1. It’s going to be an interesting trial:
A 47-year-old man from Pearce will appear in the ACT Magistrates Court later today (Thursday, October 28) charged with the sexual assault of a sex worker.
Police will allege that on October 15 the man called the woman and a price was negotiated for sexual services.
On October 21 the man arrived at the house with an envelope he said contained the agreed sum of money. After they had sex the woman checked the envelope to find it did not contain money.
The man left shortly after, promising to return at a later time with the money. However, she has not seen the man since that day.
The woman contacted the Sex Workers Outreach Program who urged her to go to the police.
Police enquiries located the man, they arrested and charged him with sexual intercourse without consent and making off without payment.
UPDATE: The ABC informs us that the gentleman in question is one Akis Livas, and he has been bailed.
—
ACT Policing Criminal Investigations detectives will charge a 37-year-old former Macquarie man with the murder of Andrew Le Dinh.
The body of Mr Le Dinh was located within his fourth floor apartment on College St, Belconnen on Thursday, May 20. The post-mortem revealed he died from severe head injuries.
CI detectives investigating the case interviewed the man today.
The 37-year-old man will be formally charged with murder, conspiracy to commit a robbery and other offences in the ACT Magistrates Court on November 19.
Loading ...
What’s Your opinion?
Police Wrap – 28 October 2010
johnboy said :
“He told me he was hung like a horse but he WASN’T!
RAPE!!!”
On the other hand if they’re arguing that consent obtained under false pretences leads to sexual assault then a lot of young men in mooseheads claiming to be lawyers and dolphin trainers are heading into a world of pain.
johnboy said :
But that is the point, either it was a business transaction and their for some sort of fraud, or it was sexual assault.
The fact that the business owner was under the impression that they had already been paid makes it an interesting question.
If I went into my local shop, handed the sales person a envelope which I said contained money, then took that value in product and left, would I be charged with:
a. Fraud; or
b. assault and robbery?
The idea that consent can be dependant on an additional factor determined after the fact is hard for me to reconcile with the otherwise clear cut (no means no) rules which should make it simple in this country.
Chop71 said :
err no I’m pretty damn sure it won’t as it’s a criminal case – this isn’t her sueing him, it’s the crown prosecuting him for rape.
georgesgenitals said :
Was her “lawn” mowed?
I’m sure it will get settled out of court
Well they don’t normally charge you with assault?
I’m not sure how this would be any different from anyone who delivered services (eg mowing a lawn) and then not getting paid for it.
how can there have not been consent?
for that to be the case either:
consent can be widthdrawn post facto
or
there was neither consent nor non-consent during the act.
derp?
Rookie error, Monopoly money only works in really backward cultures!
It is a conundrum wrapped in an enigma, wrapped in a sex scandal.
Wow. That will be interesting.
Interesting indeed. Would that mean that the consideration was an element of ‘consent’ and that in the absence of payment it is argues that ‘consent’ was absent?
I think that the real punishment here will be the fact that this chap will be outed -not only a frequenter of houses of ill repute, but also a monumental tight-arse.
This will be interesting as there is the matter of proof, she will have to prove the events took place. As for being charged with sexual intercourse without consent, apparently they agreed to have sex so there is the consent.
If he wanted to he could turn around and say that she is making vexacious comments.
isn’t that just theft?
😛