Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
Obviously the law needs to change to protect people in situations like this, but can't they at least nail him to the wall on other stuff in the meantime? Labor laws, impersonation, fraud, something?
Cato: You're attempt at irony is severely undermined with incorrect punctuation.
I completely agree this is a gross and skeezy scam - but it just won't rise to the legal standard of sexual assault. Lying to get laid is not illegal even if it is immoral, unethical, and douchey.
As an aside, the gullibility of these victims is without measure. Were they never warned about talking to strangers? About the "too good to be true"? About knowing exactly what you are getting into? Kind of boggles the mind.
I never consented to being drugged, humiliated, and raped. None of us did.
Thank you for being our voice.
But it is the claim of a business opportunity that I think is critical, as merely making false or misleading statements (e.g. stating you are single when you are in fact cheating on a partner) seems like a slippery slope.
I think most people are smart enough to say yes to banging some stranger promising a career. In this case, though, they weren't.
You obviously overlooked the part where the lawyer explained that it would have to a material misrepresentation and that for a sex worker (or potential sex worker) the law would be that it was represented as a business deal.
Same for "I had sex with you because you told me you were a millionaire" ,the law would have to make that a material representation/misrepresentation.
"...the gullibility of these victims is without measure. ... Kind of boggles the mind."
That is precisely what is meant about your lack of empathy. If you can't understand why these women did what they did, so much that it 'boggles [your] mind,' then you lack empathy. Yes, what you wrote is victim-blaming, and no amount of hair-splitting arguments will change that. If you don't like it, then either say, "I misspoke, I meant to say..." or just own up to it and move on.
And that last line, "Kind of boggles the mind." is an asshole rhetorical move, where your personal conclusion is a fait accompli. What you witnessed boggles your mind and no one else's. And that is the best admission of your lack of imagination or empathy or both that we're likely to get out of you.
@9 Would you be willing to talk about it? My e-mail address is firstname.lastname@example.org.
It wouldn't be the first 100% miserable scumbag that this city's music scene has accepted as one of its own living among us.
Here's hoping they end up naming a new WA state law after him.
In any case, I've been doing to some digging into rape laws, specifically in California as they relate to the Brock Turner case - and I noted that obtaining consent by fraud is distinctly illegal there. I don't know what the scenario in Washington is. If it's not already illegal, hopefully the legislature can close this loophole as quickly as they closed that "upskirt" loophole.
Now I feel sick--I knew there was something wrong with those pictures.
Geez. I would see Hickey everywhere for a time, I had zero clue he was such a piece of filth.
I agree that it's the best thing to do, but they're not actively bettered for it.
And take screenshots like I did before he deletes them.
Cool move, broh. Establish these women as victims of this dick head, and post their photos in this thread. B sure 2 save them.
This is truly awful. He is a predator in the vein of Bill Cosby - promising career opportunities to vulnerable young women, then intoxicating and raping them.
I'm so sorry to all the victims, and hate to think about how many more there are out there.
we could ask him if he does - bit.ly/1U9ap8a
A quick google shows the law in other states-
As far for whether this is rape or not, it sure seems like it to me. If it is fraud (which is illegal) and sex was part of the fraud, so therefore it seems like third degree rape (or whatever the low end of rape is). Of course it isn't the same as forcible rape, and the sentencing should reflect that. It is just like when an armed robber accidentally shoots someone. They didn't mean to kill the clerk, but it is still murder, because the act took place as part of another crime.
I understand the slippery slope argument, but most laws reflect that. Consider someone getting slapped. Is that assault and battery? My guess is no prosecutor would ever take that case, even though, technically, it probably is. Where do you draw the line? It is similar to fraud. If I sell you a car and says it "runs great" even though it doesn't, it isn't quite the same as it failing the last emissions test and me saying it passed. Fraud happens every day, just to various degrees. It isn't until it gets very egregious that it gets prosecuted. This is one of those times.
Anyway, that's my opinion and I'm not a lawyer. It sounds like a good plot for a Law and Order episode, though.
@77: He's *not* paying them to have sex with him, though. Though perhaps by that rationale he could finally see jailtime.
@79 It says in the feature that she cut herself after her "audition".
1) Lying about one's marital status
2) Lying about one's age
3) Lying about one's income
4) Lying about one's fertility
5) Lying about being on birth control
6) Lying about whether one has an STD
Presumably the line should be drawn somewhere. Where?
Might not be able to bust the fucker but it seems like it should be possible to make it so he has to change his name and move far away.
I look forward to the follow up reporting on this.
a couple things i notice: some lies are promises. some lies cause damages. some lies create the interest to being with. some lies are entirely fraudulent.
many of your questions are instances where sex is wanted, and there is an inconsequential lie in the mix. which of those lies created interest in having sex? which of those lies promised something in return for sex? which of those lies caused harm? which of those lies were entirely a created situation for the purpose of tricking a specific person to going from the state of not wanting sex to having sex?
i mean, i assume you are a troll, but certainly even a troll has to agree telling someone you met at a bar and wants to go home with you that you are 34 when you are 35 isn't really a big deal compared to what happened here. do you think Matt Hickey should be on the "that's okay" side of the line? is that why you are asking the question? if not this case, what case would you use to draw the line?
i mean, presumably the line should be drawn somewhere.
Some other scenarios to consider:
7) Lying about one's birth gender
8) Lying about one's genital configuration
9) Lying about surgical enhancements
10) Lying about one's kinks
No, but I am concerned for others who might get caught up in whatever legal net is invented to catch people like him.
what case would you use to draw the line?
I would support a law that prohibits obtaining sex under the false guise of being a porn producer. Or, tricking someone into believing you are their spouse. I'm sure there are other specific scenarios that I've never imagined but would agree should be illegal.
However, I am definitely not in favor of vaguely stated laws that make lying for sex a crime. With the notable exception of men of high social status (e.g., Brock Turner, OJ Simpson), our country imprisons too many men as it is.
If you want to know how existing laws on the books work, ask a lawyer. Do some research. Trying to cast doubt on things you don't understand and crying about a slippery slope that doesn't exist is a questionable tactic and not curiosity or sincere concern.
Great, then educate yourself on their text, intent, and how they are commonly applied.
What you're doing here is not helpful to anyone, nor is it a particularly interesting thought experiment considering your rambling here is based entirely on your own personal ignorance and fearmongering.
Talk to a lawyer if you're worried.
If H had even done least bit of effort to contact porn producers to obtain work for the women, no fraud.
I'm raising the potential legal and ethical implications of this story, just like Sydney in the original article and many other people in this thread. Have you read the article? Or the page you linked to? Or any of the comments?
Whatever, my mistake for engaging you in discussion, I didn't realize you were a troll.
No you aren't. You're crafting your ever so helpful "concern" from whole cloth.
Yes, I read and the key part in my sentence is the word "IF"
@107 (nor anyone here) has any idea if H contacted any porn producers.
All I am saying is that so many comments here assume that H hasn't done anything, made no efforts to reach producers. & we don't have any information if he has or not.
So that IF has had made real efforts, then the case based on rape-by-fraud disappear.
H sounds like a creep but there 's no law against being a creep.
There may be other issues such as getting the women drunk (so they have no ability to consent to sex) but I'm focusing on this very weird story of getting them into bed to interview for a porn movie and how easy it would be for him to escape any guilt by simply making some effort to contact porn producers,