Why you gotta bring race into this? Can’t we just have a nice, warm-fuzzy rape story without talking about race?
Come on jury: No means no, and lack of “Yes!” means no too.
Hey, “Prince Charming”, hold still a second. Thwock!
According to the article he was convicted but hasn’t been sentanced yet. So we don’t know if he will get prison time.
As much as California, Massachusetts, Virginia, or any of the other places where rapists get no time in jail.
Sheikh’s lawyer Stanley Schneider told the jury it should feel sorry for Sheikh: “The dreams of a man, the childhood dream to become a doctor, were shattered by his conduct. He destroyed his own dreams. What he has done to himself and his family is punishment. They are serving his sentence with him. His children are serving his sentence with him.”
No consideration for the victim? A-hole lawyer.
The more I understand about trials, the more cynical I get about the court system. It really seems to come down to which side can tell a better story to the juries they’ve selected.
Sadly, this guy’s lawyer would be daft to sympathize with the victim and risk damaging his own case.
I can tell y’all from experience. It ain’t fun
to be a rape victim in Texas!
What’s the status of her civil lawsuit from 2015?
Laura believes there are other victims.
“Of course, yes, and the reason I think so is because this person had everything very organized,” she said.
In the hospital, she even tried calling for help, but the nurse’s button was unplugged.
Hmm. Two years ago, he had a different lawyer. I wonder why the change?
To be fair, that’s not the job he was tasked with.
The incredible part is that the “have pity on this poor man who just wanted to work hard and be a doctor” ploy actually worked.
He was caught this time after a DNA investigation, but statistically, given the number of rapes relative to the number of rapists and the well-established psychology of sexual abuse, she was probably not his first victim. He thought to unplug the nurse call button and waited until he wouldn’t be interrupted or easily identified. These aren’t the actions of a spontaneous crime.
Bingo. The prosecution did a shit job if they couldn’t make plain the level of premeditation involved with this particular crime.
I remember learning in US high school civics class that we have an “adversarial” legal system whereby each side strives to get their arguments across. The theory that I was given is that justice comes from everyone having a fair chance to air their side.
Nope. That system doesn’t even seek truth or justice. It just means that each side is incentivized to amplify their side if necessary to counter the other side; If anyone actually seeks truth or justice instead of lying and exaggerating, they get buried by the other side, who will.
The truth loses, almost every time.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.