The Andrew Tate Case

@zecarlo touched my peepee 30 years ago. I’m calling the police and a lawyer. Prove I’m wrong.

7 Likes

To prove beyond reasonable doubt doesn’t require videographic evidence.

For instance. It could be found through text messages, video feed and whatnot that a man and a woman have gone on a date.

Let’s say the man drives the woman home… but instead of taking her home he drives to a secluded spot and rapes her

Woman shows up to law enforcement later covered in bruises and cuts, visibly shaken up and crying. A rape kit confirms DNA from the guy including seminal fluid is present.

They apprehend the guy, who fails a polygraph test when asked if he raped the girl… and her hair/whatever is found in the car, there is forensic evidence of a struggle etc.

At this point you’ve proven beyond a reasonable doubt that sexual assault has occurred and you don’t require video or audio.

Most rape cases aren’t like this… MOST rape cases are a case of “he said she said” and as a result most are thrown out of court.

I divert to the lawyers i’ve spoken to about this

Contrary to popular belief, rape is extremely hard to prove even if one is accused by multiple people. Outside of high profile cases the VAST majority of rape cases are thrown out of court.

Caveat is when the case involves children or people who are incapable of consenting as a rape kit alone is irrefutable evidence at that point.

In Andrew Tate’s case… some of his statements coupled with videos of him actually beating women make me believe chances are they’ve got quite a bit of evidence on him… and he will probably be found guilty but not due to #metoo culture or PC culture that doesn’t exist in Romania to begin with

The Romanian Intelligence Service can’t just go and knock down your door, detain you for 30 days and seize all of your assets for no good reason.

It’s the same as the FBI raiding your property and doing the same… chances are there’s a reason.

Correct.

Related to this:

This problem has been gone over at length in a book I’ve recommended several times on the forum: The New Politics of Sex by Dr. Stephen Baskerville.

2 Likes

Me TOO! I was -8 years old…

@zecarlo

How do you respond to these allegations!

3 Likes

Yes, a date occurred.

A woman or man can cry for any reason at any moment, including shortly after sex while in bed with one another when no rape occurred.

Seminal fluid is present after sex. So can bruises and lost hair after rough sexual encounters. (Has anyone here ever been surprised by how forcefully some women request to be handled during sex?) That doesn’t prove rape.

Polygraphs are inadmissible in court.

I don’t think it does, but I’m not a lawyer.

That’s precisely what I’ve already alluded to.

And this is all the more reason why I don’t think sexual decisions should be treated lightly.

2 Likes

Mhmmmmm

The United States Supreme Court leaves the question of the admissibility of lie detector test evidence up to individual jurisdictions. Some courts allow lie detector evidence in certain proceedings or only when both parties agree to its admissibility. Other jurisdictions do not allow any lie detector evidence. The states that sometimes allow polygraph tests as evidence in criminal case include:

  • Alabama
  • Arizona
  • Arkansas
  • California
  • Delaware
  • Georgia
  • Idaho
  • Indiana
  • Iowa
  • Kansas
  • Nevada
  • New Jersey
  • New Mexico
  • North Dakota
  • Ohio
  • Utah
  • Washington
  • Wyoming

And various countries alongside this

As time progresses, these tests have become more accurate.

When I was working as an EMT, in one case we had come across a woman who had just been raped

I think you’d be hard pressed to find a person visibly shaken up, covered in bruises and cuts screaming and crying like that out of spite…

How common is it to get punched in the face to the point of your eyes swelling closed during rough sex?

How common is it to dislocate a shoulder or have fingers bent backwards during rough sex?

I’m using examples of cases when rape and associated punishment has been the verdict handed down (i.e what is beyond a reasonable doubt)

Out of curioisty… when assault (non sexual) occurs on private property… how can we prove beyond a reasonable doubt that one individual was the perpetrator without videographic or audio evidence?

Say two individuals get into an arguement and one punches the other in the face, fracturing the individuals orbital bone.

Perhaps someone else did it? Or is it possible with forensic examination and DNA testing to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that one person was the perpetrator

What if forensic examination corroberates the pattern of events outlined by the victim but doesn’t account for discrepancies in the narrative of the accused?

It can also be difficult to prove that non sexual assault occured on private property btw and/or that it was the accused who commited the crime.

According to the two lawyers i’ve spoken to

It does

But that’s a small sample size

It is very hard to prove rape. But if one can leave enough evidence for forensic examination to outline a scenario that is corroberated by testimony and that scenario doesn’t corroberate with what the accused outlines… the tables turn in in favour of a guilty verdict.

Especially if you have DNA evidence of seminal depisition in conjunction.

Look into how rape cases are handled when guilty verdicts are handed down. It’s a fascinating process, the technology they use is very impressive.

I thought it was obvious I wasn’t referring to such cases. I was going by what you used as examples: lost hair, bruising.

Courts are also going to by what is more likely

That the woman requested to have patches of hair torn out… or that she was sexually assaulted.

“Beyond a reasonable doubt”.

Some particuarly deranged individual might actually request to be punched in the face during sex. Its just incredibly unlikely.

There’s even an act called a donkey punch that involves punching your partner in the back of the head!

I thought it was obvious I was referring to some lost hair, not obvious bald spots.

I also thought it was obvious that not all instances of rape involve such sheer brutality.

You lose hair during regular sex too. Humans shed hair all the time.

Hair in itself isn’t admissable evidence unless say… the woman says she was in the guys house and the guy says “no she wasn’t”

For hair to be brought up as evidence it either has to be something alongside the lines of hair popping up in an environment where the accused denies the woman was present in

Or… obvious bald spots

Yeah, that’s what I meant.

The intial arguement was that one can’t prove rape without videographic evidence or audio.

I say that’s not the case. Especially if a scenario can be outlined with evidence that the testimony of the accused can’t corroberate.

If you are flat out called out in the middle of a massive lie

I.e “I never brought her home”

But her DNA is all over your house in conjunction with testimony, seminal fluid being present, forensic evidence of a struggle etc

You’ve proven beyond a reasonable doubt that rape occured. Especially if you’ve lied under oath.

But it’s still hard to prove. That’s why most rape cases are chucked out of court.

Ok

Your post here infers that there is no way to prove that rape has occured absent of video or audio.

Regardless of what is obvious and what isn’t obvious

Saying “it’s not possible to prove” isn’t true.

Does a guy asking a question about something and saying he doesn’t think so sound like someone who stated something with absolute certainty?

Am I allowed to express a thought without certainty?

Punishable by 72 years in prison.

I ASKED the question. I didn’t say it’s impossible!

You asked the question

And I answered it.

Yes

It is possible to prove.

Sure… and people are allowed to respond with an answer.

Yes, that’s good enough! And I accepted your information yet you continued to post as if I was arguing and that I was certain, which I obviously wasn’t!