Mistaken identity results in Attempted Implied Non-Consentual Sex

shereads

Sloganless
Joined
Jun 6, 2003
Posts
19,242
Careful with those cyber relationships, pornsters. If you do meet in person, get the address right.

LOS ANGELES, California (Reuters) -- A California man has pleaded guilty to residential burglary after he set up a meeting with a woman on a rape fantasy Internet chat page, but instead broke into a different woman's apartment.

Michael Todd Howard, 35, pleaded guilty in a court in San Diego Tuesday in return for an expected sentence of one year in jail and probation, prosecutors said.

According to court documents, last September, Howard broke into the home of a woman with whom he thought he had set up an encounter on what was described as a "rape fantasy" chat site. After he entered the wrong apartment, he hit and struggled with the 25-year-old woman inside, who told law enforcement officials she thought she was going to be killed.

The victim stopped the attack by yelling and attacking Howard's testicles. Howard then asked for the name the victim used in the chat room and she responded by saying she had never visited a chat room and did not have a personal computer.

As a part of the plea deal, prosecutors dropped charges of intent to commit rape, false imprisonment and possession of illegal drugs. Howard will be sentenced next month.
 
All I have to say is that's a good way to get yourself killed at my 'wrong address'. That guy should consider himself lucky that sore nuts is all he left with. Whatever sentence they give him is bound to be less permanent than what might've happened to him at my house.


~lucky
 
I am sitting here wondering why the woman who had this done would have given the guy the choice to a plea bargain in the first place....??
 
Honey123 said:
I am sitting here wondering why the woman who had this done would have given the guy the choice to a plea bargain in the first place....??


I think because, while he attacked her, it wasn't his plan to violate someone so. The planned attack was entirely consensual, while appearing *in their minds* as a rape fantasy. Seems as though the prosecutors offered him a plea bargain, in return for a guilty plea that included jail time. Maybe that's what she wanted.

I can't decide what kind of punishment might have been fair. I'd most likely harbor tons of anger and resentment at having been attacked, but the truth of the matter is that he didn't rape her and admitted it was all a big screw up. Maybe she feels better knowing he'll have a year in jail to sit and think about his foolish behavior.

~lucky
 
Honey123 said:
I am sitting here wondering why the woman who had this done would have given the guy the choice to a plea bargain in the first place....??

If you mean the woman who kicked him in the balls, she does not have the final say. She does have input but not the final say. Most likely, also, she felt it was not worth going to court about. Nobody was hurt anyhow, except the guy with sore balls, and the woman may have benefited by learning something about herself and her security.

Apparently, the guy isn't really a criminal, anyhow, and he just made a mistake. He was just catering to the other woman's fantasy, although he expected to have a good time too.

:) After it's over, it is something to chuckle about but it could have had very serious consequences.:eek:
 
Boxlicker101 said:
Nobody was hurt anyhow, except the guy with sore balls, and the woman may have benefited by learning something about herself and her security.

Apparently, the guy isn't really a criminal, anyhow, and he just made a mistake. He was just catering to the other woman's fantasy, although he expected to have a good time too.

:) After it's over, it is something to chuckle about but it could have had very serious consequences.:eek:

Not to be confrontational, but two things:

1) Your statement that nobody was hurt anyhow: Are you serious? I imagine that woman (the mistaken addy woman) was and is severaly traumatized by the entire ordeal. The few times I've ever had to resort to physical violence to protect/defend myself, it has rocked me to my core. I'm not a violent person by nature, but seem to have a bit of the devil in me when I need it. This is comforting and disconcerting at the same time, but I believe I'd be quite upset at knowing how easily accessed I could be. I wouldn't say he was the only one hurt by the entire thing, by any stretch.

2) I love how you say that he was catering to her fantasy. It seems, from the article, that it was consensual on both internet party's sides, but to say that he was doing her some kind of damn favor by 'pretend' raping her is too much. He met her on a non-consent style chatring and no doubt was doing himself just as big a favor as you seem to think he was doing for her. How typically male.

~lucky
 
I understand how the systems works - I, unfortunately work for lawyers -- criminal ones at that, but I guess I was just thinking out -- although I did ask my boss and he said that the prosecutors would normally talk to the victim first before making any plea bargain -- for a case like this, i.e., attempted rape, breaking and entering...there would be no question or a plea bargain. So, perhaps the reality here is the fact maybe it wasn't mistaken identity maybe she just didn't expect someone to "search her out".
 
