> Rape cases continue to be notoriously difficult to prosecute and the onus of proof still too often falls on victims of sexual violence.
The article stops short of saying that plaintiffs should not have to prove an assault occured.
Why beat around bush? I wholeheartedly agree and support this notion and I sincerely hope it will be signed into law at once.
Maybe once we've watched the ensuing chaos for a bit we can return to reason and collectively move past tolerating destructive nonsense disguised as thought-terminating high ideals.
Or maybe they want a surveillance state so total, the question of whether something occured isn't a question at all? Sounds good to me as well, let's try it.
That's not it either? So what is it then?
Besides the hapless vaguely activist undertones of this article, it was rather interesting. Could've done without the modern-day commentary though.
The article stops short of saying that plaintiffs should not have to prove an assault occured.
Why beat around bush? I wholeheartedly agree and support this notion and I sincerely hope it will be signed into law at once.
Maybe once we've watched the ensuing chaos for a bit we can return to reason and collectively move past tolerating destructive nonsense disguised as thought-terminating high ideals.
Or maybe they want a surveillance state so total, the question of whether something occured isn't a question at all? Sounds good to me as well, let's try it.
That's not it either? So what is it then?
Besides the hapless vaguely activist undertones of this article, it was rather interesting. Could've done without the modern-day commentary though.