The bride entered the wrong room on her wedding night and married the best man by mistake. Does the best man constitute rape?

In Napo County, Guangxi, the groom Mr. Wu and the bride Ms. Feng held a wedding. In the middle of the night, the bride, Ms. Feng, went to the toilet and strayed into the best man's room. The bride mistook the best man for her husband and took the initiative to touch the best man. They had sex.

When she woke up the next day, the bride reported that she had been raped. After investigation, the public security organ thinks that the best man does not constitute rape and will not file a case. After the bride, Ms. Feng filed a criminal private prosecution and the court finally ruled that the best man was not guilty.

Some people think that the court's judgment is wrong and the best man constitutes rape 1. They believe that the constitution of rape crime does not necessarily require the victim woman to resist or resist, and it cannot be considered as "consent" or "voluntary" without resistance. In some cases, it is necessary to examine whether the victimized woman dares to resist and whether she has the consciousness of resisting (such as being drunk or being drugged).

2. The essential feature of rape is the occurrence of sexual acts against women's will. In layman's terms, the perpetrator is not the sexual object they want. On the surface, although the bride, Ms. Feng, was active and always voluntary, the best man did not use any violence or coercion. However, rape has "other means" besides violence and coercion.

In judicial practice, the criminal suspect pretends to be a woman's husband and has sex with him, which is considered as rape. The two are very similar. So the best man should also constitute rape.

3. In this case, from the common sense, on the wedding night, in the groom's house, the bride can't take the initiative to do it with the best man, but the bride mistakenly thinks that the best man is the groom, which is a typical cognitive object error. But the best man made a mistake and had sex with him. This is actually the "other means" stipulated in the criminal law to realize the crime of rape.

I think this view is debatable. 1. Judging from the constitution of rape, the best man did not rape the bride intentionally. In this case, the bride, Ms. Feng, went to the best man's bed in the wrong room and took the initiative to touch the best man. The bride, Ms. Feng, has always been voluntary and does not have the elements of rape. Although it is immoral for the best man to make a mistake, it does not constitute rape. Especially in the whole process, the best man was passive, and he didn't commit rape on purpose.

2. The best man's behavior in this case is not harmful to society, and does not have the nature of being punished according to the criminal law. From the perspective of criminal law and legislative theory, rape is a crime that seriously endangers personal safety and completely violates the will of the victimized woman. Therefore, it is very harmful to the victimized women themselves and society, so it is the object of severe punishment by criminal law.

But judging from this case, this result was not the best man's intention, and he did not commit social harm. Therefore, his behavior does not constitute a crime.

3. This case is essentially different from the crime of impersonating a female husband. The best man didn't take the initiative to carry out and pursue this result when he had sex with the bride. In judicial practice, other people who pretend to be female husbands or who are accepted by other female victims rape women on their own initiative.

The best man in this case not only didn't have the idea of having sex with the bride, but also didn't take the initiative to implement it. If the bride hadn't entered the wrong room and gone to the wrong bed, it wouldn't have happened at all.

4. The view that the best man constitutes the crime of rape is the result of mechanically applying the theory of criminal law, which is neither in line with the legislative spirit of criminal law nor based on public opinion. It is conceivable that if the judge in this case accepts the above-mentioned first viewpoint and makes a judgment accordingly, I wonder how much earthquake will be triggered in the network. In fact, judicial decisions that are divorced from life, violate legal principles and do not respect public opinion are dangerous. The "Peng Yu case" in Nanjing in those days was a lesson from the past.