Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason14h
|
Quote:
“You said you were having fun,” the player wrote.
“I was really drunk, didn’t feel good about it at all after. But I’m not trying to get anyone in trouble,” she replied.
“I was ok with going home with you, it was everyone else afterwards that I wasn’t expecting. I just felt like I was being made fun of and taken advantage of.”
|
I am really not sure if the texts demonstrate what the lawyers who gave them to the Globe and Mail think they demonstrate. But I guess when dealt with bad facts and bad law you have to play the card you are dealt.
Getting the individual on cross examination who made the two videos would be fun as a lawyer. I wonder if they make videos after every sexual encounter? If they don’t, I wonder why they made two videos after this encounter. If this was the only encounter where they made a video I would ask why that is. If they do have other videos that they could present into evidence that would definitely be helpful to show a pattern of making videos confirming consent after the event. But consent confirmed after a sexual activity is not relevant unless there is proof of consent during the sexual activity.