This man thinks he did nothing wrong and this ruling simply confirms it in his mind (at least that's my opinion). At the very least, this should be sexual assault. As the article states, it is very difficult to prove acquaintance rape cases but perhaps the burden of proof will be easier for the beating.

the article state that he never told her exactly what he was going to do to her and it sounds like there was no command to make him stop.

I have a problem with people saying she consented and after that anything goes. If I was with a partner and I consented to be tied up but then they started to do things I didn't expect or thought they would do is it still consent? Suppose they decide to use something like this:



An electric shock wand on various parts of my body and I said no but they continued, is it my fault for agreeing in the first place and now too bad I gave consent? Once it started hurting and she said no it's no longer a consensual act, it's sexual assault and/or criminal battery.

Unless they removed the law from the books you are able to withdraw consent during intercourse in Illinois:



So as soon as she said no, it became sexual assault, at the very least.

You need to make sure both parties know exactly what is going on and have a mutually agreed upon safe word to stop all activities. It seems as if Mohammad had no idea how to engage in BDSM and I would have no heartache if the prosecutor decides to pursue the case in some form or another because from the information provided he is culpable of sexual assault at the very least.

In a true BDSM relationship it is the submissive who has the power to stop interaction at anytime due to the safe word, without this it cannot be consensual because he had both the power and control, and that just becomes violence and abuse.