University of Cambridge

The Most Offensive Exam Question EVER?!



The University of Cambridge’s latest law exam got incredibly graphic, describing drunk, sexual, and violent hazing scenarios in one of its questions. More than 200 students took the exam, and the question has since gone viral on Reddit. See the full test question here and decide what you think. (Warning: question contains graphic language). Tweet: http://clicktotweet.com/0MIY2

Do you think this test question goes over the top? Or is it just prepping law students for what they’ll deal with in the real world? Let us know in the comments!

Find out more here: http://huff.to/15wcqRI

And don’t forget guys, if you like this video please Like, Favorite, and Share it with your friends to show your support – It really helps us out! See you next time!

*****************************************************
SUBSCRIBE and join the TYTU student body! http://tinyurl.com/9o8kpf4

ON FACEBOOK: www.facebook.com/TYTUniversity
ON TWITTER: @jiadarola @samschacher @tytuniversity
ON TUMBLR: http://tytuniversity.tumblr.com/

TYT University: College news, scandals, parties, tips and advice, relationships, sex and dating, self-help, music parodies, odd facts and more with host John Iadarola.
http://youtube.com/user/tytuniversity

48 Comments

Click here to post a comment

  • Much like a physics professor asking to find the trajectory of the railgun bullet speeding towards the balls of a Transformer climbing the pyramids based on energy transference and wind forces, the absurdity of the question does not negate it's ability as a teaching tool. Weirder stuff has happened.

  • They are getting ready for their job, If you are going to law school you will be dealing with way worse then this… The professor has to get them ready, he cant keep them shielded and only ask them questions about pony's and unicorns.

  • Lol yea i mean, there's so much more worse stuff and mentally fucked up stuff like rape, women trafficing, child molestation etc… they'll encounter than this lol, it's like a heartsurgeon being offended by the person's blood

  • I think its an interesting question.  I want to know what offenses were committed under the law in that situation.  Personally I think the whole situation is totally wrong…what offense wasn't committed?  lol.

  • As someone who has done my English criminal law exam, this is a little graphic perhaps, but the Sexual offences act is on the syllabus and the typical 'problem question' (a question with fictional wrongdoings and a person who needs legal advice about them) will cover at least a possible rape (which they HAVE to be specific about – rape is a penis in a vagina, without consent) a possible sexual assault (which, as I remember it can be anything from unwanted sexual touching, to penetration of an orifice with …well, anything that isn't a penis), and might have a non-sex offence mixed in to see if you know that that one isn't covered by the same laws.  It will cover issues such as consent to – is X consenting if she believes she is having sex with Y, but its actually Z, pretending to be Y? (No, if she knows Y personally, but YES if she doesn't eg: Y is a celebrity and X is a look-a-like pretending to be him) or is Sandra committing an offence with that bottle? (Probably she is – Gilbert appears to be resisting, even if he actually enjoys it so Sandra might not have a 'reasonable belief' in his consent). 

  • Although immoral, unethical and numerous degrees of sickness…  Legally there were NO offenses committed.   They willingly consented to the initiation rituals.  Perhaps they should have been asking more detailed questions ahead of time?  They may not have wanted to proceed with it.

  • There were three sexual assaults, two sodomies, and one forcible sodomy, and an assault that resulted in grievous bodily harm, and a manslaughter, at the very least. 

    By touching any of the victims in their pubic areas without consent, that is sexual assault. By the fact that the victims are surrounded by members of the society, are subject to initiation, and are under the influence of alcohol, there is no possibility of consent under the law.

    Sodomy is an unnatural sexual act of any kind. Forcible sodomy occurred when Gilbert was held down and abused by a bottle. He was subjected to two sodomies. The unnatural act, and the forcible act. Billy was sexually assaulted when Jonny sucked his penis. The crime escalated to sodomy because it is an unnatural act under the law.

