[Ladbarbastirm]

Originally posted by Cort Haus
What a law is "going for" and how it actually gets applied are not the same thing, surely? How does it define 'drunk', as I asked above?

It's like introducing anti-terror laws that are "going for" terrorists but end up being used against all sorts of basically harmless people. Well,

It will also introduce an "objective fault test", meaning a man can no longer use the defence that he thought he had consent if the circumstances appear unreasonable.

I'm thinking that simply having sex with a woman who's had a few too many beers won't be seen by juries as unreasonable. However, preying on the women who are falling down drunk will.

Oz, being a common law country, will probably shape the law into defining unreasonableness as the seedy folk. So, I agree with the person in the article in the OP who says the bar association is really going nuts for no reason.