Quote:
Originally Posted by Monahammer
This is what I dislike about court watching and following a case closely like this. Many have already picked a verdict essentially. Respectfully, you are coming at this from an angle that assuredly means you believe these 5 men are rapists. The trial is meant to determine that. What if she really did ask for more men to come back to the room? What if she did tell them she wanted a wild night?
We have to cut our own moral viewpoints here. Ultimately, while potentially perverse and counter average sensibilities, engaging in consensual group sex is not illegal. The lawyers MUST ask questions to determine the nature of the consent, and whether or not their clients could have potentially believed there was consent. The only way to achieve that, save a recording of everything that happened in that room existing, is by comparing statements to determine if there are misalignments. Yes, this is a challenge to the accuser. But the rights of the accused can't just be thrown away because we dislike the story and think they're all bad. That's Trump deportation level thinking.
|
I think as a society, we have overcorrected to the other extreme. Most are ready to convict simply based on accusations or consider them with a guilty bias until they can be proven innocent.