Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick Estrada
Meh. I haven't really posted in this thread because I really don't care either way. Either he did it or he didn't and it's pretty obvious the accuser lacks any slam dunk evidence and this latest news makes them look desperate. The bottom line is that it's basically his word against hers and I don't believe that's enough to convict any man of a crime without supporting evidence. Kane will get out of this and hopefully the sooner the better so we can move on and focus on hockey as this whole thing is becoming a joke.
|
If his story is disbelieved, either because it lacks internal or external credibility, he can be convicted. "He said/she said" cases are quite numerous and often can correctly result in a conviction.
In fact, it might only be a one-sided story. Example: Shoplifter walks out of a store, gets caught and says "I just got distracted and forgot to pay". The judge (no jury for summary conviction crimes) can believe her (acquittal), be undecided as to whether or not to believe her (acquittal) or disbelieve her (her evidence is disregarded, leading to a conviction).
I have actually had all 3 happen in my long ago criminal law cases. What was a bit surprising was which of my clients was believed and which was not. I had a girl who took half of a pack of hairbands who claimed she was going to ask to buy a partial package, and forgot they were in her pocket - stupid right? She was acquitted. I had a couple who put an item on their baby carriage and said the baby was screaming so they left the store, forgetting the item was on there. They were not believed and convicted, though in my mind it was a far more likely story (in the judge's defence on the latter, it was a more expensive item and therefore less likely to be forgotten).