The Minnesota Supreme Court just made it harder to prosecute rapists.
In an unanimous 6-0 decision last Wednesday, the court ruled that someone who is “voluntarily intoxicated” cannot be the victim of felony rape.
The decision centers on whether a woman can consent to sex when’s she drunk. The court ruled that if the woman chose to get inebriated, she is not “mentally incapacitated,” and therefore the question of her ability to consent is off the table.
The Minnesota Star Tribune explains, “Based on the court’s interpretation, a person who sexually assaults a voluntarily intoxicated person would likely face a gross misdemeanor, rather than a felony, meaning they would not be placed on the Minnesota Predatory Offender Registry.”
The Washington Post outlines the horrific details of the sexual assault that prompted the court case:
After a 20-year-old woman took five shots of vodka and a prescription pill, she said she was standing outside a Minneapolis bar in May 2017 when a man invited her and a friend to a party. She agreed but soon found out there was no gathering, she later testified.
She “blacked out” instead, waking up on a couch and found that the man she had just met was allegedly sexually assaulting her, according to court records.
Almost four years later, the Minnesota Supreme Court unanimously ruled this weekthat Francios Momolu Khalil, 24, cannot be found guilty of rape because the woman got drunk voluntarily beforehand. The decision Wednesday overturned Khalil’s prior conviction of third-degree criminal sexual conduct, which had been upheld by an appeals court, and granted him the right to a new trial.
If Khalil is re-tried and convicted of the lesser misdemeanor charge, he would face up to one year in prison and a fine of up to $3,000. When his victim woke up while he was raping her, she told him to stop. According to court documents, he replied “But you’re so hot and you turn me on.”
In their written opinion, the Minnesota Supreme Court took pains to point out that they were merely interpreting the existing law. They highlighted that other states have more robust protections for inebriated rape victims and added, “but today we undertake the task of interpreting the definition of “mentally incapacitated” that the Minnesota Legislature enacted.”
Lauren Rimestad, spokeswoman for the Minnesota Coalition Against Sexual Assault, told the Minnesota Star Tribune, “This has been a problem specific to Minnesota for a long time. [The court’s] decision just clarifies that our law needs to be fixed through the Legislature, not through courts.”
The Minnesota Star Tribune adds additional context:
More than a half-dozen states, including Wisconsin, have laws on the books that outlaw engaging in sexual contact with a person who is too intoxicated to consent. But Minnesota’s statute makes it “difficult to impossible” to successfully prosecute these cases, said Rimestad.
Kelly Moller, a member of Minnesota’s House of Representatives and a county prosecutor, has introduced a bill that would close the intoxication loophole.
