 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jan 8, 2020 - 7:46 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Mark
(Member)
|
A few questions as I am not familiar with US law. -
Why are the women involved in this case being referred to as 'victims' , not, as they would in the UK, 'alleged victims'? Surely, in itself this prejudices a jury?
When the burden of proof is on the Prosecutor to show that, in the two cases in which he is on trial for, he is guilty, are other so called witnesses being called, some of whom have claims which fall outside of the statute of limitations, and none of whom are true witnesses in the sense that they can provide any evidence or facts to the two cases on show? Showing patterns of behaviour do not prove anything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Going by what was said here, they got a big ol' cup of jack squat against Harvey Weinstein, the alleged sexual deviant.
So, if that's all they go, the worst possible thing will happen here: A show trial that goes nowhere, people in charge saying they did something when they knew nothing was going to come about it, then Harvey Weinstein, the alleged sexual deviant, can pound his chest and tell us how innocent he was the whole time and his (foregone conclusion of a) win shows that.
What a joke.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I read somewhere that he's got to be convicted by the whole jury to be found guilty.
Like that's ever gonna happen!
|
|
|
|
|
|
I got the impression from all the similar accusations that this guy was/is a serial masher.
Whether that's illegal is another thing. Plenty of coercive impositions are legal in our so-called "free" society.
Question is: does your particular in-group have the money or political clout to brush the depredations of long-established coercers off?
I'm guessing that all these scattered, relatively unconnected women don't qualify.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I read somewhere that he's got to be convicted by the whole jury to be found guilty.
Like that's ever gonna happen!
Is this like when footballers headbutt people in bars and are caught on film but still get off? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The UK system is far superior and fairer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Male jurors, thinking to themselves: "How do I get outta this? If we acquit this guy, no matter how lame the evidence The Wife will castrate me!"
Thank God Jacfool isn't a Senator
|
|
|
|
|
|
You ask some interesting questions. I wonder if the pattern of behavior stuff is just groundwork.
Who knows, nowadays in legal proceedings?
Some rather high-profile procedures have happened lately, with no real evidence presented, no witnesses offering any evidence, hearsay and presumptions being presented as evidence, and so on.
This trial may not be all that unique.
Ibid
|
|
|
|
|
|
If Jacfool was on the Cosby jury he would be a free man
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To be fair, when you're that fat, you might need a walker to support all that fucking fat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jan 8, 2020 - 11:39 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Mark
(Member)
|
I don't see Weinstein being acquitted, mainly due to the notability of all the accusations. I think he'll be found guilty if only because of all the publicity.
Just as O.J. was acquitted for obvious reasons, I believe Weinstein will be found guilty.
The verdict may be overturned, or perhaps at best he might get a mistrial.
Thanks for everyone's replies on this. I wonder what responses I would have got from a more leftwing, woke, female orientated forum? Probably just questioning the fact that he may be innocent of the crimes he is on trial for would have got me banned from this forum.
I agree with Jackfu's response which I have pasted above. I have been shocked by a number of recent cases in the UK and USA where people have been found guilty of crimes despite the only evidence being the word of the alleged victim..... And I think, because of the profile of this horrendous metoo movement that that will happen here. The pressure on the jury to find Weinstein, who undoubtedly is a sexual predator and guilty of some of what he has been accused of, is overwhelming.
The hypocrisy of many Hollywood stars in this sorry story is amazing. There are stars and 'backroom staff' who have used the casting couch for their benefit, who knew of Weinstein's ways but for years let it go and said nothing who are now sticking it to his bleeding corpse and patting themselves on their bravery for doing so. Brave is being Casca and stabbing first, not being the last to do so.
And don't get me started on Rose Mcgowan...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Also accused of sex trafficking, as I recall.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
