In Bunyard is State v. Siering, 35 Conn. App. 173, 644 A.2d 958 (1994) the jury asked, "If a person agrees to sexual intercourse, then changes her mind, withdraws her consent but is compelled to continue intercourse by use of force, does this constitute sexual assault? The court's response was "if there exists consensual sexual intercourse and the alleged victim changes her mind and communicates the revocation or change of mind of consent and the other person continues the sexual intercourse by compelling the victim through the use of force, then it would be sexual assault in the first-degree. This is not just someone withdrawing their consent, but it's a withdrawal of consent communicated to the other and then the sexual intercourse continues by compelling the victim through the use of force." The Siering Court, describing as "absurd" the defendant's argument essentially requiring, to establish rape, a dislodging of the male organ where consent is withdrawn, noted that a review of limited case law from other jurisdictions reveals only three decisions which appear to hold that prior consent vitiates post penetration withdrawal of consent.