No one likes rapists. Rape is a serious crime, but in the days of sexual liberation, the boundaries become murky. Rape no longer ruins the lives of women through public shaming or whatever they tell us happened in the past. Oftentimes, it merely means consent revoked during or after the act.
And now, thanks to a mania for equal justice, it means no justice, because we accept long-after-the-fact trials without evidence:
Instead, the defense argued that the sexual acts were consensual, and accused the women of coordinating stories to discredit the former Hollywood star.
The actor was never charged with any counts of drugging, and there is no toxicology evidence to back up the women’s story.
We have two people who, years after the event, and without having gone to the police at the time, assert the guilt of this man simply because they say so and there are two of them. This entirely inverts the sense of justice as “beyond a reasonable doubt” and takes us into a realm where the accusation is the conviction.
It is easy enough, if you want revenge, to accuse a former partner and then find another disgruntled former partner to back you up. The Heckler’s Veto — seemingly the cornerstone of democracy — wins again. On the upside, this will discoure non-rapists from participating in casual sex.