Quote:
Originally Posted by Redraine
Not according to the judge in the case in his address to the jury:-
" "A woman clearly does not have the capacity to make a choice if she is completely unconscious through the effects of drink and drugs, but there are various stages of consciousness, from being wide awake to dim awareness of reality. In a state of dim and drunken awareness you may, or may not, be in a condition to make choices. So you will need to consider the evidence of the complainant's state and decide these two questions: was she in a condition in which she was capable of making any choice one way or another? If you are sure that she was not, then she did not consent. If, on the other hand, you conclude that she chose to agree to sexual intercourse, or may have done, then you must find the defendants not guilty."
The CCTV video shows the girl entering the hotel with McDonald then returning alone to pick up from the floor outside the entrance her pizza carton, then walking steadily back inside alone, and carrying the carton showing no signs of unsteadiness, let alone drunkenness.
|
.
Every participant during the night in question had their own Agenda.
The crux of the matter is when it comes to the court appearance of the participants. I know from an acquaintance that for her divorce case in court that she was instructed by her solicitor on her makeup, her clothes and her demeanor. In the course of my lifetime I've also been told by policemen that I wouldn't recognise witnesses from first seeing them to later seeing them in the courtroom where it appeared "butter wouldn't melt in their mouths".
We make up our minds in the first few seconds of seeing a person and often it takes a darned sight longer to undo the first impressions.