In before, "She was asking for it, she should show some personal responsibility".

Stay classy, buddy. This is why you get drunk with friends and not strangers. Poor girl.

Indecent liberties is a felony. It is a sexual assault.

First and foremost, that's a lot of assault. Let's hope for some prison time.

Second: Where the hell were this girl's friends?

Ah, that lesson took me a long time to learn: It's perfectly OK to drink yourself into a stupor, but if you're gonna do it, do it at home where you can't get into too much trouble.

Oh, and unplug your phone and your computer beforehand too.

@4: Thanks! You're totally right!

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?…

Apparently my Google was broken.

Yes, the takehome message is get wasted with people you know. I had an incident somewhat similar to this and found out about it almost 2 weeks later. No fun : (

Really? I would think the biggest "take home message" is it is wrong and against the law to sexually assault someone.

Or you could, you know, drink in moderation?

Regardless, the entire group of people taking advantage of this woman sound like a bunch of top-notch assholes. If indecent liberties is the charge that sticks, I say let him have it.

Roofie

@9 This.

That bar is always full of assholes. $9M in Unmarked Bills and the Ballroom are to be avoided at all costs on the weekend.

@9, You can't help that there are assholes out there. It would be really nice if everyone took home that message, but since the world isn't perfect we have to protect ourselves.

@10, Not saying they aren't assholes. Getting wasted can be lots of fun though, and I'm not going to give up things that are fun just because people are assholes. I could give up walking outside at night because people are assholes, or I could carry mace and walk in groups.

The take home message is protect yourself!!

@7 I really hope there's a similar law making rape illegal if the perpetrator IS married to the victim...because spousal rape is also bad.

@15: Yeah, I thought that when I read it, too.

if she's too drunk to say no, is it rape?

Fremont is always where all the frat boys and girls like to come.

Plus, if you get really skunked, you can catch a bus home to the U Dist or SPU.

What a bunch of douche-bags. I hope they all get in a lot of trouble.

I also hope the woman learns a valuable lesson from this. People cannot be trusted! That's what I'm taking from this. Watch your back at all times, otherwise, your nipples could end up like this. GROSS!!!!!!!!!!

If convicted this guy is going to be on the state's sex offender list for at least 15 years. Ha!

protip: just give a good motorboating then get the fuck out of there.

I agree that this is completely unacceptable, and there MUST be serious consequences, but prison time? Really? For throwing a punch at a bouncer or putting your mouth on a drunk chick's nipple? Frat boys routinely do worse than that to their best friends--taking photos with nuts on their foreheads when they pass out and the like. I've been groped in bars before and I can't remember being more pissed, but I'd rather be the victim of that than have my wallet stolen or my car window broken, and how often do people get jail time for that?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not apologizing for these assholes, I'm just saying that the punishment ought to fit the crime. How about fining them a few hundred bucks and giving them a week's community service? I'm pretty sure an indecent liberties conviction requires you to register as a sex offender, and once that happens your entire life is FUCKED. I wouldn't want to see that happen to someone just for being a drunk ignorant douchebag.

What the fuck are "indecent liberties" anyway? We don't have such a law (and, in fact, this would be perfectly legal here).

Washington Revised Code RCW 9A.44.100: Indecent liberties.

(1) A person is guilty of indecent liberties when he or she knowingly causes another person who is not his or her spouse to have sexual contact with him or her or another:

(a) By forcible compulsion;

(b) When the other person is incapable of consent by reason of being mentally defective, mentally incapacitated, or physically helpless;

(c) When the victim is developmentally disabled and the perpetrator is a person who is not married to the victim and who has supervisory authority over the victim;

(d) When the perpetrator is a health care provider, the victim is a client or patient, and the sexual contact occurs during a treatment session, consultation, interview, or examination. It is an affirmative defense that the defendant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the client or patient consented to the sexual contact with the knowledge that the sexual contact was not for the purpose of treatment;

(e) When the victim is a resident of a facility for mentally disordered or chemically dependent persons and the perpetrator is a person who is not married to the victim and has supervisory authority over the victim; or

(f) When the victim is a frail elder or vulnerable adult and the perpetrator is a person who is not married to the victim and who has a significant relationship with the victim.

