“The appellant engaged in a premeditated and rather elaborate ruse in order to deceive the victims for his own sexual pleasure,” the judge ruled. “He violated their sexual integrity.”
You’re telling me it’s illegal to construct an elaborate ruse to deceptively persuade people to have sex with you? Makes sense I guess, but that’s not what I learned from every single 20th-century TV sitcom.
You’re telling me it’s illegal to construct an elaborate ruse to deceptively persuade people to have sex with you? Makes sense I guess, but that’s not what I learned from every single 20th-century TV sitcom.