Slog

Slog Music

Music, Nightlife,
and Drunks

Monday, June 20, 2011

Will Levi Be Prosecuted?

Posted by on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:48 AM

If you have sex with a person who is "mentally incapable; incapacitated; or unaware that a sexual act is being committed," then Alaska—quite rightly—says you're guilty of criminal sexual assault. And the statute of limitations hasn't run out on that night in the tent:

Under Alaska Statutes §12.10.010 prosecution [of sexual assault] may commence up to 10 years after the commission of the offense.

So will Levi be arrested? Will be he prosecuted? Will he go to jail?

 

Comments (42) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
"statute of limitation"? Jesus christ, stick to writing about Santorum, you useless, uneducated prick. You are dumber than a bag of fucking rocks.
Posted by Passed The Bar Exam! on June 20, 2011 at 11:51 AM · Report this
2
WTF are you talking about? Am I missing something here? Tents?
Posted by seattlebikeguy on June 20, 2011 at 11:52 AM · Report this
3
@2: Maybe try clicking the links Dan provided for you?
Posted by suddenlyorcas on June 20, 2011 at 11:57 AM · Report this
keshmeshi 4
@3,

The links don't link back to the original story.
Posted by keshmeshi on June 20, 2011 at 12:00 PM · Report this
despicable me 5
I wonder how many high school kids across America would have suffered the same fate over the last 50+ years? It would be in the millions I'm guessing.
Posted by despicable me on June 20, 2011 at 12:01 PM · Report this
Fifty-Two-Eighty 6
I certainly wouldn't charge him. With no evidence, this comes down to "he said, she said," and those types of things generally have a pretty poor conviction rate.
Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty http://www.nra.org on June 20, 2011 at 12:01 PM · Report this
7
But I thought you thought she's a lying slut Danny Boy?

Dan, you're backing out faster than someone who's had a run-in with Joan Jett Blakk at the Manhole.
Posted by Is she a lyin' slut or not Dan? on June 20, 2011 at 12:06 PM · Report this
8
The fuck is this about?
Posted by The CHZA on June 20, 2011 at 12:07 PM · Report this
9
Where did the alcohol come from? Shouldn't one of the parents be arrested for providing alcohol access to a minor as well?
Posted by Drew2u on June 20, 2011 at 12:10 PM · Report this
10
@3 - Maybe try fucking yourself?

In related solutions, I solved my own mystery:

http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…

Sorry for being an hour out of date, it will never happen again.
Posted by seattlebikeguy on June 20, 2011 at 12:12 PM · Report this
rockshrine 11
@6 I agree.
There's also chance that she's lying (or maybe twisting the story to appear victimized) and getting some media attention for her and her mother.
And she doesn't need to prosecute to create another Palin media storm.
Posted by rockshrine on June 20, 2011 at 12:12 PM · Report this
TortoiseTurtle 12
Has anyone asked if Levi gave consent, or whether he was capable of giving consent at the time?
Posted by TortoiseTurtle http://slog.thestranger.com on June 20, 2011 at 12:17 PM · Report this
13

Being unable to remember what happened due to alcohol does not mean that she was passed out or incapacitated to the point where she was unaware that the sex was happening at the time. Alcohol can put you in a perfectly conscious & apparently responsive state with no short term memories recorded. That's called a blackout.

It is different from being passed out.

It is not statutory rape because she was 15 & he was 16. There is a "Romeo & Juliet" clause in Alaska law. It's only statutory rape when one partner is below the age of consent (16) and the other is 3 or more years older.

I think if there was any way Palin could have spun this as rape, she would have done it already.
Posted by Robby on June 20, 2011 at 12:18 PM · Report this
14
this is a bitchy, bitchy thread.
Posted by Adrian Ryan on June 20, 2011 at 12:22 PM · Report this
15
Ew. Dan, I no more want to think about Republicans having sex than most of them want to think about two men having sex. I'm going to pretend I never read this article.
Posted by Prettybetsy on June 20, 2011 at 12:25 PM · Report this
Fnarf 16
@13, a blackout state is very unlikely in a first-time drinker drinking wine coolers. How many did she have, anyways?

I think her claim is worth hearing but it needs to stand up to scrutiny too. They sure didn't look like rapist-and-victim during the time they were together, though that could have been for the campaign. And the stories we've heard up until now sound more like regular ol' horny teenagers. She just doesn't seem like someone who's been incubating a rape grudge for all these years; quite the opposite.

