
phantom13
Moderator
- Moderator
- #15,126
I have my opinion, I’m not denying that, but the fact is that the case that did go to court he was found liable, I’m not stating anything as fact, I’m presenting the facts.That's fine but if you're gonna post as it's extremely certain he did it, I think people are entitled to question it aswell. Like i said, it was also thrown out of 2 other courts so it's not a cut and dry matter. If this was a criminal court and it was beyond reasonable doubt then yes that's different. Also you're not quite reading what I'm saying, I'm not saying she's lying about the sexual assault, I'm saying there's parts of the overall story that really don't make alot of sense.
My understanding is that it was never brought to trial criminally but that prosecutors determined there was insufficient evidence for a criminal case (I stand to be corrected on that) but frankly either way if you know the conviction rates and process of criminal rape cases than you’d also know that it not going to trial proves absolutely nothing except that it’s remarkably difficult to get a conviction in rape cases, especially ones that aren’t as cut and dried as most people think when they think rape.
I’m not too sure what relevance an inconsistent drunken night out has on whether she was r*ped or not? It’s not like she’s denied being drunk or high. This sort of stuff is why a lot of women (and men) don’t report or pursue rapes, because every single detail has to be spot ****ing on otherwise the whole story is brought into question. That’s your right to do obviously but it’s a problematic view of it imo.
I’m not gonna post about this again because I’m just entering into the exact convo I really don’t think this board should be having and I’m only noting what I’ve actually said and responded to.