The case of the State v Rusk involved the defendant Edward Rusk being convicted of 2nd degree rape. There was controversy as to if the defendant actually committed the act of rape due to the circumstances.
The case involves a female named Pat. She decides to meet up one night with her friend Terry and go bar hopping. While at the third bar, the defendant (Rusk) comes up to Pat and Terry. Terry is having a conversation with another individual when Rusk interrupts them. Terry acknowledges Rusk and then continues on with her conversation with the individual. Rusk starts talking to Pat and eventually requests Pat to take him home. Pat, thinking that her friend Terry knew him, since she acknowledged him, decides it will be okay to take him home. Pat drives Rusk to his apartment and once there, Rusk continually ask Pat to come inside. Pat continually refuses until Rusk takes Pat’s car keys, exits the vehicle and then comes around to her side of the car and asks her
…show more content…
Rusk appealed the decision saying to be convicted of rape, he would have had to have used force or or without the consent of the victim which he said none of those things happened. The appellate court found not enough evidence to prove Pat was a victim of rape and overturned the conviction. The prosecutor then appealed that decision by the court and was sent to the Maryland Supreme Court. The Supreme Court found that threats of force need not be made in an particular manner in order to put a person in fear of bodily harm (Brody and Acker, 2010). One of the judges even emphasized the absence of “force, or violence, or anything that would lead you to believe that this act was done against somebody’s will or consent (Suk, 2012). Since the Supreme Court felt that the fear Pat felt during the incident, was enough to be validation of the law and therefore overturned the Appellate Court’s decision and found Rusk to be guilty of 2nd degree