Where Everybody Knows Your Name
So this happened:
Defense lawyers in the coming trial of two high school football players charged with raping a nearly passed-out-drunk 16-year-old girl are expected to argue on the issue of consent.
In the case that has shocked the nation, prosecutors state that the inebriated girl was taken to a number of parties by a group of drunk teenagers, supporting her to walk when she wasn’t physically capable.
The prosecution claims that the group later sexually assaulted the girl while she lay unconscious.
But attorney Walter Madison, who represents one of the accused boys, argues she was drinking voluntarily and left willingly with the group of boys.
As reported by the Cleveland Trader Madison said: ‘There’s an abundance of evidence here that she was making decisions, cognitive choices.’ ‘She didn’t affirmatively say no,’ he stated.
I don’t believe in Hell. But if there is one, these defense attorneys are going there.






<a href="http://stranahaninexile.wordpress.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://stranahaninexile.wordpress.com/</a>
<a href="http://stranahaninexile.wordpress.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://stranahaninexile.wordpress.com/</a>
What is the difference between "an affirmative no" and "a negative yes"? Did she say "a negative yes" or "an affirmative yes" or "a negative no"?
I think the attorney should tell his clients to plea bargain: under the influence and diminish capacity, and all that. To say what he said was stupid, detrimental to his own career and would not help his clients.
What is the difference between "an affirmative no" and "a negative yes"? Did she say "a negative yes" or "an affirmative yes" or "a negative no"?
I think the attorney should tell his clients to plea bargain: under the influence and diminish capacity, and all that. To say what he said was stupid, detrimental to his own career and would not help his clients.
Also, the defence attorneys are blameless here. If there arguments are actually as stupid and obviously false as they seem, then the rapists will lose regardless of them making those arguments. But even scum are entitled to a... (show more)
Also, the defence attorneys are blameless here. If there arguments are actually as stupid and obviously false as they seem, then the rapists will lose regardless of them making those arguments. But even scum are entitled to a fair trial, and you can't have a fair trial without somebody fighting hard for the defence. (show less)
They are already there.
That's what this nihilistic pseudo-culture does not understand, the Truth is objective.
They are already there.
That's what this nihilistic pseudo-culture does not understand, the Truth is objective.