What this really looks like is payback for Levi's public remarks about Mommy.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on June 20, 2011 at 12:30 PM · Report this
17
Sarah and Todd allowed Levi to sleep/fuck in their daughter's bed for over a year. If he is charged, they should be too for facilitating his rapes of their daughter. Though no one would be surprised if Sarah tried to claim it was abstinent bed sharing the whole time.
Posted by SoSea Resident on June 20, 2011 at 12:32 PM · Report this
18
@7: No, he's not backing out. I think Dan's main point is that if she's going to accuse Levi of rape, back it up by bringing a formal charge and calling for an investigation! Don't just run to the media with it like her mother.
Posted by Nandor on June 20, 2011 at 12:36 PM · Report this
Supreme Ruler Of The Universe 19
This part seems unreadable:


(1) the offender engages in sexual penetration with another person without consent of that person;

(2) the offender attempts to engage in sexual penetration with another person without consent of that person and causes serious physical injury to that person;


The "and" clause in (2) seems extraneous given that it repeats (1).

Conversely, if it doesn't cause injury, then (2) is invalid...or is that the point?
Posted by Supreme Ruler Of The Universe http://www.you-read-it-here-first.com on June 20, 2011 at 12:46 PM · Report this
The Wretched Harmony 20
Is it the prerogative of rape victims to take it to the media and not press charges if they so choose?

It's much easier to defend against a defamation suit if you've got rape conviction, or a prosecution, or at least a formal complaint, to back it up. Obviously. But if a rape victim wants to take that risk, can they?

And if she's lying, well... people with deep pockets shouldn't throw stones.
Posted by The Wretched Harmony on June 20, 2011 at 12:46 PM · Report this
21
Danny, you need to teach your boy-crush Levi that anal rape is 100% safe effective birth control.....
Posted by us on June 20, 2011 at 12:50 PM · Report this
Fnarf 22
@19, can you not read? What it's saying is that ATTEMPTED penetration without consent is rape too, if there's serious injury.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on June 20, 2011 at 12:53 PM · Report this
Supreme Ruler Of The Universe 23
@22 and Euler's Number

Does "and" now mean the same thing as "or"?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Xee8wEMT…

Posted by Supreme Ruler Of The Universe http://www.you-read-it-here-first.com on June 20, 2011 at 12:59 PM · Report this
24
@22 Fnarf, stick to being an Ave Rat loser. You sure as fuck ain't a lawyer, ya fat fuck!
Posted by And lose some weight, you uneducated biatch! on June 20, 2011 at 1:01 PM · Report this
BEG 25
I gotta say, my first time involved alcohol and a tent, too.

Anyway, per 19, seems clear enough to me.

1) says penetration without consent is rape,

plus ("or", if you like)

2) no penetration (eg, attempted penetration) but in the course of trying to penetrate, some other injury occurs, is also rape.

#2 isn't repeating anything in #1, since #1 covers cases where penetration occurs, and #2 is covering some cases where penetration doesn't occur (but was attempted).
Posted by BEG http://twitter.com/#!/browneyedgirl65 on June 20, 2011 at 1:10 PM · Report this
26
@22, @23, @24 Your reading comprehension is not quite up to par. Thanks Fnarf.
Posted by new york state of mind on June 20, 2011 at 1:13 PM · Report this
27

@16 I'm not sure how likely or un a blackout is in the case of a first time young drinker. In the absence of someone testifying that Bristol was unconscious/unresponsive it's at least a reasonable possibility.

It's also a reasonable possibility that Bristol is just lying now about how drunk she was at the time, considering politics & her current job as a sexual abstinence spokesmodel ...

"I don't remember" is so easy to say & impossible to disprove.
Posted by Robby on June 20, 2011 at 1:39 PM · Report this
28
given that Bristol doesn't call it rape, and she just claimed she had a blackout not she was passed out (according to the AP article), then I say it wasn't sexual assault. If Bristol called it rape then it would be another matter and certainly something for Alaskan authorities to take seriously.
Posted by IowaIan on June 20, 2011 at 2:12 PM · Report this
mr. herriman 29
i am inclined to think she's just trying to come off like she was manipulated in hopes that she is given a pass on the sex-having. she doesn't want to see him get in *real* trouble, she's just throwing him under the bus to salvage her reputation, likely as a favor to her mother. over-consumption of wine coolers and getting lured into sin is not nearly as scandalous as actively wanting sex and then having it.
Posted by mr. herriman on June 20, 2011 at 2:29 PM · Report this
30
I have to agree with @28 and @29. If there had been the slightest indication it was rape Palin would have brought it up a long time ago.

Can you say "sick of hearing about the Palins in AK"?
Posted by AKTheresa on June 20, 2011 at 2:39 PM · Report this
31
Palin is sounding a lot like every chick in America who wishes she could revise her prior consensual sexual history. The presence of booze somewhere in the vicinity, which she may have take a few sips of, morphs into "I was soooooo drunk, I was not responsible."

Bull. Fucking. Shit. It takes some serious boozing to get that drunk, and first timers will be blowing chunks. This sounds like another case of a woman making shit up, after she wishes she hadn't done it.

