I hate this case and the fact that every child sex abuse case seems to want to tack on a bestiality charge. This case is an exception though, as he did try to force sex with animals
I am interested in the positive effect the ruling might have for some of us.
actuallynotazoophileok, I lied 2 points on 2015-04-30 01:14:45
very interesting, but like the guy says, "If Parliament wishes to criminalize such conduct, it can easily do so...", so I wouldnt expect this to last long.
At the moment though thats pretty good news.
Yearningmice 2 points on 2015-04-30 13:56:39
Well, "easily" and easily are two different things. Considering the omnibus bills being passed this is a line item in one of them. We'll see what happens.
JustinFromMontebello 3 points on 2015-04-30 08:52:55
Not a Zoophile, but I have been writing a paper on s.160 of the Criminal Code (the bestiality provision). I was blind-sided by this decision, did not expect it whatsoever. It's actually not even been published yet in most data bases.
What this guy did was pretty despicable, and I'm disappointed in the decision. The guy got his dog to lick his daughter's vagina.
Keep in mind Canada has one Criminal Code, and this was decided in a B.C. Court, since it is a high level Court (2nd highest) it will be very persuasive precedent.
I don't think this will last though, I'd say this maybe goes to the SCC, or perhaps since this guy got hit with a ton of other charges Parliament will just redefine the legislation.
Yearningmice 3 points on 2015-04-30 09:52:06
Being familiar with s160 but not a lawyer I cannot fathom how this interpretation was used. Sure the sodomy laws were sorta a basis for it, but it was, from my understanding, a completely new section added months after the sodomy laws were removed.
To be sure, it's the worst possible case to expect positive change from.
JustinFromMontebello 2 points on 2015-04-30 09:57:16
Yeah, I thought the BC Supreme Court's decision was really really right on the money.
HeartBeatOfTheBeastHoof and Claw 3 points on 2015-04-30 12:39:24
A very creepy case. Out of curiosity, does oral sex count as penetration?
Yearningmice 2 points on 2015-04-30 14:01:32
The way I read it the ruling says no, I would certainly encourage my lawyer to cite this if I had to go to court. I think penetration is the act of intercourse with a horse, if you get what I'm saying.
/r/zoophilia archive
I hate this case and the fact that every child sex abuse case seems to want to tack on a bestiality charge. This case is an exception though, as he did try to force sex with animals
I am interested in the positive effect the ruling might have for some of us.
very interesting, but like the guy says, "If Parliament wishes to criminalize such conduct, it can easily do so...", so I wouldnt expect this to last long.
At the moment though thats pretty good news.
Well, "easily" and easily are two different things. Considering the omnibus bills being passed this is a line item in one of them. We'll see what happens.
Not a Zoophile, but I have been writing a paper on s.160 of the Criminal Code (the bestiality provision). I was blind-sided by this decision, did not expect it whatsoever. It's actually not even been published yet in most data bases.
What this guy did was pretty despicable, and I'm disappointed in the decision. The guy got his dog to lick his daughter's vagina.
Keep in mind Canada has one Criminal Code, and this was decided in a B.C. Court, since it is a high level Court (2nd highest) it will be very persuasive precedent.
I don't think this will last though, I'd say this maybe goes to the SCC, or perhaps since this guy got hit with a ton of other charges Parliament will just redefine the legislation.
Being familiar with s160 but not a lawyer I cannot fathom how this interpretation was used. Sure the sodomy laws were sorta a basis for it, but it was, from my understanding, a completely new section added months after the sodomy laws were removed.
To be sure, it's the worst possible case to expect positive change from.
Yeah, I thought the BC Supreme Court's decision was really really right on the money.
A very creepy case. Out of curiosity, does oral sex count as penetration?
The way I read it the ruling says no, I would certainly encourage my lawyer to cite this if I had to go to court. I think penetration is the act of intercourse with a horse, if you get what I'm saying.