‘Imposter’ wins rape appeal as victim was unmarried
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A California appeals court has overturned the rape conviction of a man who had sex with a sleeping woman on the basis of legislation dating to 1872, which says only married women are protected from rape by “imposters”.
At a house party in Cerrito in northern California in 2009, the 18-year-old woman went to bed with her boyfriend, who later left her asleep.
Julio Morales, a friend of the woman’s brother, entered the room and began to have sex with her. Only when light from the open bedroom door fell across his face did she realise he was not her boyfriend, at which point, the court documents record, “she pushed him away again and began to cry and yell”.
Morales was convicted of rape and sentenced to three years in prison. However, a three-judge panel “reluctantly” reversed the decision because, under California law, the impersonation ruling only applies if the victim is a married woman.
In their judgment, the appeals panel said its ruling hinged on “historical anomalies in the law” and “...if the woman had been married and the man had impersonated her husband” then the previous ruling would have been upheld. A new trial has been ordered.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments