• Empricorn@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    84
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    He raped her. That last judge went out of their way to clarify that point. He should be in prison. But monetary compensation as well…

    • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      AFAIK the sexual assault allegation was proven with a proponderence of evidence in civil court only. I guess the criminal case already passed statute of limitation.

      This is why sexual assault, as this includes rape. But rape is a specific criminal thing and since he has not been criminally convicted he is only a sexual predator and assaulter… not a rapist. I’m explaining not agreeing btw.

      And civil court only leads to money not jail time.

      Edit: can anyone downvoting this please explain? I don’t understand, I was merely trying to explain the process and the current situation.

      • Empricorn@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        10 months ago

        You’re right, of course. It’s why victims of traumatic crimes should have longer to report their attackers and receive justice.

        • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          10 months ago

          Yup, although looking at all the sexual assault allegations we have seen in the past years from long ago. People that where abused at a very young age and/or by people that held a position of authority over them… the time should be longer.

          Time should also not tick away as long as the victim is a minor. Ie. If a victim was 13 at the time of the assault the time should be extended with at least 5 years… if not more.

          Ofc there is a question if there should be a statute of limitation at all for these types of crimes. Proof is hard enough as it is.