不知道這則新聞有沒有在香港被報導過。原文：Damned by the law for saying "I can't remember，2006年6月25日，觀察者。未必譯得妥當，請看原文，並指教一下小妹。
Judith (化名) 在一個大學派對中喝了太多酒，並被什麼人幹了。之後她控告那人強暴她，但這引起了一場關於「同意」的國際性討論。現在，先聽聽她的苦難吧。
大概是2005年5月中的一個晚上，Judith離開派對，回到她在威爾斯西部Aberystwyth的學生宿舍。她喝得很醉。很久之後，她在她房間外的走廊醒了，並發現有人企圖和她發生性行為。之後更發現那人確實和她發生過性行為。她知道她不會同意在走廊做愛，或者最少，她並不記得－－如果她不記得，那麼那人－－或任何一個人－－怎麼能嘗試和她做愛？這明顯是強暴。
她向法庭提出訴訟，故事很快便成為全世界多份報章的頭條，引起公眾強烈的關注，法律界和政府高層出現大量的爭論。爭論的結果在對法律中的檢視中扮演了重要的角色。
這個戲劇性的22歲女大學生事件成了著名的個案。她申辯，她被一個兼職保安員強暴，而因為他作為一個大學的職員而被要求護送她回家。
但她在參加考試後再記不起她當時有否同意過和他發生性行為－－她是在沒有進一步證據下提出進行起訴。「醉了時的同意也是同意。」一名法官在去年11月，Swansea 人民法院向陪審團指出，「甚至，」法官向陪審員說，「即使你不同意。」
被指強暴的是一個21歲的Ruairi Dougal。他在案件後(case collapsed?)發表宣言，他堅決否認他在Judith沒有意識和同意下和她發生性行為。「Ruairi Dougal 一直都是在原告的同意下和她做愛。性交時，她是完全知道什麼事情在發生。」Ruairi Dougal的律師David James說。
「一個女人不能因喝得太醉而不記得發生什麼事，就指一個人強暴了她」，法官在判詞中清淅地帶出這層含意，這把Judith 推到輿論風暴的中心。有人指責她是一個「胡鬧的醉酒瘋婦」，不負責任。在經歷一番輿論攻勢蹂躪之後，Judith 第一次同意講述她的故事。
「這幾天我的心是完全碎了，我只懂得大叫和痛哭，」她說，「我不明白這一切。很老實說，法庭的判決比那些攻擊更使人傷心，它使我感到我是一文不值的。」
「檢控官說，當我承認我並不記得當時的決定，我把我推到我因酒醉而忘了我答應還是拒絕的境地。他說，所以我被假設了是同意的。」
訪問將會在今晚的BBC's Panorama節目中播出，而我是訪問她的記者，這是一個為了探討強暴罪低定罪率的節目的一部份。當我在衛報發表了一些關於很難使強暴犯入罪的文章後，BBC就找我商量這個節目。
節目在以後其他的星期中還會播放，當強暴依然出現在新聞之中(The programme comes after another week when rape is in the news)。幾星期前，本地一份官方報告指出，在六年前，政府己著手處理強暴的低定罪率和堵塞「迴避，狡滑和頑固」的辯護律師把強暴受害者描繪成水性楊花的。
Judith 說現行的法律是病態的，和她的個案向公眾說明了罪犯能逃避他們的罪行。她還說，法律不能保護被強暴的人，和害怕他的個案會讓強暴犯學會如何辯護。
「這是個屈辱的經驗。我誠實得不敢讓我媽踏進法庭，因為我說了些很可怕、很個人的東西。這些甚至連我的家人都不知道。但法庭只讓我感到，我只是一個喝了太多酒、自作孽的蠢女孩。」
「沒有東西能制止強暴了。連法律也好像在保護他們。像我這樣一個證據確鑿的案件(a case as strong as mine)，只要改變一下措辭，罪犯就能逍遙法外，真的天知道，它在給我們一些什麼訊息。」
有一些英國的司法和治安權威人物支持她的說法。「這裁決是錯，也是十分值的關注的。它對法律的理解不見得無可質疑。」deputy assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police and the director of serious and organised crime for the capital's police force 的John Yates說。
擔任Solicitor-General 的 Mike O'Brien 說他正為這件事困擾。他正準備一份將會在秋天出版，關於加大法律對強暴犯的執法和關懷的咨詢文件(consultation paper)。Judith's 的事會是一個標準。
'The issue of capacity, particularly where a woman has drunk alcohol, should be clearly defined,' he said, arguing that while he was not suggesting guilt on the part of Dougal, the jury should have been allowed to decide whether or not the woman had been capable of giving consent while drunk.
「這件事將會擺在陪審員面前。他們應該自己小心留意受害者是否能作出有效的同意，而不是讓檢控官或者法官撤銷案件。」
Tonight's tracks the cases of three women who fought to put their alleged rapists in the dock. One says she was bullied and humiliated by a policewoman into dropping her claim, while another was told by the Crown Prosecution Service that a minor discrepancy in her witness statements made her case too weak to take to court. Judith, whose case was one of the 12 per cent of all reported allegations that go to trial, says her experience of court was so traumatic that if she were in the same position again, she would be extremely unlikely to turn to the law.
It is not the first time Panorama has dealt with this issue. In 1982, a seminal film transformed the way that rape investigations were conducted in Britain. Roger Graef and Charles Stewart's documentary, A Complaint Of Rape, showed Thames Valley police officers interviewing a woman who claimed she had been raped by two men she had met in a pub. Graef has returned to the subject to direct this new investigation.
Filmed with the full knowledge of the officers involved, the Eighties documentary revealed a police force told that the majority of rape complaints were false. They were trained to test such claims rigorously at the earliest stage in a manner that was intimidating, humiliating and terrifying for victims. As a direct result of that documentary, rape crisis centres were developed and police were retrained to handle complainants with respect and an initial presumption of belief. Improvements have continued: the Sexual Offences Act 2003 clarified the law on consent, 14 Sexual Assault Referral Centres have been set up across England and Wales, with six more in the pipeline. But why is the conviction rate for rape at an all-time low? In 1985, 1,800 complaints of rape were made and one in four men were convicted. In 2003 - the latest figures available - 13,000 complaints were made but just one in 20 men were convicted.
累，有興趣自己看原文Damned by the law for saying "I can't remember。
在GTalk 裡的對話：
As a punishment from the gods for his trickery, Sisyphus was compelled to roll a huge rock up a steep hill, but before he reached the top of the hill the rock always escaped him and he had to begin again.
但看看，這便是匠心獨運，把永恆化作數量。從大石的堆積，我們就看得出Sisyphus的命運。大量和無限只一線之差，在臨界點之河，此岸是人的世界，可以理解、可以說明，而彼岸則是無法理解、無法說明。把Sisyphus從彼岸拉回來，Sisyphus站在此岸。
