[intuition897]

Originally Posted by curiousagain

OK, we probably aren't going to hear back from the OP, I like to play devils advocate, I like to philosiphize sometimes, I'm bored. Bear with me.

We aren't cutting the Husband any slack because he was alcohol impaired, but evidently everybody was, including the wife who was incapicitated by alcohol voluntarily. Now obviously, since the boss had hit on her dispite her being married beforehand, he deserves the castration/crucifixion at dawn we all wish on him whether sober or inebriated. But, if the husband had been incapacitated and the wife impaired and she had allowed this as her husband was unable to protest, would we be ripping her a new one?? Would we say, "she was drunk"? We have all done or allowed to be done things, while drunk we would not while sober. Admit it, think back, you know you have. I will be the first to raise my hand. I'm not looking to start a flamethrow I am just wondering.

Thoughts anyone?

I haven't reached any conclusions about the drunkenness factor, but the thing that really pisses me off is that the guy isn't sorry he did it... just sorry that he's going to have to pay the piper. And pay he will. Oh yes.