Disturbing Rape Case

[jillian]

you have to prove a crime....consensual sex is not a crime....she has to prove it was against her will....burden of proof lies with the prosecutor not the defendant

That's what I said in post # 2 on this thread.

 

[manu1959]

That's what I said in post # 2 on this thread.

not true .... you said that the burden of proof has shifted to the defendant

 

[jillian]

not true .... you said that the burden of proof has shifted to the defendant

*Sigh* THIS was the quote...read the bolded area...

He doesn't have to prove his "innocence". He admitted to one of the elements of the case, which is sex with the woman. If she can prove, by her testimony, that it was against her will, the burdern of proof then shifts to the Defendant to show that it was consensual, by his testimony and/or the testimony of the witnesses.

Pssssssssssst...even the left of center get to be correct sometimes.

 

[manu1959]

*Sigh* THIS was the quote...read the bolded area...

Pssssssssssst...even the left of center get to be correct sometimes.

you are correct what you posted is what you said

what you bolded is not what i posted....your claim was... you posted the same as I....i posted that the burden of proof never shifts to the defendant....you claim is that it has.....

i say no

he has claimed consensual and will present his case as such....thus no crime....he has witnesses to back him up...she needs to prove otherwise.....innocent until proven guilty....

be right all you want but at least admit when you are not correct...i did not post what you posted

 

[jillian]

you are correct what you posted is what you said

what you bolded is not what i posted....your claim was... you posted the same as I....i posted that the burden of proof never shifts to the defendant....you claim is that it has.....

i say no

he has claimed consensual and will present his case as such....thus no crime....he has witnesses to back him up...she needs to prove otherwise.....innocent until proven guilty....

be right all you want but at least admit when you are not correct...i did not post what you posted

I have no problem acknowledging when I've misread or when I'm wrong. I said IF she can prove it wasn't consensual THEN the burden shifts.

It's really quite a neat syllogism... If...then

 

[manu1959]

I have no problem acknowledging when I've misread or when I'm wrong. I said IF she can prove it wasn't consensual THEN the burden shifts.

It's really quite a neat syllogism... If...then

interesting therory.....stipulating that they had sex is a no brainer...there were three witnesses...they all claim consensual....she has now sobered up and claimed rape....she has to prove rape beyond a reasonable doubt....he does'nt have to prove consensual

 

[Dr Grump]

interesting therory.....stipulating that they had sex is a no brainer...there were three witnesses...they all claim consensual....she has now sobered up and claimed rape....she has to prove rape beyond a reasonable doubt....he does'nt have to prove consensual

She did say IF Manu..IF she PROVES that it wasn't consenual, then the defendant better have all his i's dotted and t's crossed or he is in deep stum!