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Boxlicker101
Nobody was hurt anyhow, except the guy with sore balls, and the woman may have benefited by learning something about herself and her security.

Apparently, the guy isn't really a criminal, anyhow, and he just made a mistake. He was just catering to the other woman's fantasy, although he expected to have a good time too.

After it's over, it is something to chuckle about but it could have had very serious consequences.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Not to be confrontational, but two things:

1) Your statement that nobody was hurt anyhow: Are you serious? I imagine that woman (the mistaken addy woman) was and is severaly traumatized by the entire ordeal. The few times I've ever had to resort to physical violence to protect/defend myself, it has rocked me to my core. I'm not a violent person by nature, but seem to have a bit of the devil in me when I need it. This is comforting and disconcerting at the same time, but I believe I'd be quite upset at knowing how easily accessed I could be. I wouldn't say he was the only one hurt by the entire thing, by any stretch.

2) I love how you say that he was catering to her fantasy. It seems, from the article, that it was consensual on both internet party's sides, but to say that he was doing her some kind of damn favor by 'pretend' raping her is too much. He met her on a non-consent style chatring and no doubt was doing himself just as big a favor as you seem to think he was doing for her. How typically male.

~lucky

When I say "hurt" I usually refer to physical injuries. Once the mistaken addy woman realized she was never actually in any danger, her trauma would be minimal and would probably be outweighed by the realization that she was able to successfully defend herself.

Yes, as I said, he was catering to the other woman's fantasy and, as I also said, he expected to have some fun also. None of us know what the actual arrangements were. It may have been a matter of "You can have sex with me but only under these conditions" and he agreed although he would have rather come in the front door for a meeting. It's also possible that either he or the "intended victim" was actually a prostitute, hired for the role-playing that was to have occurred.

I still say the guy was hurt more than anybody else and I don't necessarily mean physically. He has a conviction for a violent felony on his record, he has become a laughing stock among his acquaintances and he will probably do time in jail. Under the circumstances, it will probably be one year in a county jail and some of that may be suspended.

Honey, I think that before a plea bargain could be made, the guy would have to prove he was telling the truth, which he could do by going to his mailbox and showing the exchanged email. The police have computers and he could probably have gone online using one of them to prove this.
 
Boxlicker101 said:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Boxlicker101
Nobody was hurt anyhow, except the guy with sore balls, and the woman may have benefited by learning something about herself and her security.

Apparently, the guy isn't really a criminal, anyhow, and he just made a mistake. He was just catering to the other woman's fantasy, although he expected to have a good time too.

After it's over, it is something to chuckle about but it could have had very serious consequences.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Not to be confrontational, but two things:


When I say "hurt" I usually refer to physical injuries. Once the mistaken addy woman realized she was never actually in any danger, her trauma would be minimal and would probably be outweighed by the realization that she was able to successfully defend herself.

Yes, as I said, he was catering to the other woman's fantasy and, as I also said, he expected to have some fun also. None of us know what the actual arrangements were. It may have been a matter of "You can have sex with me but only under these conditions" and he agreed although he would have rather come in the front door for a meeting. It's also possible that either he or the "intended victim" was actually a prostitute, hired for the role-playing that was to have occurred.

I still say the guy was hurt more than anybody else and I don't necessarily mean physically. He has a conviction for a violent felony on his record, he has become a laughing stock among his acquaintances and he will probably do time in jail. Under the circumstances, it will probably be one year in a county jail and some of that may be suspended.



The woman he attacked was in real danger most of all because the guy thought it was role play so struggling was part of it. And I can tell you being attacked like that doesn't wear off or go away just because he didn't mean it
 
Honey, I think that before a plea bargain could be made, the guy would have to prove he was telling the truth, which he could do by going to his mailbox and showing the exchanged email. The police have computers and he could probably have gone online using one of them to prove this.

I'd be surprised if they allowed him to do that - but they could have confiscated his computer and then saw what to took place with the exchange of emails...I'd love to know more about this story....

Also, how'd he know where the woman lived? There had to be an exchange of addresses?? So, again, if the emails were looked at by law enforcement authorities, could be it ws the same girl???

I don't know -- I need more info!!!!
 
Honey123 said:
I'd be surprised if they allowed him to do that - but they could have confiscated his computer and then saw what to took place with the exchange of emails...I'd love to know more about this story....

