Mamood Farooqui. Tried his luck with what was probably a lefty loon and is now paying for it. Also, the guy tries to make his move while his wife is in the kitchen?
“Yes” and “No” both mean no depending upon how she feels about it next week, next month or next year. And women are always to be believed no matter how many times they lied in various love letters, emails and texts to their attacker.
If I understand correctly, the rape victim showed interest in the rapist, who was married to another woman. This does not bode well for her.
However, from the article: the judge questioned whether the perp was “able to understand it [her non-consent to sex] as he was allegedly in an inebriated state and suffered from bipolar disorder.”
That’s a huge red flag. Now being bipolar or drunk are considered legitimate defenses to accusations of rape? Doesn’t fly.
That’s the kind of failed logic that allowed a European (iirc) judge to accept the excuse of a man who raped a little boy at a swimming pool because the man claimed he had a “sexual emergency.”
The only thing worse is the judges who punish women for adultery when they make a complaint of rape.
Mamood Farooqui. Tried his luck with what was probably a lefty loon and is now paying for it. Also, the guy tries to make his move while his wife is in the kitchen?
That sounds like a reasonable conclusion.
I think this comes down to reasonable doubt. In this case she expressed through writing enough interest - past positive responses with the kissing, stating I love you, and the length/depth of the relationship to put enough doubt in the court’s mind to not pronounce guilt.
She’d likely win a civil case where it’s only preponderance of the evidence.
The standard for criminal conviction is “guilt beyond a reasonable doubt”. To all appearances, there was reasonable doubt in this case.