Please tell me i’m not the only one who still finds this ridiculous and believes that only a court of law can determine guilt?
Please tell me i’m not the only one who still finds this ridiculous and believes that only a court of law can determine guilt?
What candidate isn’t vulnerable to this type of charge though? Should you be fired from your job, immediately and without trial, if one of your exes comes out of the woodwork to accuse you of something?
People get drunk. The vast majority of the US population has been drunk at some point in their life. Most people could have such accusations leveled against them, and they would have no way of refuting it.
If there’s evidence from multiple people and text messages and therapist notes all from before a run for a government position that indicates you have a problem with boundaries and sexual assault, yes.
Or maybe you prefer Platner’s approach to talking to rape victims:
You are spreading misinformation. Please read the actual NYTimes and Politico articles carefully. There is one and only one piece of contemporary evidence - screenshots of facebook messages that could have been easily photoshopped. And the name of the person they were sent to was kept secret.
That’s it. Literally everything else has either been deleted or is more recent. The therapist notes are recent.
Planter isn’t gonna fuck you, bro. He’s too into raping women while blackout drunk.
Just because you don’t know the names of the friend and ex-boyfriend doesn’t mean they are completely unknown or that they are not credible. Likewise, the therapist’s notes are still evidence.
His quote speaks to how he views rape victims which is relevant.
You said:
I pointed out that in fact there is very little evidence contemporary to the alleged rape. You ignored this and instead replied, “but it’s still evidence.”
Here’s what he wrote about a soldier convicted of raping and murdering a 14 year old Iraqi girl:
Again, Platner could release his side of the conversations. I wonder how much different his texts are from what his victim is saying about that night.
It is still evidence whether you want it to be or not.
Why would he have those messages if what he says is true? If Platner is telling the truth, then those messages never existed. You’re demanding Platner produce something that, according to his side, never existed in the first place.
He doesn’t deny the relationship with this woman.
You’re confusing “all texts” with “specific and relevant texts.”
Yes, Platner would have had texts with her. But the texts where she asked him not to come over, or accused him of rape, the actual damning stuff? None of that would exist if Platner is telling the truth.