Also, how'd he know where the woman lived? There had to be an exchange of addresses?? So, again, if the emails were looked at by law enforcement authorities, could be it ws the same girl???

I don't know -- I need more info!!!!

I'm wordering if the woman who he chatted with intentionally gave the wrong addy either chickening out or setting up the girl who was attacked.
 
Hmmmm....never thought of it that way!

Still it just seems fishy.
 
RenzaJones said:
I'm wordering if the woman who he chatted with intentionally gave the wrong addy either chickening out or setting up the girl who was attacked.

That's a perspective I hadn't thought of before, Renza J. I think it's dispicable either way, but the fear aspect of it must have been very real, even over the air waves. If this is the case, then the guy was much more into it than she was and perhaps she didn't feel like she could get out of it any other way.

* * *

And Box, your phrasing of 'fulfilling her fantasy' and 'hoped to have some fun himself' is what I'm hung up on. I'm sure you think we're both saying the same thing, but it is vastly different in my eyes. Seems a little bit, God's gift to women-ish to me. He was her night in shining armor, her stallion of rape, her every dream made of abusive storming flesh...and he hoped to have a little fun too. Seriously.

~lucky
 
lucky-E-leven said:
And Box, your phrasing of 'fulfilling her fantasy' and 'hoped to have some fun himself' is what I'm hung up on. I'm sure you think we're both saying the same thing, but it is vastly different in my eyes. Seems a little bit, God's gift to women-ish to me. He was her night in shining armor, her stallion of rape, her every dream made of abusive storming flesh...and he hoped to have a little fun too. Seriously.

~lucky

I can't see what point your're trying to make here Lucky. He had to go to the house, he had to 'break in', he had to rape her. She is giving permission for all this. Ok so he is fulfilling his fantasy but he's simultaneously fulfilling or enabling hers.

Gauche
 
lucky-E-leven said:
[B
* * *

And Box, your phrasing of 'fulfilling her fantasy' and 'hoped to have some fun himself' is what I'm hung up on. I'm sure you think we're both saying the same thing, but it is vastly different in my eyes. Seems a little bit, God's gift to women-ish to me. He was her night in shining armor, her stallion of rape, her every dream made of abusive storming flesh...and he hoped to have a little fun too. Seriously.

~lucky [/B]

Lucky, you are quoting me as saying something I did not say. What I said was: "Apparently, the guy isn't really a criminal, anyhow, and he just made a mistake. He was just catering to the other woman's fantasy, although he expected to have a good time too." Instead of saying "a good time" I might have been more hyperbolic and said something like "a lot of fun, too". I can't help but think this is splitting hairs.

However, I never said or implied anything like: "God's gift to women[/i]-ish to me. He was her night in shining armor, her stallion of rape, her every dream made of abusive storming flesh". Those are your words.

All anybody expected, assuming he was telling the truth and that there actually was such a rendezvous scheduled and he went to the wrong place, was a little fun, casual sex.
 
Honey123 said:
Hmmmm....never thought of it that way!

Still it just seems fishy.
Just a guess here, but I would assume that the police checked up on the real consentual victim, the woman he had been chatting with, to confirm that "Oops, wrong window" was not just a lame excuse on his behalf.

#L
 
We don't know the whole story, but from what Sher posted for us, I think it's going a bit far to suggest the mistaken identity victim is scarred for life. She had the strength and will to fight back, and now she needs to muster a little more to put all this behind her. And now she knows how the stupidity of others can put her at risk, she knows also how to improve her security. I'm with boxlicker on this one.

I've had a couple of girlfriends who wanted to be raped. There was something seriously wrong with each of them. Although one should certainly have been worth the effort in some ways, I didn't find it a satisfying experience. Outright consent reduces the value of the fantasy for them. They want to do it all with inuedno, so as the fantasy rapist you worry whether you are being set up by some weird form of femminazi. It's not a pleasant experience at all if you are half way normal.

This guy was stupid to go to this length, but how much jail time should he get for being stupid? After all, at least he didn't try to colonise Mesapotamia.
 
gauchecritic said:
I can't see what point your're trying to make here Lucky. He had to go to the house, he had to 'break in', he had to rape her. She is giving permission for all this. Ok so he is fulfilling his fantasy but he's simultaneously fulfilling or enabling hers.

