Ohio bill making marital rape illegal gets no support from GOP

Democratic lawmaker introduces a bill that would remove “marital privilege” from all rape statutes, as well as from subsections that address sexual battery, sexual imposition and gross sexual imposition.

Rep. Greta Johnson (D-Akron) from Columbus, first introduced a similar bill in 2015, which received no support from the GOP. Now, the revised bill, House Bill 97,  focuses on marital rape exemption.

Johnson said she drafted a “cleaner version of the bill” and hopes for a bipartisan support.

Filing HB 97 on February 28, 2017, the bill has yet to find support from a single republican sponsor.

Marital rape as defined in the Ohio Revised Code is illegal and is punished as a felony. Under that definition, rape occurs when a defendant forces a spouse to engage in sexual intercourse against the victim’s will. This also includes a threat of force or deception.

“Not only is it about rape, but it’s also about the fact that this is an antiquated law that treats women as second class citizens and treats women as property,” said Johnson.

Being a former prosecutor in Summit County, Johnson has heard of cases involving rapes in marriage before.

“The victims are reluctant to come forward and when you mix in sexual assault, it makes them less likely to seek prosecution,” said Johnson. “When you talk to a victim about their sexual violence and they say ‘well, one way to get them to stop hitting me is to have sex with them,’ what they don’t realize, is that is rape.”

“There are a lot of personal factors that come into play,” she said.

According to Johnson, Ohio is one of just 13 states in which spouses can receive exceptions for rape and other sex-related offenses. Eight states have spousal exemptions within their own rape laws.

“A husband can go and drug his spouse to the point where she’s not conscious and have sex with her, but it’s not a crime,” said Johnson. “We’re still living in the dark ages.”

John Murphy of the Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association opposes House Bill 97.

“It’s a matter of proof and knowing who did what and who said what. Most of the time these things happen in private,” said Murphy. “So, yes, as of right now we oppose the bill. Taking away these exemptions could just mean false accusations in cases like custody battles or a divorce case.”

Johnson has different reasoning.

“People say that removing exemptions like these could open the door to false claims so that someone can get some sort of leverage in battles,” said Johnson. “But spouses are not property.”

Since Johnson brought the bill to surface, there has been one hearing in February during the last general assembly.

According to Johnson, it can take a full two years to get a bill passed, but with no support from the majority party, it won’t go anywhere.

“Not only do we need to open up access to justice for all victims regardless of their marital status, but we also to repeal the portions of the state code which indicates that once a woman says ‘I do’, she doesn’t give up the right to her bodily autonomy,” said Johnson.

According to Ohio Revised Code, in 1986 Ohio partially lifted the marital exemption, declaring that rape within marriage can be prosecuted when there is force or the threat of force involved. According to the law, drugging the spouse victim is not considered force.

The marital exemption remains intact in other sexual assault laws, such as sexual battery or gross sexual imposition.

Last year, lawmakers agreed to extend the statute of limitations for rape from 20 to 25 years, though some legislators pushed to wipe it out entirely.

Meanwhile, the Ohio House voted 92-2 back in February, in approval of a bill that improves domestic violence laws, allowing victims of dating violence to acquire civil protection orders against the person whom attacks them.

Currently only those who have children or are married or cohabitating can seek civil protection orders against her attacker. Ohio and Georgia are the only remaining states which don’t allow victims of dating violence to seek such protection.

“Everyone keeps asking ‘oh how many people are really suffering because of this,” said Johnson. “Everyone suffers when our state code says they’re not equal to their male partners. As it’s about access to justice, it’s also about rectifying it to misogyny in the state code.”

Johnson said she does not expect House Bill 97 to go anywhere because there is no support from the majority party.

Emily: writing | Hayley: graphics | Sam: video