[Melas]

The conservative route, in this context, would be the co-worker being happy that the woman is protecting herself and not saying anything else that would endanger the woman.

Sorry, that would be criminal in and of itself. The conservative route IS NOT BECOMING AN ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT no matter how badly you want to call that conservatism. It's criminal, plainly criminal. How we've fallen that so-called-conservatives now openly call for criminal conspiracies in open and public forums.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

You don't get it, that's fine, we'll just disagree respectfully.

I don't condone criminal activity but there are times when the law itself creates criminal activity via poor judgment & unintended consequences.

[Badray]

Are you a lawyer?

[Badray]

"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void."
Marbury ~vs~ Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)

"When rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda ~vs~ Arizona, 384 US 436 p. 491.

"An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed."
Norton ~vs~ Shelby County, 118 US 425 p. 442.

"The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it's enactment, not merely from the date of the decision branding it."

"No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it."
16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177, late 2d, Sec 256.