Laws are Laws. If they are on the books, it is up to the individuals who enforce them on what to do. But, they are still there and maybe it is just the interpretation and judgement of said persons.
As was said on a previous post, it is the interpretaion and the explanation of the circumstances. Northwestern thread should bring that out as a point.
How should that be interpretated, was it consensual and if so, what were the circumstances at the time. Is it crying wolf when one is caught in a position?
A lot depends on the actual evidence at the time of occurance. Did this really happen or was it something that was said at the moment.
Interrigation after the thought does at many times change the actual facts. Not trial by Media as is done so many times!
Threaded Mode