In a case where a man has allegedly raped his wife, this would be hard to prove, mostly relating to the need for corroborative evidence. Corroborative evidence is defined as "physical evidence or witness testimony other than from the victim that supports the claim that a crime occurred" (Gardner & Anderson, 2015, p.325). In this specific case, it would be extremely difficult to prove that a man raped his wife since there needs to be more evidence proving that the man actual committed the act. There would need to be more evidence than a case where a man raped a woman. If a husband is accused of raping his wife, there needs to be evidence of sexual abuse in the relationship among other corroborative evidence to add to the testimony of the wife. One sexual crime would be sexual abuse of a child. This is when a child is forced into sexual behavior/ intercourse with someone over the age of 17. Another offense is public lewdness and this occurs in public if at least one of the following actions occurs: "(1) Act of sexual intercourse; (2) Act of deviate sexual intercourse; (3) Act of sexual contact; or (4) Act involving contact between the person 's mouth" (Texas Penal Code, section 21.07). Under section 21.12 of the Texas Penal Code, improper relationship between an educator and student occurs when the teacher "engages in sexual contact, sexual intercourse, or deviate sexual intercourse with a person who is enrolled in a public or private primary or secondary school at which the employee works". These are only a few offenses among several that the Texas Penal Code defines. Under common law, it would be difficult proving a man raped his wife because the two are married and it is assumed that the sex would be voluntary, not forced. Also, it would be difficult to get a rape conviction for a known prostitute because that person gets paid to have sex with strangers. If that person willingly gets paid to have sex with strangers, then it is going to be hard to prove in court that the prostitute unwillingly had sex with a stranger.

The most lenient state punishments regarding rape is between Ohio and California. The punishment for rape in Ohio is "1) Six to 18 months in prison, (2) if the actor is less than four years older than the victim, a $ 1,000 fine, or (3) if the actor is 10 or more years older than the victim, one to five years in prison" (Norman-Eady, Reinhart, Martino 2003). This really surprised me that the rapist would spend such little time in prison and the fact that if the rapist is less than four years older, than that person only has to pay a $1,000 fine. It is almost like Ohio is not super serious about rapes. California also has a really low punishment and that is a year in a county jail. That is a really low punishment and basically like a slap on the wrist to the rapist. One of the higher states was Alabama and the punishment is either a life punishment or a punishment between 10 and 99 years. There are a lot of states that have similar laws, some being really low or really long depending on the rape. I was also surprised that Texas had an average punishment for rape because I would have thought that Texas would be one of the states that had extremely long sentences. The main states that I disagreed with was the states that had really low sentences of a maximum of a year in jail or prison or any other low amount of time like five years. I agree with extremely long sentences of at least ten or twenty years. I agree more with longer sentences because rape is a very serious issue and deserves an extreme punishment.

How would you agree or disagree with this statement?