Donate SIGN UP
Gravatar

Answers

121 to 140 of 171rss feed

First Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
// The "smile" emoticon was my little joke or pun// sqad

I write [joke] to give notice of an intended er pant-filler instead of an emoticon
and you know Ms Grumpy or someone still manages to keep a straight face - and make a glum comment....
It is AB
Don't be so rude Ummmm and do not accuse me of being ignorant. If you read my post properly you will see I posted I was not going to read them all AGAIN, not that I hadn't read them at all.
I think you owe me an apology. Oh and my name isn't Ladybirdy but you knew that.
> I dislike the notion bandied about on here that because she was paid off afterwards she wasn't raped

I think the notion is that, even if she was raped, the moment she accepted a huge payoff and chose not to press charges she stopped being a rape victim and became instead the gold digger which, if she wasn't raped, she had been all along. It's impossible to prove rape one way or the other now, but this opinion-based logic would make it moot.
Why is it wrong to assume this woman wasn't raped yet OK to assume Ronaldo is a rapist?

it's double standards
I've always thought that he was gay!
Sqad the act of rape be it ‘modern’ or ‘old fashioned ‘ have one thing in common that is the word NO! Any woman who says no should be forced into participating in a sex act.
RockRose

" Any woman who says no should be forced into participating in a sex act."

LOL...LOL....you don't really mean that surely?
^^ Must be a typo. But how would this allegation be proved? It's one thing to believe the allegation, but is it proof? Doesn't proof have to be established beyond a reasonable doubt?
Cripes. I asked the girl in Asda if they had any Irish bread this morning.
She said no.
// The rich and powerful are apparently protected from any accusations because .... //
they can hire very expensive lawyers to muddy the waters

why has she kept her mouth zipped up for 9 y ?
I am certain 3T would comment 'how unlike a woman'

If I said - I was robbed/broken into 10 y ago but didnt bother to report it to the police
not many people would say - no no in that case it cdnt have taken place!
If you blackmailed the burglar 10yrs ago, you wouldn't get much sympathy for selling your story now.
// Doesn't proof have to be established beyond a reasonable doubt?//

there is a certain amount of more blah needed here
The burden of proof is on the crown - they have to show the events occurred
The standard of proof is beyond reasonable doubt
and that is in the minds of the Jury ....

and the blessed Allison Saunders now else where when she was DPP decreed that more cases of "he said, she said" went to trial

and clearly since people are convicted - the jury is persuaded.

Scots law let me say an admission alone is not sufficient
Spicerack do you think she said:-

' Mwahahahah I've just had consensual sex with you now give me $300,000 or I'll scream rape'

or do you think it went more like this:-

'You raped me, you raped me I'm going to the police.'

'Nooooo no no no no no, don't do that, I'm sorry I'm such a nice guy normally I don't know whatever came over me,it'll never happen again, I'm so sorry here let me at least give you something to make your life easier $300,000, but please don't say anything it would ruin me and i didn't mean it.'

I mean seriously which seems more probable?
Talbot's point is compelling. I too struggle to understand why assuming Ronaldo isn't a rapist is bad but assuming the woman wasn't raped is bad.

It is a massive, huge, double standard.
When I did jury duty last year, we found one man not guilty of handling £100,000 worth of stolen goods. We suspected he had done it, but in our eyes, the prosecution hadn't proved the case. We all said had it been in Scotland, we would have gone for "Not Proven" rather than not guilty.
In a perverse way I hope this does go to trial. I'd love to see the prosecution prove beyond all reasonable doubt that Ronaldo raped a woman 9 years ago without a single shred of evidence, a woman who accepted money not to go public. By any reasonable objective point of view it just doesn't stand up to scrutiny. But I'm bad for thinking that and should just accept she's telling the truth.

I find that odd.
I can't help but think if that happens that the view will be taken that paying her was tant amount to an admission of guilt at the time.
I'm still undecided about the matter tbh.
Maybe although innocent, he paid her off to stop his name being dragged through the mud.
Mud sticks and could have affected his career. He might have paid off a blackmailer.
Now lately, the default position is, "Guilty until proven innocent." Lawyerland!
I can only praise the Lord in the last 53 years of bonking, since I was a 17 yr old lad, and there were many bonks.I can satisfy myself that I rarely had a pot to pee in in those days and I never got any complaints. One can only wonder why. Vive le difference.

121 to 140 of 171rss feed

First Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Why Has This Taken 9 Years To Come Out?

Answer Question >>