    Richard was sexually assaulted by the pubic hair waxiing, was grievously injured by the forcible removal of the wax, and his subsequent death was manslaughter, since his death was not intentional.

    I have not read any public discussions on this, but now I will.

  • From watching this and reading comments i began thinking about sexual assault and the problem that might occur if i ever get sexually assaulted by a guy, i'm a guy (16). The problem that i might like it. :S

  • some guys have no idea how great it is to bottom. even smaller things can make you cum. lotsa nerves, and your prostate is stimulated.

    you can be straight and be pegged 😉

  • That's a perfectly good lesson for class, but I think it's inappropriate for an exam.  At the very least it's going to throw you off when you're under pressure and trying to concentrate.

  • I don't understand why this is shocking or offending people; do you want our future lawyers to pretend like this stuff never happens and then be blindsided when it does?!  I would never want anybody to go to a lawyer, tell him they have been raped, and he/she to say, "I have no idea how to help you."  Really, why is this even an issue?!?!?!

  • It's graphic, but good questions in my opinion. It gives nuances like "he appears to resist … enjoys the experience", which can be things that happen with rapes, as not all rapes are violent "stranger danger" types of rapes or whatever. 🙂 I wouldn't be upset at all if I got a question like that.

  • Never did law although I am British but I've got it pegged as sexual assault (he didn't consent for it to be johnny), Rape of some degree/sexual assault probably for the girl with the bottle and probably some sort of assisted or accessory for the girl pining him (maybe even rape for her as well), then sexual assualt/GBH/manslaughter?. I think the manslaughter would probably be thrown out for something lesser after some debate but it would be included in the original charges.

  • I have friends who have studied Law in the UK, and such questions are normal when you're studying criminal law. Actually, compared to real cases that they had studied as part of their course, this question is quite tame. There was a case that they studied where a man used a knife to carve his initials into his girlfriend's bum during sex. Another case involved someone getting second degree burns during an orgy.

  • It's most certainly an awkward question, but it's not like this will never happen or hasn't happened before, lol
    You'll have to consider these things in the real world, and you'll have to know what offenses and charges you can peg the other side with in order to be a decent lawyer, lol
    People are creepy as hell, so I'm definitely not against it…
    Could be worse. They could have raped his dead body like some serial killers have done to their victims. owo

  • "I'm a woman and I think everything is sexist and rape." My god western women are so useless and are low class trash. No wonder we are seeing them get with low class trash. Similar classes with entitlement issues.

  • "Billy blinds folds Sandra and tells her that Tracy will finger her. Johny does so.

    Billy penetrates Sandras anus with a bottle. Although Sandra appears to resists, and has to be held down by Gilbert, she actually enjoyes the experiment.

    Billy waxes Sandra's pubic har and pulls it off with such force…."

    Consider what type of death penalty we should give to Billy and Gilbert.

    Though I've never understood why frats have such big gay obsessions wanting to penetrate new members anally or have all that type of faggy shit done (I'm basing this on mosly hollywood movies though, and don't be offended by the use of faggy)

  • This is a pretty normal question in criminal law, I had even "sicker" questions, having said that, I don't know the laws in UK, but in Colombia the first cases wouldn't be a crime given that they both agreed in the performance of the act and the error in person is not applicable, the second case is a clear violent sexual assault, and the third one, they were engaging in dangerous and criminal activities so the were guarders of each others life, health, sexual and physical freedom, she wanted to cause the damage but exceed her intentions, so probably she could be charged with preterintentional homicide 😀

  • There's several crimes: there is sexual assault (first guy didn't consent as there were false pretenses); forcible sodomy (Gilbert resisted & was restrained; someone 'seeming to enjoy the experience' isn't enough to prove consent. Even an erection or orgasm doesn't equal consent as they can be involuntary); third case there was some form of physical assault (the forcible waxing), and finally perhaps the most obvious, manslaughter (girls negligent actions caused this guys death but not intentional; they also can't be legally justified with normal recourse like self defense)

Follow us