Andrew Cuomo accused of sexual assault as ‘look-back’ window closes
Ex-governor accused by former aide amid flurry of last-minute claims under New York’s Adult Survivors Act
www.theguardian.com
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I know little about the history of this law. Was it passed with the intention of allowing Carroll to go after Trump?Andrew Cuomo accused of sexual assault as ‘look-back’ window closes
Ex-governor accused by former aide amid flurry of last-minute claims under New York’s Adult Survivors Actwww.theguardian.com
I never heard that but I don't know.I know little about the history of this law. Was it passed with the intention of allowing Carroll to go after Trump?
That law is absurdAndrew Cuomo accused of sexual assault as ‘look-back’ window closes
Ex-governor accused by former aide amid flurry of last-minute claims under New York’s Adult Survivors Actwww.theguardian.com
I'm a little surprised it's constitutional. But the courts have always been pretty lenient when it comes to SOLs.That law is absurd
Over 2,000 suits filed. Many against gov actors. Jail etc. like tort reform. Always a mad rush to file before it kicks in and a resultant logjam for a few yearsI'm a little surprised it's constitutional. But the courts have always been pretty lenient when it comes to SOLs.
I know little about the history of this law. Was it passed with the intention of allowing Carroll to go after Trump?
To even consider that Trump was the focus would be absurd, right? Crazy.It was passed in the wake of #MeToo. That Trump got caught up in it is not surprising, but I don't think it was passed with him as a specific target.
My issue with this #Me too stuff is where is the evidence? There has to be some physical or eyewitness evidence to prove these claims. Yet people are getting ostracized over circumstantial claims, it's ridiculous and goes against innocent until proven guilty.
I'm just glad I'm not being held to account for the way I treated women 40 or 50 years ago. I'd be doing time.
What kind of evidence is there usually in sexual abuse cases? Guys don’t usually do it in a crowd with witnesses.My issue with this #Me too stuff is where is the evidence? There has to be some physical or eyewitness evidence to prove these claims. Yet people are getting ostracized over circumstantial claims, it's ridiculous and goes against innocent until proven guilty.
Rape kits. Police reports. Today timely messages. On and on. With the priest cases you had repressed memories etc. These are a nightmare.What kind of evidence is there usually in sexual abuse cases? Guys don’t usually do it in a crowd with witnesses.
You know this how....?What kind of evidence is there usually in sexual abuse cases? Guys don’t usually do it in a crowd with witnesses.
I'm thinking a bullet hole in the head of the rapist, would be a pretty good piece of evidence. Or for a less drastic measure, extreme burn marks from a tazzer? Just a thought.What kind of evidence is there usually in sexual abuse cases? Guys don’t usually do it in a crowd with witnesses.
So short of that, there's no case?I'm thinking a bullet hole in the head of the rapist, would be a pretty good piece of evidence. Or for a less drastic measure, extreme burn marks from a tazzer? Just a thought.
I haven’t looked at the elements but it seems like a cash grabSo short of that, there's no case?
The common law tradition doesn't have a great history on this topic. Cases have always been tough to make.So short of that, there's no case?
What @mcmurtry66 said.What kind of evidence is there usually in sexual abuse cases? Guys don’t usually do it in a crowd with witnesses.
I'm not a lawyer but I think it's insane people are getting convictions on circumstantial evidence.Rape kits. Police reports. Today timely messages. On and on. With the priest cases you had repressed memories etc. These are a nightmare.
It’s always been screwy. You can kill a guy and get less time in state than stuff involving $I'm not a lawyer but I think it's insane people are getting convictions on circumstantial evidence.
Red from That 70s show is a good example. 30+ years in prison over unsubstantiated accusations? Social media is killing the judicial system.
If your feelz get hurrty, don't come here...What an asshole thing to write.
Sexual abuse doesn’t just mean rape. And there are many, many reasons women don’t report abuse to the police and sometimes not anyone, especially when they are young.Rape kits. Police reports. Today timely messages. On and on. With the priest cases you had repressed memories etc. These are a nightmare.
Because I’ve worked with victims of sexual abuse. Any other questions?You know this how....?
Lol it always comes back to overly emotional women, doesn’t it? Lmao Sorry they are getting old. I know you think the Bill Cosbys and Harvey Weinsteins of the world should get to walk, but….What @mcmurtry66 said.
As for a 30 year old case? He said, she said and overly emotional women who didnt know adams even existed until a year or two ago.
I'm not a fan of him but he has the right of innocent until proven guilty and these decades old sexual abuse accusations are getting old.
There’s more than a few guys here that think sexual abuse is something to joke about.What an asshole thing to write.
Because I’ve worked with victims of sexual abuse. Any other questions?
Nope. Not a swat on the rear, language, things like that, I don’t think so.Should 80s or 90s behavior be judged by 2023 standards? Serious question.
The point is it’s unfair to a defendant. A sol is to protect the defendant. Relevant evidence gets lost, destroyed, witnesses’ memories fade. It’s terribly unfairShould 80s or 90s behavior be judged by 2023 standards? Serious question.
Good griefLol it always comes back to overly emotional women, doesn’t it? Lmao Sorry they are getting old. I know you think the Bill Cosbys and Harvey Weinsteins of the world should get to walk, but….
The point is it’s unfair to a defendant. A sol is to protect the defendant. Relevant evidence gets lost, destroyed, witnesses’ memories fade. It’s terribly unfair
It doesn’t bother me that you’re an asshole. Just pointing it out.If your feelz get hurrty, don't come here...
Then stop whining..It doesn’t bother me that you’re an asshole. Just pointing it out.
It wasn’t Red who was convicted, it was Hyde (Daniel Masterson). Jury found him guilty and typically they get it right. I have no idea what the evidence was.I'm not a lawyer but I think it's insane people are getting convictions on circumstantial evidence.
Red from That 70s show is a good example. 30+ years in prison over unsubstantiated accusations? Social media is killing the judicial system.
I'm not a lawyer but I think it's insane people are getting convictions on circumstantial evidence.