(2)(a) Except as provided in (b) of this subsection, indecent liberties is a class B felony.

(b) Indecent liberties by forcible compulsion is a class A felony.

Is it wrong of me to say that punching the bouncer in the face was the bigger crime?

Well now some perv thinks this is no big deal. OK then, next time I see some really drunk frat boy I suppose it is OK for me to sexually assault him while my friends take pictures. Then we can dump him at a church and let a man of the cloth sober him up. Since these kinds of things are no big deal.

As for the notion that this woman should not have been so drunk, well that would be ideal, but we all get drunk, we all walk alone, we all take risks.....If we did not we would not make any progress in our lives. Can we please move on and put the responsibility for such bad incidents solely on the parasites who violate the rights of others. It is for individual crime victims to decide what risks are worth taking even if their decisions are not something the rest of us would make.

So, really stupid question, though ...

Why did the bartender continue to serve both highly intoxicated individuals .... well?

#27 Nope. Personally I think it is just as bad. But it depends. Some women would rather get punched in the face. Some would rather be sexually assaulted. Same goes for guys, but thanks for brining it up. He sounds like a really good guy and he is being overlooked on this thread.

#24 A couple hundred dollars and community service is not serious. So frat boys behave badly to each other, shame on them for tolerating the abuse. They are not the standard for the rest of us to gage right and wrong. They are not that important. Yes, the filthy pervert should go to jail. As for registering; no one should register as a sex offender. If they can’t stop abusing others they should stay in jail. Sorry about your car but seriously!

Thanks, breakdown. Maybe it's the lawyer in me, but I don't see how this fits any of those categories. You are, of course, welcome to attempt to convince me otherwise.

@31, the prisons are all full. Who do you suggest we release to make room for this guy? Traditionally, it's someone in for multiple DWI's or domestic violence.

@32, I think courts generally consider "blind drunk" to count as "mentally incapacitated". It's a good, progressive law, but the sex offender registration system is seriously broken in most states and WA is no exception.

@32, 5280...the girl was so wasted that she couldn't even say her name or sit upright, rendering her both physically and mentally incapacitated and unable to grant consent. It fits right in with 1(b) of the indecent liberties definition cited above: When the other person is incapable of consent by reason of being mentally defective, mentally incapacitated, or physically helpless.

Mmm, that's not exactly what I think of when I see "mentally incapacitated." I suppose the session notes for the bill could provide further insight into the legislature's intent, but, um, the odds of that happening aren't especially good. Regardless, there's certainly ample room for argument there on both sides.

@36, well even if you argue that her mental capacity is somehow irrelevant (I would disagree), her physical state was pretty clear: she had no way of fighting for herself, and the assailant obviously could tell that if she was unable to sit up and vomiting everywhere.

Again, Lily, the point here was whether it was the intent of the legislature to include people who are falling-down drunk as part of what is obviously intended to be a protected class. If this were my case, I'm afraid I'd have to argue that, if they had wanted to include "drunk," they would have included it. (That's one of the oldest ones on the books; something that is as inclusive as this list is is also, by definition, exclusive of the things that are not specifically mentiioned.)

Right, but it still ignores the big question, which is why the bartender continued to serve her - or the guy - when they were both obviously faced.

Three people messed up. Him, the bartender, and her - in that order.

Yep, plenty of blame to be spread around to all.

BTW, I'm not saying what's "right" or "wrong;" only that, from a purely legal perspective, there are enough holes in that case to drive a truck through.

#33 – I said jail not prison, but if those are full…build more or just release certain drug offenders. If he goes on and re-offends put him in prison. If there is no room, build more. Full prisons are not a reason to let sex offenders off lightly. If I go out, grab a woman, suck on her breasts then punch someone who comes to her aide I would deserve jail time even if it screws up my life. If I did it again prison is where I would belong.

@27
It's not wrong, but it is politically incorrect. Personally, I'd rather be drunk and groped by some guy (and I'm not into guys) than take a hard punch to the face.

