Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » 47 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

47 minutes ago

Huey » 59 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

59 minutes ago

1.  No jury has convicted him of rape.

2.  He was found liable for sexual assault buy a jury in a civil case which has a much lower bar for the burden of proof.

3.  The jury was instructed to use NY State law for rape.  Digital Penetration did not qualify as rape, if in fact he even did that.

Those are all facts.

1. Not relevant 

2. For a SPECIFIC act of Sexual Assault. Broadly defined as rape.

3. You insist on laboring matters irrelevant to the verdict.


 

 

Your number 1 is not a fact, it is an opinions.

Your number 2 is not a fact, it is an opinion.  If he was in a criminal trial he WOULD NOT have been convicted of rape.

Your number 3 is another fact.

You refuse to acknowledge objective facts.  Rules for thee, but not for me is your motto.