Eric Takabayashi wrote:

> Raj Feridun wrote:
>
> > I forgot the question and you snipped it.
>
> I did not.

I see I did snip too much. The entire passage should be:

Accused ruled "not guilty". Does this mean they did not do what they were accused of? (Y/N)
If [YES to the above], does this mean that the (eg rape) claimant lied? (Y/N)

But I see you do not believe a "not guilty" verdict means anyone lied. So what of victims or
survivors who cannot receive justice in criminal, possibly even civil court?

I'd like to tell them something better than "live with it", "deal with it", "that's reality",
or suggest they instead relocate and accuse people of crime in a totalitarian state.

[And would certainly never tell them, as past posters have told me, that the escaped criminal
committing more crime (maybe against the original victims once more, as in domestic violence,
child molestation, or acquaintance rape) would give law enforcement another chance to punish
them.]

Do you have any ideas?