Personally, I'd rather be punched that sexually assaulted. And I weigh 105. The former is a random act of violence, the latter is a systematic form of objectification and control. I've been sexually assaulted and sexually harassed more times than I can count. I'd rather someone go to jail for letting out his anger on me rather than taking advantage of me on the belief, perpetuated by society, that my body is public property - a much worse crime.

Let' not discount #11 here. She very well may have had a roofie.

Regardless, it doesn't matter. Taking advantage of someone who can't consent is seriously, seriously wrong.

And Breakdown, NPR is doing a series of reports this week on sexual assaults on campuse. Their stats are 1 in 5 college women get sexually assaulted on campus. I hardly think any reasonable person would find that acceptable, and the frat culture certainly contributes to a lot of it.

I would take a punch in the face over sexual assault any day. Sexual assault leaves emotional scars that can ruin your sex life, or at least fuck it up for a long time. I've been punched (well, hit in the face with a beer stein, which is probably worse), and I'd take that in a second before I'd let someone steal my sexual self-confidence from me.

The most terrible crime here is the name of the bar.

I've been presuming all of the douchebags drunk-drive home from Fremont.

Metro actually makes it a really hard place to get out of late at night. The 31 stops at 7:00 (negating Will In Seattle's transit knowledge yet again). The 30 is done at 10:00. The last 17 is just after 12:15. And the 26/28 drops to less-than-hourly combined (!) after midnight.

Fremont->Ballard after a show at the Nectar or High Dive can be worse than getting home from Cap Hill, unless the weather's nice enough to just walk.

Oh yeah, and ditto on the insane "spousal exception" in the Indecent Liberties statute. WTF? Was that grandfathered into the law from when wives were considered chattel?

When someone is too intoxicated to consent, that is sexual assault.

Period.

End of story.

@51,

Metro has a silly little thing called the 46. Shilshole Bay to downtown Fremont via downtown Ballard, but only hourly and only between 9:15 AM and 3:15 PM. Kind of pointless, right?

The rest of the time, the 17 is perfectly reliable (drops you on the other side of the Fremont bridge, but at least there's no transfer involved). But that one stops running 90 minutes before the Fremont bars close and Nectar/High Dive shows end. And they JUST cut evening inbound (from Ballard) service on it for kicks!

I am with Irena and Kersy. Having experienced both, I'd choose being punched in the face every single time. It is easier to recover from a random act of violence in my opinion.

@51 - 46 bus route.

28 bus route.

Use em.

Will @55,

I am BEGGING you to PLEASE stop giving "advice" about a public transit system that you CLEARLY never use.

If, rather, than looking at Metro's master system map and conveniently noticing a line between Fremont and Ballard, you had bothered to look at an actual 46 SCHEDULE -- or if you had, say, read my post on the 46 just TWO POSTS BEFORE YOUR RESPONSE -- you would know that the 46 to downtown Fremont is a pointless, hourly, midday-only service.

And the 28 only goes halfway.

Can you PLEASE occasionally use your brain before posting?

It's really sad that so many people are focusing on the level on the woman's level of intoxication. If she were robbed when she was drunk would so much blame be put on her? The crime was committed by the group of guys, lets keep that in mind.

Disorientation and vomiting can also be signs of a concussion. She had recently hit her head...

Chiming in as another who has experienced both severe beatings and been sexually assaulted, I'll take the punch in the face. And Marci, it is indeed sad but not surprising that many are focusing on this woman's actions instead of on those of the perpetrators. It's a common self defense mechanism. The idea is to distance oneself from the scary situation by finding some reason that the victim is complicit, if not out right to blame, for what has befallen them. "If only she had been smart (like I would have been) then this would not have happened to her, and since I would have been smart (unlike her) it won't happen to me or some one I love (because they would be smart like me as well), so now I feel better and can believe that universe is not random." Too bad it doesn't work like that.
Personally I hope the men responsible are prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and if that includes ending up on a sex offender registry then boo fuckin' hoo. Maybe if they hadn't gotten so drunk, or hadn't gone out to get drunk they might have avoided alllllllllllll this trouble.