LogFAQs > #909160957

darkknight109 posted...

GreenKnight127 posted...

However, what I am also saying is that due process is a thing and men shouldn't be seen as guilty by default just because some woman said something happened years ago. It shouldn't be some fucking race for the guy to try and clear his name. No. SHE needs to prove a rape/assault/harassment occurred.

I'm sorry, "she" needs to prove this occurred?

Fucking why? She's not an investigator. She has absolutely no tools or authority to do that, and even if she did the results wouldn't be considered admissible because of her glaring conflict of interest. That's the entire reason why we have investigative bodies - like the FBI - in the first place, and it's exactly why she and the Democrats are asking for an investigation to take place.

Again, you're conflating standards here. If you're putting the guy behind bars, yeah, you need to prove that the rape happened. But that's not what we're talking about here. Again, Kavanaugh is not owed anything in this process - not the nomination, not a fair-and-speedy trial, nothing. The senators could vote him down because they don't like his tie, that's their right.

Women in today's society DO need to prove a rape/assault/harassment occurred. Does that concept blow your mind or something? How else would a woman expect law enforcement to magically find evidence against the man to result in a conviction unless she brings something forward beyond a verbal testimony?

In the case of Kavanaugh, since this incident happened almost 35 freakin' YEARS ago....what the hell does she expect the FBI to "investigate" exactly? You can get all the sworn statements you want from people who might have been around at the time, but that was a loooooong ass time ago. Those people are going to have fuzzy memories and be totally different people now than they were then. Unless someone's got a torn swimsuit with Kavanaugh's fingerprints on it....I don't know what the hell people are expecting to find that could damn him. Other than the damn allegations alone. Which brings me back to my initial point: the destruction of a man from allegations alone.

I could go into a police station right now and claim that my neighbor is a pedophile. The first question the cops are going to ask is, "Do you have any evidence to support that claim? Why would you think that your neighbor is a pedophile?"

And at that moment.......everything stops. Unless I have something concrete to offer them, the chances of them getting a warrant to investigate or arrest my neighbor are slim to none. Sure, they might be able to go over and question him, but he could just deny it. That's assuming the cops don't have anything else better to do and decide to go over and question him at all. And my allegations of him being a pedophile shouldn't be able to legally damn him in any way. Should he be fired from his job because someone made allegations about him? Should his company fire him simply because it "looks bad", even if my accusation is a complete lie simply because I was upset he mowed over my rose bushes?

In 2018, the game has changed. Women could easily get evidence to support a claim of abuse. Cell phones are everywhere. Social media can make tracking down witnesses very easy. So many streets, businesses, and intersections have cameras. If some guy does something terrible to a woman, there can be evidence to support it.

If a woman wakes up in a frat house, and believes she might have been raped.......she could easily take pictures of bruises or questionable marks on her body the next morning in the bathroom. She could easily walk into a doctor's office and get swabs for possible DNA evidence. Build a case. Value your life. Seek justice.
---

~Gamefaqs logic: Q: If it's so obviously a troll topic...why are you responding to it? A: "Because I have to tell them it's a troll topic!" *facepalm*