Team trump

[lurker]

The entire article was written to PROVE MY POINT!!!

You're an idiot!

[lurker]

Older does not equal smarter.

In this case it does. You're a freaking idiot.


Tell us ALL your pertinent background questions that I keep asking, so WE can determine more about you.


Or are you afraid?

[Tyy7777]

You lost and you know it.

How? You linked an article that proved my point. That was the whole point of the article. To talk about why clothing shouldn't be admissible.

[Tyy7777]

Chickensh!t!!!! You’re afraid you’ll out yourself.

And how so?

[lurker]

Sorry, but you're going to have to try harder next time.

You lost and you know it.

[Tyy7777]

That would be —- Old, smarter than you, and non-tolerant of BS people like yourself with your wokeness.


And remember, remember, it's your fault Trump won the 2024 election. And that little factoid will be burnt into your feeble little head the rest of your life.


Trump is your Daddy and lives rent free in your head.

Older does not equal smarter.

[Tyy7777]

She is. I keep her well protected especially from snowflake people like you.

Sure you do. She needs to be protected from you.

[Tyy7777]

Which is a lie, and you know it. Typical Leftist —- lie to fit your narrative. You couldn't articulate your way out of a wet debate paper bag.

What's my narrative? Tell me. I want to know what you think my narrative is.

I'd bet it's wrong.

[lurker]

Now stop avoiding my questions —-


Age?

Educational background?

Married?

Kids?

What you do for employment?

[Tyy7777]

You won’t like this case LAW —--

A 1993 journal article? That's your basis?

What's next? You're going argue that segregation is right with a 1960s journal article?

On just the 3rd page of this article it states:

Part II presents social science research that shows how clothing is perceived and that those perceptions are often inaccurate. Part III argues that in cases of rape, sexual assault, or sexual harassment, the victim's clothing should be per se inadmissible if introduced to show that the victim consented to or welcomed the sexual advances.


The entire article was written to PROVE MY POINT!!!

Page 7 provides that:

Georgia, Alabama, and Florida are the only states that have rape shield statutes that specifically address the victim's dress as evidence. Georgia and Alabama include the victim's "mode of dress" under the definition of "past sexual conduct." As such, the victim's dress is generally inadmissible in a prosecution for rape.


At a federal level we have the Federal Rules of Evidence 412 (1994 amendment) that provides that clothing can not be admissible in criminal cases and only in civil cases if it meets certain criteria. While rape cases are uncommon at this level this is a good example of how it is viewed at a federal level.

Here's a source for that. https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_412


Rape shield laws have been around since the 70s with the purpose being to prevent a women's prior sexual behavior to be admitted as evidence. Most states follow the principles established in FRE 412.


Sorry, but you're going to have to try harder next time.

[lurker]

—- Old, bitter and bigoted.

That would be —- Old, smarter than you, and non-tolerant of BS people like yourself with your wokeness.


And remember, remember, it's your fault Trump won the 2024 election. And that little factoid will be burnt into your feeble little head the rest of your life.


Trump is your Daddy and lives rent free in your head.

[lurker]

Hope she's safe.

She is. I keep her well protected especially from snowflake people like you.

[lurker]

The minute you explain why it’s relevant is the minute I will.

Chickensh!t!!!! You’re afraid you’ll out yourself.

[lurker]

You’ve never presented valid facts in an argument before.

Which is a lie, and you know it. Typical Leftist —- lie to fit your narrative. You couldn't articulate your way out of a wet debate paper bag.

[Tyy7777]

I do.


Do you?

Poor woman. Hope she's safe.