• Nougat@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Come now, that wasn’t rape, because New York doesn’t consider “forcibly inserting your fingers into someone’s vagina against their will” as “rape.”

    And he was only found civilly liable, not convicted of a crime, because of statute of limitations. Not even civilly liable of sexual assault, but civilly liable of defamation, because he called her a liar multiple times when she reported the sexual assault incident.

    That’s not so bad, now, is it?

    • beebarfbadger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 hours ago

      And even if he had been found guilty of a crime, then it would just have been a rigged trial. Innocence thus proven. Checkmate, laws.

    • BertramDitore
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      16 hours ago

      I know you’re being cute, but for those who don’t know the whole story: after the jury found him civilly liable, the judge made a point of publicly clarifying that yes, he was found to have raped Carroll.

      One source

      Another source