There's A Verdict in the E. Jean Carroll/Trump Case

a reply to: stevieray

Doesn't matter what I believe.

It's the jury's verdict that counts.

Try checking your "facts" before posting.

a reply to: stevieray

9 of Trump's peers believed the story aka a jury

And unanimously came to a decision inside of just 3 short hours.

Seems Relevant.



CLIP

a reply to: crankyoldman

Should there be a statute of limitations on sexual assault or rape cases, criminal or civil, given the severity of the crime and transgression?

I mean there is no statute of limitations where the likes of murder is concerned.

Rape/sexual assault crimes are of the same to similar caliber.

By my guess, some crimes and acts of depravity don't have a sell-by date, or should not have.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: stevieray

Careful. She might sue YOU for defamation!

Honestly, threatening other posters with legal action is a new low. Even for you.

Wasn’t threatening, but if I was it could be a thousand different things, not just what you choose to announce. One could be you wagging your finger and gassing on and on. That would make anybody jump in front of a train.
Just talking about people running their mouths about other people, based in ignorance.
And hey, I didn’t know it was a she. Are you sure you’re even allowed to say that ? You may get in trouble for that.

I would normally just laugh at an angry “ovulating human” griping about “angry ovulating human issues”

Wouldn’t even argue. I’m more into arguing with screechy little dudes.

a reply to: crankyoldman

Not what I heard. I heard the word "didn't" help change the law.

As for moving he'll and earth, yep, to defend a sex abuser.

Gentle Reminder:

Reaffirming Our Desire For Productive Political Debate (REVISED)



Community Announcement re: Decorum
An opposing viewpoint is NOT a valid reason to complain & It takes two to tango


You are responsible for your own posts.....those who ignore that responsibility will face mod actions.


and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!

a reply to: stevieray

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: crankyoldman

Should there be a statute of limitations on sexual assault or rape cases, criminal or civil?

I mean there is no statute of limitations where the likes of murder is concerned.

Rape/sexual assault crimes are of the same to similar caliber.

By my guess, some crimes and acts of depravity don't have a sell-by date, or should not have.

So, a person can accuse you of rape 60 years after the fact, you’re both 75 and it was when you were both 15. Hell, anybody who would have facts to help you, is probably dead. So all that’s needed is just enough of a feelzy jury, and you lose. There is no true or false involved. If they somehow don’t win, they lose nothing.

Great idea.

In fact, not far off from this case. No rhyme or reason for them being there, just convoluted nonsense. No day or date, impossible for the guy to prove he was there or not. Just pick the right jury.

originally posted by: crankyoldman
Seems Relevant.

CLIP

Wooops. Don’t tell them angry shaky fellers. I want things to be OK for them

originally posted by: stevieray

So, a person can accuse you of rape 60 years after the fact, you’re both 75 and it was when you were both 15.

in your hypothetical did they rape them, if so, then yes I believe they should be charged regardless of time, if they were innocent then no

are you suggesting even if they did rape someone because they avoided a courtroom then they magically become innocent?

and tough luck for the victim of the rape

a reply to: stevieray

So, on that logic, you'd stick up for the rights of the likes of Jimmy Saville over his victims?

Or all those Nazi concentration camp guards brought to justice years later?

a reply to: stevieray

The depraved act of rape or sexual assault never goes away for the victims.

Can't see why there should be a statute of limitations that allows the evil bastards that perpetrate such acts of depravity to get away with what they did after a finite period of time.

As to this case well Trump has been found guilty by a jury of his peers.

Simple as that really.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
So, let me get this right.

Bud Light is garbage but Americans think it's #1.

Trump is garbage but Americans........

No. Sorry. Best not go there.

You get it.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: stevieray

So, on that logic, you'd stick up for the rights of the likes of Jimmy Saville over his victims?

Or all those Nazi concentration camp guards brought to justice years later?

They had ample evidence for these guys. Sorry I need to explain.
Ah, straight to Nazi in some form or another. Nah, I wouldn’t be sticking up for any actual, proven Nazi. But thanks for the insinuation, it always helps the quality of debate.

a reply to: stevieray

Sigh. He did not have to prove he was not there. It's up to her to convince the jury. Which she did.

With the help of his video deposition and the fact he didn't bother to show up.

So, just on point, these old Nazis that have been brought before courts after decades.

You in favour of giving them a free pass for their crimes?

a reply to: stevieray

Same logic as yours. Deal with it.

a reply to: stevieray

"Proven Nazi. "?

Yes, but with your interpretation of the law, they would not be able to prove it?

"So, a person can accuse you of rape 60 years after the fact, you’re both 75 and it was when you were both 15. Hell, anybody who would have facts to help you, is probably dead. So all that’s needed is just enough of a feelzy jury, and you lose. There is no true or false involved. If they somehow don’t win, they lose nothing."

So, those Nazi victims, just need a "feelzy jury"? Coz it was all a long time ago?

originally posted by: andy06shake

Here in Missouri, there is no statute of limitations for any class A felonies. It helped my sister in law when they just recently added sexual misconduct, of any type, with a child. She was being molested by her sister's boyfriend, who was about 15 years older than her, ages 10-12. At the time, he had convinced her that it was the right thing to do. It wasn't until a few years later, after the guy was out of the picture, that she realized what had happened. At the time there WAS a statute of limitations. Fast forward another 10 years or so when it was removed, and she got the guy. Before she knew she had a chance of getting him convicted, she never told anybody about it.

I'm not sure Trump can ever be treated fairly in a court of law , I've never met the guy but I bet I could win if I sued him for something . The Hate the Dems have sown is just to much for the normal sheep to understand .