Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
The two women alleged they were eyewitnesses to Assange's behavior. "I say I saw this" is the strongest evidence you have in these sorts of intimate, one-to-one contexts. If courts didn't consider it 'strong evidence' then we'd pretty much never get any convictions for crimes that happen in intimate, one-on-one contexts.

fairleft
by fairleft (fairleftatyahoodotcom) on Thu Aug 26th, 2010 at 03:44:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]
We pretty much never do get convictions for crimes that happen in intimate, one-on-one contexts.

It also depends on the credibility of the witnesses in question. But the credibility of the witnesses is a matter for the courts of law to decide, not for the courts of public opinion.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Thu Aug 26th, 2010 at 07:30:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
In the states many are convicted of 'sex-or-abuse-related' crimes on such intimate testimony. It's one of those 'who do you believe' deals for either a judge or a jury. This has long been considered a difficult and 'feminist' issue, because if you don't credit such testimony to some extent then certain sorts of 'non-violent' incidences of sexual abuse and rape become very difficult to 'prove' beyond a reasonable doubt.

Anyway, 2 witnesses against 1 would not have been helpful to Assange, but now things may get down, according to shaky press reports, to one woman's word against his.

fairleft

by fairleft (fairleftatyahoodotcom) on Fri Aug 27th, 2010 at 10:16:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series