Search results

Nope. Someone get this guy a dictionary...

So you acknowledge that if a husband forces himself on his wife against her will that it's rape? Okay, good to know.

Does that include husbands who force their wives into sex?

Oh, I don't need the help but Stripe might appreciate it. :D

Words...fail...

Not on Twitter anyway.

Nope.

Supporting universal basic income is anti free speech? Eh, who knew... There's nothing wrong with criticizing government, it's healthy to have a level of cynicism where it comes to politics. What isn't healthy is buying into any given rubbish from varying wingnut sites.

Eh, let him back on. Be kinda fun to see what garbled nonsense he tweets this time around...

Nope.

By all means carry on!

A case not getting to court due to lack of evidence is not the same at all. I should have corrected your "dismissal" comment as this is not the same thing as a case being dismissed out of court.

Well, for starters, you're dealing with a guy who doesn't consider it rape if a husband forces himself on his wife with 100% proof of guilt. He considers it..."something else". He'd find the husband innocent regardless. He then concocts up this feeble scenario where guilt or innocence can't be...

No, it isn't.

Tell ya what JR, let's address Derf's scenario as presented: "Consider this scenario. A married couple has sex on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday. Afterward, the wife complains to a friend about Tuesday's tryst, which friend gets incensed about the husband forcing himself on her, and convinces...

Wouldn't even get that far as explained multiple times so was already moot. Duh. You're welcome.

A charge needs to be backed up with substantial evidence before it gets to court. You surely know that much? Derf's scenario was vague and frankly, feeble. If you consider it a test of judgment and that I failed spectacularly then I'm sure you won't be too surprised to hear that I value your...

And as explained to you prior, there isn't enough "evidence" for his scenario to even go to court. No jury or judge would even be required so reducing it to posters giving a "verdict" is nonsense. The best you can do is address it as hypothetical on it's "merits" (or lack thereof) as I have so...

Wow, you too? Eh, shouldn't be that surprised really. In order for a case to get to court there has to be sufficient evidence for it to get that far. Derf's scenario doesn't come close to the level required. Therefore trying to argue that it should be a case of giving a guilty/innocent verdict...

Not to anyone with a basic reading level so thick/dishonest it is with you then. Noted. Well, fun as it usually isn't to bandy words about with you Stripe there's a documentary coming on soon about carpet cleaning which will doubtless be more entertaining. Fare thee well!