Gauche

I just didn't care for the insinuation that this poor guy is getting trampled by the legal system because of this big favor he was doing for another woman. I did agree earlier that it seemed fully agreed to by both parties and that it wasn't only him. It just rubbed me the wrong way. I've had a friend severely pursued, stalked and almost raped by an internet acquaintance and I know how easy it is for people to get ahead of themselves when fantasies are being discussed. Shouldn't have let my emotions get in the way. Apologies.

If I'm perfectly honest, I think it's a pretty shitty turn of events that's landed him in the klink. Perhaps she (the consentual partner) should be charged with some sort of accessory charge to even the playing field, as it was most likely part her fault the addy's got mixed up as well. Unless the guy just refused to stop and ask for directions...(sorry, I shouldn't joke.)

Anyway, it is a weird and sad twist of events that landed an unsuspecting woman in the middle of a nightmare, as well as a man with seemingly good :rolleyes: intentions that went haywire with a bad address.

~lucky
 
Boxlicker101 said:
Lucky, you are quoting me as saying something I did not say. What I said was: "Apparently, the guy isn't really a criminal, anyhow, and he just made a mistake. He was just catering to the other woman's fantasy, although he expected to have a good time too." Instead of saying "a good time" I might have been more hyperbolic and said something like "a lot of fun, too". I can't help but think this is splitting hairs.

However, I never said or implied anything like: "God's gift to women[/i]-ish to me. He was her night in shining armor, her stallion of rape, her every dream made of abusive storming flesh". Those are your words.

All anybody expected, assuming he was telling the truth and that there actually was such a rendezvous scheduled and he went to the wrong place, was a little fun, casual sex.

Gimme a break, Box. Splitting hairs is what you live for. At any rate, I didn't change your wording around so much that it took on a different meaning, I was just too lazy to go back and quote you properly. Sorry for that, but the meaning didn't really change.

My 'God's gift to women-ish' comment, was and still is the impression I got from the tone of your post. I never said those were your words. But it really was just a matter of how I read it and you just explained there might have been a different/better way to say it. (As it is, it seems I'm the only one with a problem with it, so no worries.) This whole thing really is pointless without more facts, but from where I'm sitting the guy fucked up, whether honestly or otherwise and assaulted another woman in the process.

I find it sad that people don't really think she'd be rattled by such an occurance for long periods of time, even after finding out it was an 'accident'. I might look at it differently if any women thought they could shrug something like that off, but so far it's only been men. It's not like someone ran into her on the sidewalk and knocked her down. Someone accosted her in her place of residence and attempted to take something wholly personal from her that she could never get back. I'm also a little irritated that the assumption has been made that this should be looked upon as a positive experience for the unintended victim.

"Chin up, dear girl. You fought back and were able to stop the attack. Now you know how to better secure your apartment and deal with something of this nature in future."

Is this for real? I guess I don't see anything positive in the whole sordid tale, other than the fact that he stopped before actually raping her. But if I'm honest, it surprises me that he did. Maybe they had the details worked out and he figured out that the unintended girl wasn't playing along her part of the script. But it seems to me things had a lot more potential to go sour, as the entire purpose behind non-consent is not to take 'NO' for an answer.

I'm not looking to argue here, just attempting to explain how it looks to me. And obviously doing a piss poor job of it, so I'll rest now.

~lucky
 
Gary Chambers said:
We don't know the whole story, but from what Sher posted for us, I think it's going a bit far to suggest the mistaken identity victim is scarred for life. She had the strength and will to fight back, and now she needs to muster a little more to put all this behind her. And now she knows how the stupidity of others can put her at risk, she knows also how to improve her security. I'm with boxlicker on this one.

I've had a couple of girlfriends who wanted to be raped. There was something seriously wrong with each of them. Although one should certainly have been worth the effort in some ways, I didn't find it a satisfying experience. Outright consent reduces the value of the fantasy for them. They want to do it all with inuedno, so as the fantasy rapist you worry whether you are being set up by some weird form of femminazi. It's not a pleasant experience at all if you are half way normal.

This guy was stupid to go to this length, but how much jail time should he get for being stupid? After all, at least he didn't try to colonise Mesapotamia.

I think you're being a little idiotic, or maybe it's my veiw on the issue but if you love anyone that's ever been assaulted you would know telling them to buck up and walk it off is not how it works. Are you telling me if some one held you at knife point or gunpoint and literally had your life in their hands then said oopsie daisy wrong guy you'd just go on about your business as if it was just happenstance?
 
