September 25, 2009 10:53 AM BST
Stephenie.
The law is quite clear. If a woman touched you in an appropriate way, As I said if you read back, she would probably be charged with gross indecency, if she forced you to have penatrive sex, then that would come under rape, but generally, would be charged with gross indecency, if you were a minor at the time, that would have been taken into consideration when sentancing.
None penatrive sex would proably been deemed serious sexual assault of a minor. But the rape of minors has been on the statute books as far back as records, go Rape involves penatrive sex, either with a penis, or object, If you read back there are some of the dates and details of some of the most basic revisions to the rape of a male. Under the Butler revisions, the gender of the perpretrator of rape or the gender of the victim, is not indicative to gender. Both are legally culpable to an act of rape..
Through my contacts, I have been able to elicit masses of information, I have asked Katie if we could have a new forum, Titled the transgendered and the law, Where I will be able to quote, The rights of the transgendered and the law, citing case histories and the relevant laws, relating to Employment law, case histories for the advancment of transitioning, where treatment has been started under the UK NHS and then delayed or deffered, laws relating to the transgendered in police custody and prison.
Descrimination laws and peoples entitlements, for instance, once you have a GRC as far as I am aware at the moment if you have a GRC, you are entitled to draw a pension in line with genetic females, five years earlier than men,
I will be contacting Prof Andrew Sharp, by invitation, when I get back from my holidays with a view to asking him to comment, if the new forum is established.
I have on record of various case histories where Transgendered people have been under the care of the NHS been given hormone treatments and therapy and then denied suirgery, on reasons of budget or delayed referal for surgery and have won their cases in the high court,
I have also asked various legal establishments and publishers of legal interpretations of various acts for permission to re-publish them here in tranny web, on a basis of a none comercial gain, based on TW being a support and advice site.
Cristine
September 25, 2009 2:14 PM BST
Employment law is an area that I am currently researching, as it is always tricky for us to find and hold jobs through transition. I hope to have something put together soon and will probably post it in the Tribune, perhaps as a series of articles.
Nikki
September 27, 2009 1:54 PM BST
Further to my previous posts and in answer to Nikkis question about terms of reference, ref gender of a victim, I have recieved the following email from Proffessor Andrew Sharpe, We have a mutual aquaintance.
Dear Cristine.
Ref your email, GRA2004.
If anybody is penetrated annaly or vaginally with a penis, without their consent, the proper charge for the offence would be a
''Section 1 rape (SOA 2003)''. The legal gender, GRC or not does not matter. It is irrelevant under the two previous act ammendments and so far not to any subsequent ammendments.
If the victim does have a GRC then they would obviously be reffered to with and as a female, with the pronoun female.
Even if the victim does NOT have a GRC and is in the process of transitioning and presents as a female, It is usually accepted by the DPPS and the courts that out of respect for the victim, It is my considered opinion that would be taken into consideration and she would be reffered to as a female.
Best wishes Andrew.
September 27, 2009 2:19 PM BST
Another guide to the treatment and detention of TG people is:-
It is quite lengthy and involved, but there are definitions and laid out requirements and procedures tables 1-5.
http://pfc.org.uk/node/384#sn1-2
September 28, 2009 12:36 AM BST
Thanks Christine for the info and clarifications.
Maybe Canada law is different , i don't know. I do know when my dad tried to do something about it when I was 10 that he was not able to. The only thing that happened was that the person was fired.
Anyhow, I do appreciate all of the efforts that you and others have put into this. One day it is my hope that we can all be equal under the law.
Thanks again for your informative postings
Stephenie
September 29, 2009 6:28 PM BST
http://www.southportvisit[...]799882/ no details of what went on but at least its seen as male rape.
what is making extent of all crime hard to appreciate now is that UK Govt has told the press and media it will have to pay for court reports and obviously a lot of newspapers aren't bothering so we don't get to know what crime is going through the courts...
September 29, 2009 7:29 PM BST
Rose, xxXxx.
So much for the missive from your attendance group, refusing to acknowledged the fact of male rape. But from what I understand now, there is now now difference of rape by buggery, genderwise, its dealt with under an amendment that I failed to find earlier, section one of the Sexual offences act SO2003. Which precedes the Gender recognition act being passed by parliament in 2004.
the case you quoted from your local paper, ''The police were investigating *an alleged* rape of a young boy'' the police cannot specify that a named person did the rape until he has been found guilty by a court of law. Thats contrary to prejudicial reporting and could be used in argument for a defence on the grounds of a pre-biased jury. The usual response from police sources is a person has been detained and charged in connection with the offence. This is where the rape of women, where the womans identity is kept in closure, whilst the name of the arrested person is released. is rather unfair if it turns out that the rape allegations are found to be untrue, mud sticks?
In my previous post, the email from professor sharpe, I saved the mail to a folder then edited it to cut out a lot of references and links and examples, to simplify it, also removing various personal references, it was me that spelt Anally wrong, lol in my hurry to get to the pool.
Cristine xXx
As for court reporting, I'm not sure, but have been told there is an act of freedom to judgements, by way of public interest,
January 4, 2010 7:11 PM GMT
Further to satisfying the question of male type rape ie buggery of a pre-op transexual, there is also a very interesting case that Proffessor Sharpe has pointed out to me. just to show how slippery defence lawyers can get in trying to deride the seriousness of the rape of a post op transexual vaginally.
Regina versus John Mathews, Reading Crown court. T960397.
A jugmental precendent ( these overide statutes or clarify, misleading or ambiguous elements of statute law, passed by Parliment.)
Defence council arguing that the perpretrator of raping a post-op transexual vaginally, did not in effect comit rape, as the vagina was artificially constructed and therefore technically did not come under the clinical constitution or definition of a female vagina. The defendant had admitted that he had intercourse with the complainant against her will. , that case had been proved, but defending council demanded that a lesser charge of indecent assault be brought forward for judgement, instead of the more serious case of rape. as the complainant had not been raped anally, there was in effect no basis for the rape charge..
http://www.pfc.org.uk/node/322
Cristine
January 6, 2010 4:28 PM GMT
My last posting here, I thought was very interesting. The rape of a post op, and the ongoing technicalities and terms of reference, everyone was interested enought to comment on the rights and effects the judicial system had on pre-ops.
But this is even more interesting, showing just how far the law has come giving considerations to Transexuals.
Rose, any comments?
Cristine