Quote: (06-06-2016 09:55 PM)Samseau Wrote:
Agreed with LOZ. This case smells like bullshit.
I'm wondering how the jury decision went down.
He was convicted of "sexual assault."
How is sexual assault defined? Sexual advances without consent. Feminists argue since she was drunk, she therefore couldn't consent. That's all they convicted this young man for. The jury had to agree, however, that drunk women cannot give consent.
In many jurisdictions, "sexual penetration without consent" is charged rather than rape. Putting your fingers or your dick inside a person in these circumstances would fit that particular charge.
Remissas, discite, vivet.
God save us from people who mean well. -storm