(February 9, 2020 at 8:34 pm)Athene Wrote:(February 9, 2020 at 6:58 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote: This is just pure speculation, you have no idea what her condition even is or how serious it is, the point is she is a functioning adult who wasn't experiencing any sort of delusional behavior during the incident and she was able to an accurate description of what happened that night which was also confirmed by Bryant himself, the only point of contention was the consent.
Her injuries were not consistent with rough sex, the medical report found it "not to be consistent with consensual sex". A sexually active women is not going to tear and bleed during "rough sex" that lasted 5 minutes.
Why is this such a problem for you, I think he raped her, I believe her and not him, I don't see why your so upset about it?
Pure speculation? Authorities confirmed that the accuser had made 2 recent suicide attempts prior to the encounter with Bryant and was indeed taking prescribed medication for the treatment of schizophrenia. Witness accounts and her own retraction of pertinent details following the alleged assault clearly demonstrate drastic disparities in her perception of the event AND clear lies and/or extraordinary confusion in regards to her original statement.
That sort of evidence cannot simply be ignored by a court of law, no matter what you say.
It presents a solid foundation for reasonable doubt.
And yes, vigorous consensual sex can result in vaginal injuries similar to rape. Google it, if you don't believe me. And once again, so can multiple partners within a brief time span--Which again, was evidenced in her rape kit.
Btw---I'm not upset that you believe the accuser, nor do I care actually. You're not a sitting judge, network executive or anything like that as far I can tell, so I'm honestly baffled as to why you would think I feel you're that important. You started a dialogue with me on based off of a post that I directed at Huggy, remember? I've simply been responding to the thoughts and queries you directed at me, with my own thoughts.
That's how discussion forums work.
I don't have to google anything, the medical report said "not consistent with consensual sex", what good what it do me who is not a medical professional, to look up other injuries and try to compare them. The whole reason they do a rape kit and examination is because they can identify the trauma consistent with a rape.
The fact that this was going to trial tells you that they felt there was enough evidence to prosecute, I don't know what else to tell you. The evidence was not on Bryant's side in this case which is why they were going after things like the type of meds she was taking. Bryant's team knew they were in trouble which is why they settled out of court and issued an apology.
You seem upset about it, telling me I'm just glossing over things and barreling ahead to label him rapist, as if I took no time to look at the evidence and just want to label him a rapist.
