@wrench248 may comment further but to PROVE rape, you have to demonstrate penetration without consent.
“The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”
And as I mentioned in a prior post, that brings up the definition of consent:
“The term “consent” means a freely given agreement to the conduct at issue by a competent person. An expression of lack of consent through words or conduct means there is no consent. Lack of verbal or physical resistance does not constitute consent.”
so the idea that DW made a woman feel like she had no other choice but to provide oral sex or he would “break her career”is going to require a lot of other evidence. And she’ll need to have that statement indisputedly recorded to withstand defense attempts to discredit the authenticity.
as far as a medical exam, by the old definition of rape, it was the standard form of evidence for attaining a conviction. By the new definition, it’s a standard to prove the event occurred in conjunction with the lack of consent.
as far as “rape” is concerned, I stand by my former statement that a medical exam is necessary evidence if you’re going PROVE rape.
Incorrect. I did not bring up that case. Which is why I said you can’t compare them.
Right. They could have just traded Watson and easily got 1st and 2nd round picks plus a quality starter and just rebuild for the future. What better way to help out a 1st time HC. Instead their more concerned with winning a battle instead of the War. Texans are mad incompetent.
Actually, I brought up Duke Lacrosse to remind everyone that a rush to judgement is often based on a wrong conclusion. Everyone ASSUMED the Duke players were guilty as they were “rich white guys”. Turned out to be a lie, but the players were forever tarnished. The university even started to overreact by stating they were abolishing the Lacrosse team. I was using this not as a direct comparison to the “crime” but as an example that sometimes allegations are either false or exaggerated. I am not making a judgement either way, I am suggesting a wait and see approach to this case as it is too early to judge and we do not know the entire set of facts yet. It does look awfully bad for Watson, but we haven’t heard anything really from his side. As a married man, I get judged on flimsy evidence daily, hate to see it happen to others...
I have already stated and will one more time that WATSON IS GUILTY OF BEING A MORON. There is no disputing his conduct is at minimum troubling. If not for his overwhelming talent he coupled be compared to Isiah Wilson. That’s how stupid this is. Your attitude seems to be Boys will be Boys.
As your own quote of wrench points out wrench says Buzbee is doing his job very well. That is NOT the same thing as a smear campaign. Wrench is paying Buzbee a compliment on his ability. He is vigorously repenting his clients.
Below is the definition of SMEAR:
damage the reputation of (someone) by false accusations; slander.
- "someone was trying to smear her by faking letter
Wrench didn’t use the word smear or even imply it’s meaning in reference to Buzbee and his clients. I think he would agree that if Harden was in Buzbee shoes he would be doing the same thing.
You conveniently leave out this quote from from wrench:
“ As i have said, it looks bad for Watson, really bad. However, the suits are only a week old and they have got a long way to go. Have to try and keep an open mind and see how this plays out”
Why does Wrench think it looks bad, really bad for Watson? Because he understands like I do that while nothing has legally been proven yet and Watson is absolutely entitled to his day/days/weeks in Court there are just elements of this that ring true.
You seem ready to just be ready to just blow it off.
In the discussion of Watson. My bad. You’re right.
You can stand by your statement all you want but you are so very very wrong.
Everybody keeps bringing up Duke Lacrosse, Big Ben, Kraft etc. The case closest to this one would be Harvey Weinstein. He is currently serving 23 years in prison and awaiting a second trial in another state. NO MEDICAL EVIDENCE, NONE. It was multiple women who didn’t report the incidents out of fear for their careers.
You are lost in another time Riverman.
The Duke case is a horrible example.... 1 accuser. Just 1. Not as of now 9 and possibly 22 or more women who do not know each other. If this was just 1 I would get the defense.
My context from the first post has been the same. No need to keep stating.
You’ve admitted you’re biased toward the women in this case. Just keep an open mind and trust due process like wrench said.
I can see how it was confusing. I worded it weirdly. I’m my point was Duke had 1 person accusing something. DW is up to 12.
I’m biased towards believing women, not just these women and not just dismissing them as a money grab, Investigations need to be done. Watson gets to defend himself. Quit misquoting people and trying to cleanup your stance. You think Watson did nothing wrong. Just say it. I mean you are actually trying to prove his innocence and now saying even if he did it that without medical evidence they can’t prove it. Which is blatantly false.
No, I am not comparing the crimes. I am using it as a rush to judgement warning. Again, the case is so early, people should just pump the brakes a little. I think most everyone has said it looks bad for Watson. My point in bringing up Duke is that the court of public opinion is often misinformed and people should wait to condemn. Watson is in a bind because of the number of people accusing him no doubt, but my post SPECIFICALLY stated I wasn’t comparing the crimes, but rather the rush to judgement.
I really wasn’t responding specifically at you and so probably shouldn’t have quoted you, I know what you are saying, I was just making a general statement about the Duke case. 1 accuser is a rush to judgement, I get it, We also don’t need to rush to judgement in this case either. However, the Harvey Weinstein Case is the best example of what’s going on with Watson.
Thanks. I just took exception to introduce the idea of “rape” into the context of discussion. I’m not aware of any allegations of rape toward Watson. It was my misunderstanding.
I believe forced oral sex is considered rape?
It is.
Slapping someone hand with your junk is at minimum an assaultive offense as well.
yes!
It is CRITICALLY unfair to Watson to rush to judgement and condemn his character under the assumption he’s guilty just based off of allegations and the “number” of accusers. He IS ALREADY suffering damages due to this being in the court of public opinion, regardless of whether he’s actually guilty or not. He probably has done some stupid, maybe illegal behavior, the merit of the allegations and the legality of the transgressions are to be determined by due process. But either guilty or innocent, his formerly good reputation has and continues to be tarnished.
and like it or not, plaintiff’s attorneys exploit the unfair and brutal nature of the court of public opinion to their clients’ (and their own) financial advantage. It’s a VERY common practice.
A sex crime accusation, coming from 1 or 12 is plenty damning. regardless of whether anyone is found guilty or not. If Watson is proved to have been guilty with only 1 person, it just as horrific. Due process is due process and the Duke case better illustrates that because Harvey was indeed guilty and the Duke guys were not. That is why I used that example because to use Weinstein assumes guilt right now. I am not defending Watson, I am defending due process.
Yes. But issue is first, did she consent by definition, and second did it actually occur.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
