Quote Originally Posted by ReginaldBubbles View Post
And they did find him guilty because a girl is allowed to change her mind and not have the guy insisted on violently fingering her when she says no.
The issue here is, how do you prove when she changed her mind. There is no way to prove that she did not retract her consent only after the act, for whatever reason.

I mean sure, the guy is a dog leaving a girl injured like that. He should be done for causing bodily harm. I think people would have had more faith in the justice system if that had happened.

Toward the end of the trial, the jury asked the judge if "ignorance of the law was a sufficient defence". The judge replied No. The judge had to force the jury to take more time to come up with a "decision", when they had told the judge that they couldn't come up with a unanimous decision even after 2 extra long deliberation sessions.

That sound fair to you? Under any normal circumstance, a jury not being able to find a defendant guilty would've resulted in the defendant being found not guilty. Not given more time over and over until they found the guy guilty.