Is rape ever not rape?

[catsix]

LouisB said:
If the hypothetical 28 year old male took the 17 year old female to PA before having sex, the sex itself would be legal but would the male be guilty of violating the Mann Act? If so, who would have jurisdiction?

The feds? I have no idea.

[Bippy_the_Beardless]

@lucyetc

Point of information: it wouldn’t be because the gay male age of consent has been 16, for a couple of years I believe.

I’m glad they fixed that little hypocracy in the laws.

It seems a good idea to separate the crime mentioned from rape.

Does anyone know if the 28 forced sex with the 17 year old would it still legally be called statutary rape? Even though in this scenario it is the full henous crime of rape.

[JRDelirious]

@Bippy the Beardless

I’m glad they fixed that little hypocracy in the laws.

It seems a good idea to separate the crime mentioned from rape.

Does anyone know if the 28 forced sex with the 17 year old would it still legally be called statutary rape? Even though in this scenario it is the full henous crime of rape.

If we’re talking about a jurisdiction with the old-style article (and an AoC of 18), the charge you’re arraigned for in court by the DA is just “rape”.

“Statutory rape” was not itself a charge, it was a description of a charge, sort of like when we mention the “felony murder rule”.

Given this specific set of facts, the prosecution could make the foundation of the case upon the statutory provision, because then all they need to prove is that it did happen, but also seek to prove the forcible element, as an aggravating factor in order to seek a harsher sentence.