Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ
Well again, we'll find out however as I mentioned earlier I'd be surprised if someone with his backing took his legal advice from the CAB.
|
Well this is a website. This is not a legal document or case.
Quote:
|
This is why I said earlier that if the inquiry turns up nothing then he remains a rapist.
|
But if you're willing to take out of context Tweets from a advocacy website for him which they themselves sourced from a third party and consider that 'new evidence' then that's a pretty low bar to clear. What happens when they publish something else? A previously unknown witness sending a anonymous letter? A Facebook post etc etc.
Quote:
|
Without wanting to sound churlish, consider it vice versa? What if evidence not available at the time casts serious doubt on the woman's intentions? A man's life and career could have been permanently damaged.
|
Then the correct place to air this new evidence is in a court room and not an internet website. In a court room the evidence can be properly examined, the crown can mount a challenge to the appeal, they can make an argument as to the relevance of the evidence on the verdict of the case.
I would prefer a court makes these decisions and not people on Twitter.
The victim here was no real ability to respond to these allegations and nor should she have too.