Was The Jury In “Unwanted” Fellatio Case Wrong To Rule In Favor Of The BJ Giver?

A straight man in New Zealand testified that he received unwanted fellatio from a gay man after consuming a dozen alcoholic beverages in a six-hour period. The gay man testified that the straight man had asked him for the blow job then changed his mind five minutes into it. Expert witnesses claimed the straight man, who had a history of blacking out while drunk, likely suffered from “alcohol-induced amnesia” and did not remember making the request. After hearing two days of testimony and 45 minutes of deliberation, the jury ruled in favor of the gay man.

No, this was not a recap of last week’s episode of Law & Order:SVU. This actually happened in a Christchurch, NZ courtroom earlier this week.

Since posting the story Wednesday morning, Queerty readers on Facebook have been divided over the verdict. Many said the jury was right by ruling in favor of the gay man, but some felt the straight man was a victim.

According to part 4 of section 128A of New Zealand’s Crimes Act of 1961, “A person does not consent to sexual activity if the activity occurs while he or she is so affected by alcohol or some other drug that he or she cannot consent or refuse to consent to the activity.”

So was the jury wrong to rule in favor of the man who performed the blowjob? Sound off in the comments section below.