For a one-time event, like egging a car, sure. For something that allegedly happened several times? I feel like the parents ought to be able to protect their daughter. I guess, if it happened but she never told them at the time maybe they couldn’t have. You’d think they would notice she was upset if she were traumatized, though?
Oh, on rereading that, I see that I misunderstood. I thought it meant that it had happened 9 decades ago. I assumed typo or other minor error.
My bad, the error was all mine.
If I understand correctly, this is a civil suit, not a criminal trial. This makes a huge difference (note: I am no lawyer).
By its nature, a civil suit has to be for dollars, even if the plaintiff isn’t really interested in money. And generally, the amount of the dollars finally awarded (if any and if known) tends to color the public’s view of the extent of the defendant’s guilt (if any).
Also, there is no “guilty” or “not guilty” verdict. The best the defendant can expect is what? The jury decides that no money is due to the plaintiff, and maybe (if a counter-suit for costs is filed) the plaintiff has to pay court costs and lawyer fees. That’s pretty good, but it’s not “not guilty.” Can such a case be “dismissed” like a criminal case for insufficient evidence?
The burden of evidence in a civil trial is, I believe, not “reasonable doubt” but “preponderance of evidence.” This makes it easier for a plaintiff to win something.
In a lawsuit, does the plaintiff have to have a prima facie case in order to proceed to trial, or can they proceed with next to nothing and hope for a sympathetic or easily-deluded jury?
How much of the trial records and evidence can be withheld from the public by the judge? All of it?
What if a perfectly innocent defendant, for reasons of family feeling and generosity or something, decides to settle for no award to the plaintiff and both sides pay their own court costs and lawyers fees, and that the settlement is held confidential. The public never finds out anything and people like @madsircool can gleefully assume the worst. (I hope Savage does not take this course if he is indeed innocent).
I guess what I’m getting at here is that we can wait for the evidence to come out and it is quite possible we, the public, will never see any of it.
If only people like @Roderick_Femm would learn to read a thread before posting in it and making assumptions.
What assumption would you make if you hear that they settled for an undisclosed amount, and she signed an NDA?
Yes, yes, you have your semi-plausible deniability, but ask 30 strangers to read this thread and see how many of them, based on your posts here, think that you’ve already made up your mind.
Posted by me;
It does sound like YOU have made up your mind and its not based on any evidence presented.
And I can make a blog post claiming that I was assaulted by a particular congresscritter back in 1970 from Western NY on my nonexistant public blog and it would be darned near impossible to substantiate any further than my Dad was friends, and he occasionally would come over for picnics in the summer and once or twice for dinner in the winter. Potentially the time for abusive contact would be feasable. I would put the average undocumentable blog posting of abuse at about par with I was beamed up and butt probed by aliens. Proof would be photographs, interviews with the abuser admitting it and links to court documents post trial where he/she/they were found guilty. As a person who was raped twice, I do have sympathy for any person male, female or intersex who has been assaulted, but I would like there to be some sort of corroborative evidence, even if it is as simple as ‘he babysat for her every Saturday evening so the parents could have date night’ and could have had the time and privacy to do so. Medical notes would be good also [I know when I was 5 or so the urologist treating my urethral stricture was queried by the childrens hospital about the possibility of abuse because of the appalling string of UTIs that I had that led up to the original urology visit. [believe me, [urethral sounding - Warning, explicit penis photo with sound inserted](Urethral sounding - Wikipedia) and extreme youth do not make for calm quiet procedures …]
No worries - I had to reread your quote of my post a couple of times to make sure I didn’t have a typo in there. Not my most easily understood comment (or least, either).
May I remind you that NO EVIDENCE has been presented. There isn’t even testimony yet, only an accusation. And I challenge you to quote any of my actual words, in context, that indicate that I have an opinion on the guilt or innocence of Mr. Savage.
And an alleged letter written by Savage mentioned upthread.
Possibly that he was hoping to shut her up once and for all?
I mean, she is his sister. How objectionable can it be to give her money?
Which, incidentally, is another thing that has me wondering-- if I had a lot of money from doing a really successful TV show for years and years, and my brother asked me for some --or hell, even a cousin-- I’d say “sure!” So I’m thinking that 1) relations have been strained for a very long time; 2) she’s a black hole for money because she has some habit that cries out for a 12-step program. It could be drugs, or it could be gambling, internet shopping, or hoarding cats, but Savage may not want to contribute to a very unhealthy lifestyle.
Which incidentally, could be another reason not to try to get the suit dropped. A contingency of a settlement could be that it is “with prejudice,” meaning she can’t sue him again. If she drops it in the starting gate, it may be dismissed “without prejudice,” meaning she can file again.
For all we know, Savage has actually given her money in the past (something he may not want to come to light, because it sounds incriminating-- and it would be highly so if they were not closely related, but there’s really nothing unusual about giving one’s sister money), and she keeps coming back. Maybe he said “No” for the first time, and he wants it to be the last time.
That’s all pure speculation, but so is any talk about them doing typical childhood “mock sex,” or her having recovered memories from unscrupulous therapy.
“alleged letter” is almost the definition of “no evidence”. We don’t know if the letter exists and if it does exist we don’t know what it says.
Not necessarily. Her lawyer is likely telling her to not make it public at this time. Her case isnt being tried in the court of public opinion.
Which is why you shouldn’t be using it as evidence.
What nonsense. If we use the K9bfriender standard of evidence, what can we really accuse Trump of? We havent seen actual evidence yet we believe strongly in his guilt. Again, just because there is a letter doesnt mean he is guilty. Its just another data point.
I am not an attorney, but I believe Trump’s character indicts him in a way that Adam Savage’s does not.
Upthread you even said that there is ‘no evidence’ and there is ‘the alleged letter’.
But now it is evidence?
You’re the one that kicked off the thread by “how horrible is this” and that he should get the death penalty. Why do you get to judge him but the public can’t?
EDIT: I just realized that you said there’s no evidence he did not do it. What kinda of backwards logic is that? There’s no evidence you didn’t rape your sister either.
I wouldn’t accuse Trump of something only on the strength that supposedly Trump wrote a letter that no one can see.