The only thing missing is her going to a Take Back the Night Rally, er, Slutwalk, er, Second Virginity Church Meeting, er delusional whatever and claiming victim status.

You guys, you know what I am talking about.
Posted by Let the flames begin on June 20, 2011 at 3:04 PM · Report this
32
Dan,

You're asking the wrong people.

It seems to me that someone associated with a newspaper could and should call the police and prosecutor's office asking for statements on the state of the investigation and if or when charges will be filed.
Posted by We can be outraged once we have their answers on June 20, 2011 at 3:26 PM · Report this
33
But here's the question to me: if Bristol is not calling this rape, if she's not bringing it up... then what's the point of the 'revelation' in her book? Just to get people talking about the possibility that it was rape, without saying it so herself? She has to know that someone is going to ask her the question 'will you press charges?' at some point. Right?
Posted by ankylosaur on June 20, 2011 at 4:37 PM · Report this
34
As I said before, a hangover related memory gap doesn't exactly mean she wasn't consenting (and awake) at the time.
Posted by illDottore on June 20, 2011 at 5:10 PM · Report this
35
@34 If you can't remember what happened last night you were not only far too drunk to consent it's also about time to start an exercise program, one that involves climbing 12 steps.
Posted by redwulf25_ci on June 20, 2011 at 7:16 PM · Report this
Free Lunch 36
@35 - I normally have two cocktails when I go out, and I stop at that. On Saturday night, I had four.

I don't remember paying my bill (I did - the bartender said I seemed normal enough), riding my bike to the grocery store and buying dinner (the receipt and trash show that I did), or riding my bike home, eating, locking up, brushing my teeth, etc., all of which I did.

I clearly wasn't too drunk to do any of those things, yet don't remember any of it. But you're saying I would have been too drunk to consent to sex?

I'm not saying I don't need a 12-step program. But there's a difference between being blacked out and being incapacitated. And I'm guessing there is a difference between having one's judgement impaired (which can happen after a beer or two) and being physically impaired.
Posted by Free Lunch on June 20, 2011 at 8:07 PM · Report this
37
@36: "But you're saying I would have been too drunk to consent to sex?"

Legally, depending on the jurisdiction, you might be considered too drunk to consent. But realistically, if you wake up the next day, realize what happened with no memory of it, and think, "Oh, I guess I decided to get laid," that's essentially consent. Call it retroactive consent if you'd like; it's perfectly valid. But if you said, "Holy shit, I didn't want to fuck anyone, I got taken advantage of," that would be valid as well.

The law isn't supposed to dictate your capabilities. It's there to protect people in vulnerable situations from predators who would love nothing more than to play the what-counts-as-consent game in order to escape any repercussions. If it seems unfair that a person could consent to sex with you and then turn around and have legal grounds for claiming rape, well, don't fuck anybody who's that drunk and whose intent you're not sure you can trust. That should be logical.

That said, if I'm reading Dan's law link correctly, it doesn't appear Levi could get busted for anything. "Unaware that a sexual act is being committed" could include being passed out drunk, but the law continues: "...and (A) the offender is a health care worker, and (B) the offense takes place during the course of professional treatment o the victim." It may be that being passed out means you can't consent somewhere in the Alaskan legal code, but it doesn't look like it says that here.
Posted by Spiffy McBang on June 20, 2011 at 9:35 PM · Report this
38
I'm pretty sure Bristol is "mentally incapable", so the debate about how drunk she was is beside the point. When will that horrid family stop inflicting itself on the public? Maybe all this Palin crap will endure forever. Nightmare.
Posted by Suzy on June 21, 2011 at 11:40 AM · Report this
39
@35: Well, I checked out the AA's 12-step-program on wikipedia and for what it's worth, thanks to 6.5 of the 12 steps (#2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11 & first half of #12) I would have to stay an alcoholic - or, you know, get my lazyass self control out of its coma mode and yeah, eventually seek some outside help. Just not outside the physical world.

36 already explained the rest for me, thanks 36.
Posted by illDottore on June 21, 2011 at 1:24 PM · Report this
dangerkitty5000 40
Maybe she just forgot that Wasilla residents were no longer required to pay for their own rape kits.
Posted by dangerkitty5000 http://www.ababblingbrookofbullshit.blogspot.com/ on June 22, 2011 at 11:43 AM · Report this
TreGibbs 41
Please - she's a liar just like her mother.
Posted by TreGibbs on June 22, 2011 at 12:40 PM · Report this
TreGibbs 42
Here's another comment: FUCK YOU JOHN MCCAIN !!! You've unleashed this 'shit for brains' family, this pack of manipulating LIARS on THE ENTIRE COUNTRY. For that, you should be imprisoned for treason....you bastard.
Posted by TreGibbs on June 22, 2011 at 12:44 PM · Report this

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!


All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy