mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES003/DOJ-OGR-00006278.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "10 of 29",
    "document_number": "424-3",
    "date": "11/08/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 424-3 Filed 11/08/21 Page 10 of 29\n104\nJ. Engle and W. O'Donohue\nDenial of Consent\nA key issue in sexual assault is whether consent was given for the sexual contact. Consent is complex and, in real-world situations, may have significant variability and may be rather subtle and, in general, an intricate process. Rarely do sexual interactions begin with individuals explicitly stating \"I give you permission to do x, y, and z\" (Hall, 1998). Consent in sexual situations is often implied, sometimes by the absence of a negative (\"She didn't say no or move away\") or inferred (\"She seems to be enjoying this\" or \"We did this in the past so I assumed she was ok with it\"). Hickman and Muehlenhard (1999) found that nonverbal tactics were used more often than verbal consent. Consent is thought to involve both knowledge of what is being consented to and a belief that the person is free to either assent or not. Thus, a claim of lack of consent can also come from the person's \"feeling trapped\" or \"coerced,\" which, again, the two parties may interpret differently. However, mistakes can be made in these situations and given the motivations of the parties, these mistakes can be motivated (\"I want this, so I interpret her silence as consent\" or \"She was free to leave at anytime; I was on top of her because I thought she wanted that\").\nUnderstanding whether consent was given is made more complex by the fact that consent early in the interaction for a certain kind of sexual contact is not consent for any and all further sexual contact in that episode. In addition, consent for the same act (consent last week) is not consent for all future contact. This complexity led to the infamous Antioch College consent policy that stated that there were multiple levels of sexual intimacy and every time someone wants to proceed to another level, they must explicitly ask and receive explicit verbal permission to proceed to this level (Francis, 1996):\n\nIf the level of sexual intimacy increases during an interaction (i.e., if two people move from kissing while fully clothed—which is one level—to undressing for direct physical contact, which is another level), the people involved need to express their clear verbal consent before moving to that new level. If one person wants to initiate moving to a higher level of sexual intimacy in an interaction, that person is responsible for getting the verbal consent of the other person(s) involved before moving to that level. (p. 137)\n\nThis policy was critiqued on the grounds of its impracticality, but it raises the question how explicit and how often does consent need to be conveyed? This ambiguity creates a pathway for a false allegation in which the alleged victim engaged in behaviors that can plausibly be interpreted as providing consent, but the victim herself may not understand or realize this. Thus, a false allegation can arise when it was reasonable to believe consent was given but the alleged victim falsely believes that it was not.\nDOJ-OGR-00006278",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 424-3 Filed 11/08/21 Page 10 of 29",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "104\nJ. Engle and W. O'Donohue",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Denial of Consent\nA key issue in sexual assault is whether consent was given for the sexual contact. Consent is complex and, in real-world situations, may have significant variability and may be rather subtle and, in general, an intricate process. Rarely do sexual interactions begin with individuals explicitly stating \"I give you permission to do x, y, and z\" (Hall, 1998). Consent in sexual situations is often implied, sometimes by the absence of a negative (\"She didn't say no or move away\") or inferred (\"She seems to be enjoying this\" or \"We did this in the past so I assumed she was ok with it\"). Hickman and Muehlenhard (1999) found that nonverbal tactics were used more often than verbal consent. Consent is thought to involve both knowledge of what is being consented to and a belief that the person is free to either assent or not. Thus, a claim of lack of consent can also come from the person's \"feeling trapped\" or \"coerced,\" which, again, the two parties may interpret differently. However, mistakes can be made in these situations and given the motivations of the parties, these mistakes can be motivated (\"I want this, so I interpret her silence as consent\" or \"She was free to leave at anytime; I was on top of her because I thought she wanted that\").",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Understanding whether consent was given is made more complex by the fact that consent early in the interaction for a certain kind of sexual contact is not consent for any and all further sexual contact in that episode. In addition, consent for the same act (consent last week) is not consent for all future contact. This complexity led to the infamous Antioch College consent policy that stated that there were multiple levels of sexual intimacy and every time someone wants to proceed to another level, they must explicitly ask and receive explicit verbal permission to proceed to this level (Francis, 1996):",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "If the level of sexual intimacy increases during an interaction (i.e., if two people move from kissing while fully clothed—which is one level—to undressing for direct physical contact, which is another level), the people involved need to express their clear verbal consent before moving to that new level. If one person wants to initiate moving to a higher level of sexual intimacy in an interaction, that person is responsible for getting the verbal consent of the other person(s) involved before moving to that level. (p. 137)",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "This policy was critiqued on the grounds of its impracticality, but it raises the question how explicit and how often does consent need to be conveyed? This ambiguity creates a pathway for a false allegation in which the alleged victim engaged in behaviors that can plausibly be interpreted as providing consent, but the victim herself may not understand or realize this. Thus, a false allegation can arise when it was reasonable to believe consent was given but the alleged victim falsely believes that it was not.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00006278",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Hall",
      "Hickman",
      "Muehlenhard",
      "Francis",
      "J. Engle",
      "W. O'Donohue"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Antioch College",
      "DOJ"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "1996",
      "1998",
      "1999",
      "11/08/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "424-3",
      "DOJ-OGR-00006278"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a sexual assault case, discussing the complexities of consent in sexual interactions. The text is well-formatted and mostly free of errors or redactions."
}