From: Terah
I heard this story from a coworker, about her husband. It happened before they even met, but I thought it was kind of funny, despite how it went down.
Mr. PJ and a couple of his friends got drunk one day, and decided to go to the well-known sex shop in town and look around. Now, at this place if you go in with a purse or any kind of bag, you leave them at the counter and get them when you leave. As they decided to head out, his female friend asked for her purse back.
And the dude said ‘no’.
Now, Mr. PJ didn’t stop to listen if there was a valid reason behind the ‘no’. As he later explains, for all he knew, there was a legitimate reason behind the ‘no’ and the dude was about to continue explaining something that made a lot of sense, but all Mr. PJ heard was ‘no’ and he didn’t like the fact they weren’t giving his female friend her purse back as she asked for it.
He grabbed the nearest item he could find, which happened to be a very large dildo, and smacked the man across the face with it, threw it down, grabbed the purse, and bolted.
He’s now banned from the store for life for it.
So I wonder, would that count as SEXUAL assault and battery, or just REGULAR assault and battery?
--Terah
Regular assault. The guy grabed the nearest object and had no intent on any sexual advances.
This is my own opinion and I am not a lawyer by any means.
Posted by: Kel | Monday, March 04, 2013 at 06:12 AM
In the context of the situation I would call it regular assault & battery. But I'm also not a lawyer of any kind.
Posted by: Nomnom | Monday, March 04, 2013 at 06:16 AM
Well, I'm not a lawyer either, but I am a future LEO. This is a simple battery case. There is no sexual intent, his intent was to wang te guy across the face.
However since they banned him from the store, they likely won't pursue any charges against him unless he tries to come back.
Posted by: Theguy | Monday, March 04, 2013 at 06:24 AM
720 ILCS 5/11-1.20 outlines sexual assault and 720 ILCS 5/12-3.05 outlines battery; both of these are for Illinois, but I can't imagine other states being much different. I'm not giving legal advice, but look here or in your state statutes, all of which can be found online, for your answer.
By the way, your coworker's husband is a moron.
Posted by: Boho | Monday, March 04, 2013 at 08:35 AM
i'd say it would be regular assault and battery... if it was taken infront of a jury i bet they'd snigger when they found out it was a dildo... or that might just be my sense of humour
Posted by: Restaurant_Slave | Monday, March 04, 2013 at 09:26 AM
So what was the reason behind the "no"?
Posted by: Riferous | Monday, March 04, 2013 at 11:00 AM
lol, the comment at the end was meant to be funny more than anything. I know it was just regular. I was just making a joke at the fact he used a sex toy as the object of his assault.
And I don't know. He never found out what the 'no' was for, and he's perma-banned, so he'll never know now.
Posted by: Terah | Monday, March 04, 2013 at 11:16 AM
Simple assault. That said despite being drunk there is no valid reason to tell someone no when they want their property back. I would have considered dong slapping the guy as well if he refused to give me back my property, but would have done the right thing and threatened to call the cops instead.
Posted by: RayvenMoon | Monday, March 04, 2013 at 11:25 AM
Am I the only one who finds the term "Assault and battery" hilarious in the event of a dildo attack?
Anyway sexual assault requires there to be a sexual motivation. Clonking a guy round the head with the nearest object is not sex assault, regardless of the dildo. Unless it somehow penetrated... 0_o
Posted by: Liz | Monday, March 04, 2013 at 01:14 PM
If it was a vibrator, would it have been assault with a battery? ;)
Posted by: Me | Monday, March 04, 2013 at 02:28 PM
If they were somewhere else, on the bus or something, and he just randomly pulled out a dildo and started beating on him with it... then I could actually see a lawyer making a case for sexual assault. Or a viral Youtube video at the very least.
Posted by: Nocturnesthesia | Tuesday, March 05, 2013 at 12:01 AM
When I asked him about it, he followed up with 'First thing I thought when I was out of there was 'Ewww, I touched that'.'
I told him it was clean, because they don't take returns and all. He said it hadn't even been in a package, it was just a dildo on the counter.
I thought a moment and said 'Try before you buy?'
'Well, they do have fitting rooms.'
Posted by: Terah | Tuesday, March 05, 2013 at 12:09 AM
The story is pretty funny, but I am maddened by wondering what the "no" was about. It's eating my brain with curiosity.
Posted by: Skittles | Tuesday, March 05, 2013 at 12:36 AM
I doubt it mattered, I don't think I can see someone calling the cops and saying they were slapped in the face with a dildo. And if they were, that would make them one of the types we like to skewer around here :)
Posted by: Nic | Tuesday, March 05, 2013 at 11:29 AM
@Theguy
"his intent was to wang te guy across the face."
*collapses in a fit of giggles*
Posted by: Wmdkitty | Wednesday, March 06, 2013 at 12:37 AM
*joins WMDkitty in the fit of giggles* Yeah, I'd say he successfully wanged the guy. *adds 'wang' (verb form) to her inner dictionary*
Posted by: Spider | Wednesday, March 06, 2013 at 06:24 PM
Me: "Assault with a friendly weapon"?
Posted by: Techtyger | Monday, March 11, 2013 at 08:20 PM