You know, they had a similar (well…similar in principle) case on Law and Order once…A senior partner at a law firm tells a junior partner (Or whatever the proper job titles were), basically, “Sleep with me, or I’ll make sure you never work in this town again.” She sleeps with him, and he doesn’t stand in the way of her career (He doesn’t help it, either).
The D.A.'s office finds out about this eventually, and tries to charge the senior partner with rape. The judge won’t accept it. But the D.A. is able to press forward with another charge…extortion. They win in court.
All of this is moot, of course, if the island you’re shipwrecked isn’t under the control and jurisdiction of the United States, or any other first-world country.
So, be forewarned…in this situation, the U.S. might not be able to try you as a rapist, extortionist, or panderer. But the U.N. might want to consider you a Pirate praying on a shipwreck survivor, or an effective “warlord” committing crimes against humanity.
In any case, though, such conduct would be highly dishonorable. You may expect your shade to be cast down into Hel, the frozen underworld of the dishonored dead, after your passing.
To carry this weird premise even further is there a point where the people on the island can be considered common law spouses and she can then say hey bud now we’re common law wed you start getting me my food and no sex either?
Since they now have a relationship? Does it depend on the size of the island? If it is too big do they EVER become ‘married’ common lawwise?
IANAL but there are states where you live with a woman for a certain amount of time and you are considered wed without any document saying so…is this correct? Would this carry over to being stuck on an island for years with someone?
What if there are kids from this? Can the guy after being rescued say tootles toots thanks for everything and leave her with the kids? Can she go after 50% of his belongings? AND child support?
Or if as in the original OP can HE get 50% of HER stuff?
Sorry if this seems to be a hijack but these questions seem natural extensions of the OP(I doubt either would be carrying enough birth control to last if they are there for years…therefore the kids question)
I remember seeing that episode; McCoy’s opening line of summation to the jury was something like “Sleep with me, or I’ll indict you for murder. I’m the DA - I can do it.”
Again - it was a positive threat. It wasn’t simply the refusal to do something.
cole burner’s island is in the US. He said so.
Maybe he could be charged under sexual harrassment laws. Cook could be considered an employee if she’s paid for her services.
Peace,
mangeorge
To be common-law spouses one of the requirements is that the couple in question present themselves as husband and wife and are so conidered by others. Since RLC and cole burner are alone, there is no one else to consider them to be husband and wife or for them to present themselves to. In addition the island would have to fall under a jurisdiction which recognizes common-law marriage. There are only about seven (I think) states that recognize c-lm. As for child support, that would be completely separate from spousal status of the parents. No alimony would be owed since there was no marriage or divorce, but there may be a claim by one party or the other for “palimony,” again depending on the law of the jurisdiction to which the island was subject.
I think if you ever got on that island alone with her that the balance of power would be way far in the other direction. I think you’d be begging to go kill something for her for a kiss.
She’d have you building her a hut and everything, and you’d be happy to do it just cause you were lucky enough to be on the same island.
I’m pretty sure that if you and her were stranded on an island together, eventually shes gonna want some and guess what, theres only one person who can satisfy that need… Just wait a while and sparks would fly by themselves
There is a thread going on now in the BBQ Pit, people are saying it would be probably be rape if Strom Thurmond had sex with a maid who felt she couldn’t say no and keep her job.
In this thread that I am now resurrecting the legal opinion was that it was not rape to refuse to feed someone unless they had sex with you.
Sorry cole burner. Rachel announced her engagement to some guy that’s in Spiderman 2 (didn’t catch his name, and no it’s not Tobey Mcguire). So she’s off the market.
I was going to bring up the very same point that t-bonham@scc.net did, but I was beaten to it. The Good Samaritan law as posed in Seinfeld is completely ficticious. The GS law that exists in most places says you’re not liable for damages if you try to help people in an emergency (usually auto accidents) in good faith. It’s a law designed to let people try to help without fear of being sued…a good law, if you ask me.
And I can’t believe so many of you people believe that there must exist some law that forces you to help people if you easily can. I thought Phnord Prephect’s example of having money when your neighbor doesn’t is spot on. I’m under no legal obligation to help anyone…even if I’m the only person who can.
There are circumstances under which you have an obligation to help someone. A parent or spouse, for example. But I’ll bet dollars to doughnuts that being stuck on a desert island with someone is not one of those situations. It may be ethically/morally wrong to let the person starve. It may be a violation of various religious principles (The Golden Rule, for one). It may make everyone else on Earth think of you as a selfish asshole. But the fact is, there’s no law against being a selfish asshole.
So it’s not illegal to withhold assistance. Is it illegal to only provide assistance in exchange for sexual favors? I’d say no. If the situation is agreeable to both parties, it is a contractual arrangement. It would be consensual, just not very respectable (see note above about legality of being an asshole). It might be extortion, but not coercion. Besides, the prostitution arguments fall flat because this deserted island is presumably in international waters, and under no one’s jurisdiction. Even if it is in a nation’s jurisdiction, prostitution isn’t illegal everywhere. So it’s kind of a silly argument to make.
All in all, you could get away with it, surely. It may be hard to live with yourself, but at least you wouldn’t have to deal with your shame behind bars.
Okay…point taken. But the island could be in US jursidiction and still have legal prostitution. There are inland places like that in the US.
Point is, the prositution charge is boiled down to a “Maybe” at best, and more like a “Probably not,” since the situation is a little…shalle we say, unorthodox?
If you’re talking about the same Pit thread I’m thinking of, it’s not talking about rape. It’s discussing whether Strom Thurmond committed statutory rape by having sex with a 16 year old, a very different question altogether.
