"she noted the female was never questioned on the witness stand about it, nor did she report any physical pain, discomfort or injury."
I'm not getting that. The female didn't report what she would have reported if she had been forcibly raped by a telephone pole that size, so that proves she was raped?
Huh?
And not the good screams.
Then again,perhaps she became less enthused with the proposition once she commenced the special preps? He didn't want to stop though.
I don't understand this either. What is the actual basis of the charge, how was the charge substantiated, is there more to the charge than a simple 'she said'? If a rape kit could easily exonerate him, why was it not performed? Is this fellow being railroaded by a 'feminazi' court?