Gary Chambers said:
We don't know the whole story, but from what Sher posted for us, I think it's going a bit far to suggest the mistaken identity victim is scarred for life. She had the strength and will to fight back, and now she needs to muster a little more to put all this behind her. And now she knows how the stupidity of others can put her at risk, she knows also how to improve her security. I'm with boxlicker on this one.

I've had a couple of girlfriends who wanted to be raped. There was something seriously wrong with each of them. Although one should certainly have been worth the effort in some ways, I didn't find it a satisfying experience. Outright consent reduces the value of the fantasy for them. They want to do it all with inuedno, so as the fantasy rapist you worry whether you are being set up by some weird form of femminazi. It's not a pleasant experience at all if you are half way normal.

This guy was stupid to go to this length, but how much jail time should he get for being stupid? After all, at least he didn't try to colonise Mesapotamia.

Hi Gary Chambers! Didn't you just step out for a moment to buy a beer or something, and wasn't that back in 2003?

Without your thoughtful, well researched, dispassionate and yet persuasive posts on a variety of intellectually challenging topics, this place has gone to shit.

:D

Welcome back.

--------

Edited to add: One thing is virtually certain: the attack on his testicles was not part of his fantasy.
 
Last edited:
a little side-slip on the original subject

Gary Chambers said:
I've had a couple of girlfriends who wanted to be raped. There was something seriously wrong with each of them. Although one should certainly have been worth the effort in some ways, I didn't find it a satisfying experience. Outright consent reduces the value of the fantasy for them. They want to do it all with inuedno, so as the fantasy rapist you worry whether you are being set up by some weird form of femminazi. It's not a pleasant experience at all if you are half way normal.

I had one experience with someone who really wanted to go to this extreme and it took a possible relationship and turned it into a one night stand from my point of view. Although I was able to play along half-heartedly that night, it really freaked me out and I just was not comfortable with her after that.

I guess it was just too close to a line I would never want to cross. I've done some other things that other people might consider a little wacky, but I just could not deal with this one.
 
I think it is a lose-lose situation all round. Both are probably deeply scarred from this experience.

I think it is a strong possibility that the male, having realised his mistake, and stopped - yes, attacking his testicals might have made him realise faster, but he did stop - probably has to live with the fact that he almost raped someone, believing that is what they wished. He did wrong, and I would be very interested to see what his charges were reduced from rape to - assault? - and will be sentenced/punished accordingly. Even though the fantasy was to 'rape' a woman, in his mind it was still consensual, and to find out it wasn't isn't something you would get over easily.

But if it were a sick joke played by an unknown third parties, then I they are both victims, and that that third person should be charged with attempted rape.
 
There are a lot of tricky cases--taken up to the Supreme Court level-- when the accused rapist has stated that he believed there was consent; he just happened to be wrong.

In a few cases, that works as defense, but only where reasonable steps** were taken to ascertain consent.

OTOH, it does seem terribly traumatic; there is genuine damage, most likely.

One might picture oneself kidnapped by a person who thought he was staging it. I'd definitely feel wronged if I told him "Stop."

In the technical sense, I don't think the man had 'intent' to rape. But in previous criminal cases, lack of intent is NOT quite sufficient.

There are all kinds of cases involving 'recklessness' which result in criminal charges, like going 50 mph down a residential street to test your new car's acceleration, and hitting a kid by mistake.

What the man did was negligent/reckless as to ascertaining consent. He is a rapist by negligence (out of recklessness), as it were (assuming the story checked out).

I think I'd want my (mistaken) kidnapper to do some time; this guy should; he got a rather good deal in being sent up for a non sexual offense.

My 2 cents.

=====

PS. An analysis in terms of 'recklessness' deals with the 'sick joke' possibility. That circumstance, if true, would be irrelevant.
Again, think "If I were kidnapped, and the person doing it was told to do so by someone as part of a joke or scene, that someone claiming I consented." So what.

Added: The approach deals with the question, Is he dangerous? I think the answer is 'yes'. Like the man in the speeding car. He's less dangerous than a serial rapist, but dangerous. Also, in terms of the law, there should be 'deterrence' of others who might claim 'it was all a game (from my pov)'



**That being an objective judgement; what a reasonable person would do.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top