How is that an interesting question? The answer is yes, and if you need an example how just refer back to this case where in fact it was proven that Kane didn't rape her despite no recantation by the liar.

_________________

If he was willing to go out and make it clear he thought she was lying then why not just go all the way?

There are good reasons why they decline to pursue it, and they are the same reasons you don't make the accuser out to be a liar in the press.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

I judge a comment like "her story does not agree with witnesses" and essentially saying she got a key location detail wrong...that says to me she's not believable. I've reserved judgement till now, but I think things are becoming more clear on the believe-ability scale.

_________________
Ба́бушка гада́ла, да на́двое сказа́ла—то ли до́ждик, то ли снег, то ли бу́дет, то ли нет.

I think his goal was to admonish her while at the same time not wasting any more time and money on this situation.

Like you said, it doesn't do society any favors by prosecuting false rape claims in terms of the big picture of not wanting to discourage rape victims from coming forward for what is already an uphill court battle for the most part. But, at the same time the DA was clearly angry that this liar wasted his office's time and resources and felt she needed to be scolded for that to some degree.

_________________

There is a difference between proving that he didn't do it and not being able to prove he did do it.

_________________

In part 2 of his TV interview, he said that they thought about charging her, but because they never charged Kane,
they decided not to press charges on her. Plus, they didn't want to deter real rape victims from coming forward
in the future.

There was no rape, or any intercourse between the two.

I was commenting in reference to this

Obviously Rick does not feel that this is an example that proves a rape didn't happen. So my point is, if this is not enough evidence to prove it didn't happen then what more is needed? It would seem to me that by this standard it would be essentially impossible to prove definitively rape didn't happen.

_________________

Just bukkake gone bad

_________________

Thanks SiD.

So basically since it was only an investigation and there were never charges brought, he isn't going to bring them against the "accuser".

_________________

Of course it isn't possible to prove a negative.

There isn't enough evidence to charge Kane and it would be unfair to think that he did rape her but of course you can't prove it didn't happen.

That is why our legal system uses "not guilty" instead of "innocent".

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

But he certainly did that in the press conference.

That is the problem. Saying "no charges are being filed due to lack of evidence" would have been enough for everyone involved.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Why? She obviously lied. There is NO evidence at all, just the BS put out by the SJW's.

IF there was NO sex, how is she a rape victim?

Even that isn't proof. When Cathy Webb recanted her testimony against Gary Dotson the prosecutors and judge said she was lying then and telling the truth at trial.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Elon, Tulsi, and Don

From Seditas statement
The DNA results lend no corroboration whatsoever to the complainant’s claim of penetration, a required element of proof for a rape charge.
You are one obstinate fuck for sure. How does that statement not prove it didn't happen when by the definition of rape they are using there had to have been penetration?

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.

Because it doesn't?

That sentence means there is a lack of proof to substantiate a charge, which is consistent with what I am saying. It can't, and logically it never could, prove that a rape never occurred.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

What are you talking about?
How can it be rape without a sex act?

Kane is in that rare breed of men who can fuck a woman and leave no physical traces that he did. Talk about a needle dick!!!

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.

I don't understand this question.

The negative rape kit was a major reason why Kane wasn't charged. It just isn't definitive proof one way or another that a rape occurred. If it had been positive, the same would have been true.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

God, do you just ignore facts for the hell of it? Read the statements, no sex occurred.
Believe what you want, just don't act like your beliefs are the truth.

Talk about a train that left the station and reached its destination on the other side of the country.

_________________

_________________
Power is always in the hands of the masses of men. What oppresses the masses is their own ignorance, their own short-sighted selfishness.
- Henry George

Hahaha. I rarely say this, but me thinks BRick is on the wrong side of this one.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You

He's just BRicking.

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.

Amen.

_________________
"When people want their version of the truth, they go find it, no matter how baseless their beliefs." -- Ken Rosenthal

I don't think it occurred either.

But, you have to understand that the concept here is PROVING that a rape didn't occur, which is virtually impossible outside of the accuser admitting they were lying.

Just like I can't prove that I didn't kill the Fox Lake police officer, but there is not enough evidence to think that I did.

I think a lot of you are just so emotional about this thing that you ignore basic legal concepts.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

He has been on fire lately and doing fine work overall. I know he likes to argue to infinity, but most of his recent material has been good. On this one, I think you got him. I don't say all this lightly because I much prefer to be on the same side of one of his arguments. It's much easier on me.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You

Are you saying it is possible to prove that a rape didn't occur outside of an accuser admitting they were lying?

Because, our whole legal system is pretty much built around the concept that you can't prove a negative.

The evidence points to Kane not raping her. I've made that clear. People are just so fired up about this case that someone saying "You can't really prove a negative" turns someone into a "obstinate fuck" when anyone who has ever watched an episode of Law and Order knows that is true.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

You can't Brick me the day before I leave for Vegas!

Trick or BRick? I choose trick of the non tranny variety.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You