And yet she was *not* "dead."
I think using the drunken hyperbole of teenage boys as "evidence," particularly when, as in this case, the statement is demonstrably wrong, is the tactic of a mob.
Further, my "default" is "innocent until proven guilty" and in no post from anyone in the "lynch'em" crowd have I seen anything but white hot hate for any comment that could be construed as exculpatory.
My position is that all parties were too inebriated to credibly support a rape charge, and I'd rather see ten guilty go free than one innocent convicted.
The law regarding consent is clear. If she’s passed out, she doesn’t have the ability to consent by law.
That’s not a new concept. It doesn’t matter if she was trashed or not. She was guilty of being stupid. The perps were guilty of being evil.
“My position is that all parties were too inebriated to credibly support a rape charge, and I’d rather see ten guilty go free than one innocent convicted.”
Really? My understanding is that the boys weren’t even slurring their words when speaking. Just how drunk were they when they were driving her around from house to house?
The young victim was unable to give consent. There is proof by way of pictures and witnesses.
Yet you still favor the rapists rather than the victim.
Absolutely stunning.
They were carrying her around as dead weight, for pete’s sake! How much more “out of it” does a person need to be? How much more “out of it” can a person get?