woman in a coma is wrong? because she doesn't consent. You can't assume consent. Same reason getting a girl drunk so she can't say no is wrong. She doesn't consent. you can't assume consent, legally, you can't assume consent.

The ruling means prosecutors cannot introduce the videotapes as evidence in their case against Johnson...

They did not rule it wasn't rape.