And my point is that the entire trial was not covered in the article and none of us knows what else was presented. Apparently enough to find the man guilty. I am having trouble with all the apologists on this thread! The article never said her essay was the only evidence.
I'm just not seeing justification for prosecution and people have been
prosecuted with less evidence for much worse, like Murder on false accusations.
One of the Jurors was also only 20-years old. No mention how old the others
were or the makeup of the jury.
I don’t doubt the verdict. I don’t see where the stepdad objected very strongly. I do have a problem when convictions are handed down when it’s one word against the other with no physical evidence. And that does happen.