Raj Feridun wrote:

> On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 22:37:04 +0900, Eric Takabayashi
> <etakajp@yahoo.co.jp> wrote:
>
> >Raj Feridun wrote:
> >
> >> If Clinton raped someone let them come forward and press charges.
> >
> >There are valid reasons why people who are assaulted may not come forward,
> >publicly or otherwise. Untruth is only one, and a minor one at that.
> >
> >> Then a jury can decide based on the evidence and testimony. Failing that
> >> you really need to just shut up with the unfounded aspersions.
> >
> >So do you believe the decision of a judge who is not involved in the matter,
> >or a randomly selected bunch of amateurs, likewise not involved in the
> >matter, and probably selected specifically because they know little or
> >nothing of the case or scientific issues involved for the prosecution or
> >defense to arrive at their conclusions, has any bearing on what did or did
> >not actually happen to result in the filing of a complaint?
>
> That's is our legal system, Eric, like it or not.

I failed to notice there was not the expected yes/no answer here.

Let me rephrase. Please note that the details and charges don't matter, I am
only referring to the rulings of the trial or any appeals. Assume however, that
proceedings were fair:

Accused ruled "guilty". Does this mean they did what they were accused of? (Y/N)

Accused ruled "not guilty". Does this mean they did not do what they were
accused of? (Y/N)
If no to the second question, does this mean that the (eg, rape) claimant lied?
(Y/N)

And last, what should be done with those who file false reports of crime,
considering your assertion "it's oh so easy for someone to destroy someone
else's life forever with false charges alone"? It would be pretty damned serious
if a liar took down a President in office or lost a millionaire sports celebrity
his job or millions in endorsements.