Wait till you find out about the rat alarm clock.
https://dotesports.com/streaming/news/even-a-rat-cant-survive-asmongolds-notoriously-messy-house
https://m.twitch.tv/clip/ManlyProudTireNerfBlueBlaster-4-6m_gd2n5vkR-Xw
So what are you suggesting? Just toss out cross examination and just mandate that the judge and juries have to believe an alleged victim at their word?
Despite being given a sh¡t sandwich of a client like Brand, he doesn’t seem to be particularly good.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/us/articles/russell-brand-lawyer-reports-himself-170630536.html
Pretty average compared to some of the lawyers in recent news. Like the one who convinced all good...
I am 100% fine with the message this case sends out. No-one should be protected from the consequences of bad behaviour.
Even if you exclude all the nonsense about this case, in terms of consent, laws etc. It is an objectively bad thing for both men and woman to get involved in casual sex...
https://www.jpost.com/international/article-913985
Something scary to think of is that this is the way Trump can make himself unimpeachable. Dems won't dare to punish Trump for getting rid of Iran on his political capital.
Funny you say that. I suspect one of the reasons why the ANC got clobbered here is they didn't have Iran bankrolling them, as Iran has some other problems.
Under the strict legal definition of beyond a reasonable doubt. I don't know if there is enough evidence for him to be convicted as a rapist given the behaviour of all parties involved.
Remember if you are allowed to look at his prior behaviour to the event in question, you can look at the...
In the legal context, it absolutely does.
No, it means they didn't believe her.
I don't know why you are being so salty on this? I am being pragmatic here and agree with you that society is better off with Brand in prison. I just don't think that the justice system is working particularly...
Reasonable doubt means the jury has to presume he is innocent until guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
This is a case where it only relied on testimony on both parties. One said it was consensual, and the others do not.
She claimed she was raped, which means the jury didn't believe her.
I am...
The jury cleared him of that. They didn't believe her. Think about how silly it sounds. He is guilty for groping boobs, but the oral sex she gave him afterwards was deemed consensual.
This isn't a good and clear jury verdict. Because there really isn't any evidence.