Definition: The Clinton Affair [Not for children!]

When Bill Clinton was US President, he was accused of lying under oath about his affair with Monica Lewinsky. In particular he was accused of lying about the fact that he had sexual relations with Monica when he received oral sex in the White House office.

According to Clinton, when he denied that he has engaged in sexual relations, this is the definition of "sexual relations" that he uses. The definition is actually taken from a particular court case :

A person engages in 'sexual relations' when the person knowingly engages in or causes contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.

Here is Clinton's explanation why he did not engage in sexual relations :

If the deponent [the person who is testifying] is the person who has oral sex performed on him, then the contact is with -- not with anything on that list, but with the lips of another person. It seems to be self-evident that that's what it is. . . . Let me remind you, sir, I read this carefully. ... any person, reasonable person would recognize that oral sex performed on the deponent falls outside the definition.

Suppose we accept the above definition of sexual relations. Should we then accept Clinton's argument that he did not engage in sexual relations when he received oral sex? Or should we say that receiving oral sex also counts as engaging in sexual relations? If you are a lawyer trying to argue for the second position, how would you go about defending your position?

<< previous page