I see where you’re coming from. I just think the person you’re engaging with here does not want to go so far as to say the five accused are innocent given the seriousness of the issue at hand.
Much of the evidence is unknown and comes to light during a trial. I don't believe in lynch mobs or lynch mob mentality.
Its sad that people feel the need to attack others with a difference of opinion. Some clown going on about Prussia is just bizarre.
They could be, but intelligent men to me don't invite themselves to a woman who can't consent, or at least stop when other guys try to.
So all the innocent people in prison belong to be there because they put themselves into a position that can be misunderstood or used against them?
This is such a rare event. When you take into account how many assaults aren’t reported at all, the few who lied about one are extremely small.
Right but I have seen multiple posters say the hockey players are guilty or the poster themselves would never put themselves into a position to be accused or that its the players fault for being there.
In the new America, I expect them to get a warm welcome back, but they have missed too much time and lost more than a few steps.
the NHL tried to do its own investigation for this very reason but the alleged victim refused to cooperate with the NHL and refused to answer any questions.
That's why the term in a criminal trial is "not guily". The verdict is never "innocent", it's that there is not enough evidence to prove the defendant guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
The statement that, "a not guilty verdict does not necessarily mean the defendants are innocent" is not a difference of opinion. It is simply a correct statement.
Except the guy quoted me specifically and said I implied that and I was wrong to make such inference. ...Make that statement all you want put don't direct it at me if you aren't implying some garbage statement that I "implied"
I hear you. In my life I’ve now known two men falsely accused of abuse. And it was a meat grinder for them.
