Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Exactly my point. That video doesn't show a rape or sexual assault. The video shows a naked man dragging (and not overly aggressively or violently even) a semi-nude woman who casually walked out of the motel room back into the motel room. This can easily be viewed in a number of ways. The jury decided to believe Mateen and not believe his accuser; they found the accuser to be untrustworthy apparently due to changing stories, etc.
She was running away the second time before he dragged her back. You keep pretending she was casually walking away.
She was not. We must have not watched the same video.
It was the second time she tried to getaway. The first time looked like a drunk stumble ad the second time, thirteen minutes later, she was running (jogging pace). That is where he wrapped his arms around her middle and carried her off before she fell to the ground.
Her involvement at what point, though? Its clear that the woman didn't want to go back into the room. But, again, that doesn't prove that a rape or sexual assault took place. It is known for people to have consensual sex and for one party to be upset/pissed off afterward based on something said/a text message read/etc. I don't know what all that happened. What I do know is that the jury decided to not believe the accuser and that the video does not show sexual assault.
Do all rapes have to be recorded on video in meticulous detail in order for it be clear that it's a sexual assault?
With many crimes, there is NO video recording. Does video have to be the absolute requirement for prosecution? If so, we need to let tons and tons of prisoners out of jail.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 8 days ago)
35,634 posts, read 17,975,706 times
Reputation: 50663
So regardless of the reason she was trying to get out of there - whether she was drunk out of her mind and decided to walk home for some reason, she was clearly trying to get away and was pleading with the witness for help.
At that point, this man dragged her back into his hotel room, certainly knowing cops were on the way, and 13 minutes later she runs out again and he's STILL NAKED. That doesn't point to him trying to make sure she's ok, he's just got his hands full here taking care of her, he's STILL NAKED. After she made a real attempt to get away he still, while expecting the cops to arrive (they didn't, though) he hasn't bothered to put on boxers and a t-shirt. Why?
How can anyone determine what happened between these two people from that few second clip? the jury saw this clip, heard the evidence, and made their judgement.
How do you think he got off scott free from those charges?!!! If this was some 'nobody'/ average Joe smith down the street, and there was a video like this....he would be convicted in 5 minutes and be sent up for 20+ yrs.
Just curious, does anyone know how long the jury deliberated in this case? Im betting it was not long.
How do you think he got off scott free from those charges?!!! If this was some 'nobody'/ average Joe smith down the street, and there was a video like this....he would be convicted in 5 minutes and be sent up for 20+ yrs.
Just curious, does anyone know how long the jury deliberated in this case? Im betting it was not long.
Little over two hours, some round things out to three.
"In the end, the jury took a little over two hours before acquitting Cleaves on all counts, prompting him to leap into the arms of Frank Manley and sob loudly in court."
This was a standard "blame the victim" case, a defense of (allegedly) rape that has has was common if not standard well until the 1980's or so.
Cleaves was never going to be convicted, just as it was (and often still is) difficult to win such cases when the man is powerful, successful, and more importantly relies upon his status as a pillar of community, family man, brought up properly from one of our very best homes, etc....
All through the proceedings and afterwards all Cleaver has been saying pretty much is "you know me, you know my family, how could I do such a thing..".
More to the point the female's behaviour prior to the incident wasn't entirely blameless in many eyes. She came on to Cleaver (allegedly), drank booze, went willingly to a rented room, etc... All things that go against the "nice/respectable" female standard that is still used to judge victims of sexual assault.
Bottom line Cleaver was portrayed as a saint, the woman a ****, and you know what happens afterwards.
Far as defense team, jurors and others are concerned Cleaver was guilty of nothing more than stepping out on his wife. Boys will be boys, and if you start locking up every married man who has a bit on the side, you are going to have thousands of empty places at dinner tables.
I see a fleeing naked woman assaulted and kidnapped. What do you think happened to her before and after she was dragged back to the room?
I saw a few second clip without information regarding the context. the jurors were given all the facts. they didn't convict the man of rape. I respect their decision. why do you dispute the decision of the jurors?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
