You wouldn't think it needs to be said, but rape is a crime of physical violence, court rules

A Boston ride-share driver will remain behind bars as a possible threat to society as he awaits trial on charges he raped at least eight women passengers over several years, the Supreme Judicial Court ruled yesterday.

Alvin Campbell of Dorchester - brother of state Attorney General Andrea Campbell - had sought release on "reasonable" bail as he awaits trial for the rapes and related offenses, which include photographing his victims and indecent assault and battery, arguing that because the state law on bail denial for dangerousness mentions the use of force in a crime but does not mention rape specifically, prosecutors should have presented detailed, trial-level evidence that he had used force against his victims, but did not.

In its ruling, the state's highest court ruled we are no longer living in the 18th century and that rape inherently involves the use of force, even if a victim does not physically struggle against her attacker.

We conclude that unwanted sexual intercourse compelled by force renders rape an inherently physical violation of another person and, therefore, an offense with "physical force" as both core element and end result.

Campbell was indicted in Suffolk Superior Court on September, 2020 on 20 counts related to the alleged attacks - which police in Boston and Medford did not initially bring to prosecutors.

Court records show he is currently scheduled for trial on Dec. 9, although that might be delayed because last month, a Suffolk Superior Court judge granted a request by his trial attorney to conduct discovery - a potentially lengthy process involving the collection of documents and conducting of interviews - related to his allegation of misconduct by law enforcement in the case.

The SJC rejected, in unambiguous terms, arguments by Campbell's appeals attorney that without detailed proof of force, the charges against Campbell were more akin to indecent assault and battery - think groping - or even forms of assault and battery that could be as simple is tickling, crimes that do not, legally, imply the use of force.

The court pointed to its rulings in rape cases over the past several decades that were meant "to dispel the antiquated common-law requirement that victims must physically resist their assailant. "

The violence inherent in forced penetration under [the state's rape law], regardless of its extent or the way in which it is accomplished, differentiates rape from the "merest touching." Vieira, 483 Mass. at 426. ...

Although we have extended the definition of rape to include situations involving constructive force, we did not in that process reduce unwanted penetration of another's vagina, anus, or mouth into incidental offensive contact not amounting to a forceful crime. Put differently, the physical contact required to constitute rape cannot be equated to "tickling," "spitting," or "a tap on the shoulder." ...

To decide otherwise and determine that rape is not an offense with physical force at its heart would be to fundamentally misunderstand the nature of the violation.