Most people believe her story, as do I.
But I don't think either that the judge acted with ill intent, like most mass media say. He must have got caught up in some legal loopholes.
“Unlawful restraint but not sexual assault.”
It's a strange ruling. I'm curious about what specifically led the judge to stop there, but I couldn’t find much online.
Unfortunately,with rape charges it’s “innocent until proven guilty” and they aren’t easy to prove. Which is why half of the victims don’t report them.
But as much as that sucks, they can't switch to the “guilty until proved innocent”, which is the formal approach to child abuse allegations or the #MeToo movement’s hope. If they did that, they’d risk encouraging false accusations.
But I don't think either that the judge acted with ill intent, like most mass media say. He must have got caught up in some legal loopholes.
“Unlawful restraint but not sexual assault.”
It's a strange ruling. I'm curious about what specifically led the judge to stop there, but I couldn’t find much online.
The DA said she just couldn't make the case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Since we are a country of laws, if the DA can't prove rape beyond a reasonable doubt (she said in one of the linked articles that she was afraid the young man would be exonerated if they went to trial) she did the next best thing and took the plea deal.
The law isn't perfect. Sometimes people can scam the system. I think this was one of those times. That doesn't make it any more palatable, but it's the way things happen sometimes.
Unfortunately,with rape charges it’s “innocent until proven guilty” and they aren’t easy to prove. Which is why half of the victims don’t report them.
But as much as that sucks, they can't switch to the “guilty until proved innocent”, which is the formal approach to child abuse allegations or the #MeToo movement’s hope. If they did that, they’d risk encouraging false accusations.