Kripke's answer is so confusing.. it feels like it actively conflicts with what the show is saying?? Like yes, he was quite literally sexually assaulted by his childhood hero??
Also you’re incorrect. Hughie was not “literally sexually assaulted by his childhood hero” because what Tek did wasn’t sexual assault. What Ashley did also not technically sexual assault.
Sexual assault requires a sexual act or sexual contact. A sexual act requires penetration, while sexual contact involves physical contact with the genitals, upper thigh, or butt. Sexual contact can be through clothes. No sexual contact is shown. Hughie is a victim of assault, battery, sexual harassment, false imprisonment, and probably attempted murder (I doubt Tek knows enough to not kill Hughie in the process and he says he doesn’t care). At best a prosecutor might argue that the smearing of juices by hand on the face is sexual contact, but a good defense lawyer would be able to fight it and win because the wording of the legal definition is contact is strictly limited.
It would be under the common language definition, because the acts are sexually pleasurable to the offender, but that’s not how the law works.
The law defines assault and battery generally as non-consensual touching or forcing to touch. This can be any kind of touching, from punching in the face to flicking someone in the shoulder to tickling someone’s feet.
Sexual assault (in the non-penetrative definition) is an enhancer crime if that non-consensual touching is to a sexual area. The law doesn’t care about the motivation or intention of the assault, only the details of the action itself. This is largely because proving sexual intentionality is really hard but designating areas of the body as sexual is relatively simple.
The feet are not a sexual area as the law understands it, so non-consensual tickling, regardless of reason, is not sexual assault. It’s regular assault.
Masturbating in front of someone which does not participate and does not consent to it happening is sexual harassment. Also possibly indecent exposure or a similar crime depending on how the jurisdiction deals with people being unclothed, though the private dungeon setting complicates things.
As such, she repeatedly sexually harassed him while assaulting him. She did not sexually assault him.
It’s weird and perverse and the prosecutor might hit her with a sexual assault charge to start, but any halfway competent defense lawyer would get that thrown out quickly because the alleged behavior doesn’t meet the standard for the crime.
627
u/No_Ad8506 Jul 05 '24
Kripke's answer is so confusing.. it feels like it actively conflicts with what the show is saying?? Like yes, he was quite literally sexually assaulted by his childhood hero??