I like watching the news. Even the bogus news like A Current Affair and Today Tonight.
Obviously the news tells us everything we need to know, like whats happening in politics, finance, weather, sport and is Lindsay Lohan really a lesbian or just desperate for attention? All the most important and hard hitting questions and answers that will be crucial to my everyday decisions – will I really truly like the taste of girls cherry chapstick if I kiss her?

But tonights hard hitting question: can you rape a consenting prostitute?

Remember, consent can be withdrawn at any time – and can turn into rape. So for the sake of this, we must understand that, as far as the facts go, at no time during the act, did the prostitute withdraw her consent.

So now, let us consider the facts of this trial currently being heard in the Perth Magistrates Court:

A man (We shall call him D, for defendant) went into a brothel or similar and hired the services of a prostitute (V, as in victim) to do well… what prostitutes do.

D wrote V a cheque for her services. Later on, V went to cash the cheque and it bounced.

Apparently this occurred twice. (Atleast that’s what I think the voice over lady said…)

The procecution (P, for prosecution), who are representing V, are claiming that D was fully aware that he did not have the funds to pay for V’s services and that he knew the cheque would bounce.

D has now been charged with rape and potentially fraud.

I think I’ll get a better look at the facts before I go making my opinions known.
At this stage I think the outcome will be based very much on whether or not D is proved to have known that his cheque would bounce. If he can successfully prove he honestly and reasonably thought that his cheque was valid and would process, then he might have a defence under section 23 of the Criminal Code which covers Mistake of Fact – at which point he might get off.

I will be watching this case very closely. Very influential precedent could arise from this.

I’ll keep you posted!


EDIT: I just wanted to clarify that the term ‘rape’ isn’t actually used in the WA Criminal Code. The terminology used is infact “sexual penetration without consent”. And there are cases that will no doubt be considered by the courts. If you’re interested, check out the cases of Ibbs (WA) from 1987 and Papadimitropoulos (sp?) (Vic – a High Court decision). Last semester my Criminal Law lecturer put the question to us: “If A agrees to pay a fee for prostitute V’s sexual services and then runs off without paying, is this rape?” There was no answer, and as far as I know, no specific precedent for it. As I said, this is going to be important.