4 ms·

The second paragraph said he sent texts. Texts can be verified.

tabeth 9y ago
Are texts really an example of "sexual assault?" My understanding was that sexual assault had to be physical, though I may (probably) be wrong. EDIT: Thanks for the clarification, all. As many have pointed out, there's also the harassment portion. I guess my question is now: how do you prove intent? I know nothing about due process, so I'm curious. I suppose in this case it really matters what it says in the texts.
- vkou 9y ago
  The texts are trivially verifiable proof of harassment, AFAIK, there is no trivially verifiable proof for the assault.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- runevault 9y ago
  Legal definition of assault is not what you'd think it is, and I'd assume sexual assault legally is the same thing, just in a sexual manner. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/assault http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/assault edit: For reference the actual physical acts are battery in the legal sense.
- kinkrtyavimoodh 9y ago
  There's also harassment, which can be textual.
- bsder 9y ago
  Not in and unto themselves, but they certainly establish a pattern and lend more credence to the actual charges being brought. They help move the needle from simply "He said; she said."
- jimrandomh 9y ago
  No, but they can be strong evidence if they include people talking about what happened.
- lmkg 9y ago
  Texts would be an example of "sexual harassment." Some types of sexual assault can be proven by medical examination, if the exam happens soon after, although many actions that qualify as sexual assault will either not show up on an exam, or can be proven to be "sexual" but not "assault." However, in cases like this where there is an ongoing relationship before and after the incident, the text messages will often refer to physical events. These can be evidence that a physical event happened, and what the attitudes and beliefs of the involved people were towards the incident at the time. Although even that is still a large amount of he-said-she-said and drawing large inferences from circumstantial data.
  - Alex3917 9y ago
    > Texts would be an example of "sexual harassment." Sexual harassment law only applies to the workplace.
    - dragonwriter 9y ago
      Sexual harassment exists and is a thing people can be publicly accused of even where it is not legally prohibited. An action need not be legally actionable to be newsworthy, or to be important for people who might want to know of their risk of being subjected to similar action.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > Are texts really an example of "sexual assault?" He is accused of sexual assault and harassment. The particular harassment is, in principle, more readily demonstrable (though perhaps not legally actionable, “sexual harassment” short of assault isn't always illegal, though it may well be newsworthy, without an employment relationship.) OTOH, in the case of a VC against people seeking funding, some forms of what would analogous to quid pro quo sexual harassment in employment could shade into the crime of soliciting prostitution.
- darkerside 9y ago
  Article said groping
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > I guess my question is now: how do you prove intent? In a legal case (which is not now pending from any information published, but that could change), any facts from which an observer could infer that the intent at issue was more likely than it would be in the absence of those facts are evidence (providing that they aren't inadmissible for other reasons.) Legal proof isn't mathematical proof; in general, the ways you'd forms belief about something in your daily life are how it is “proved” in a court of law. The degree of certainty a juror is expected to have for a conviction in a criminal cases is very high, but that's not a matter of how it is proved, but how conclusively it must be proved.

Are texts really an example of "sexual assault?" My understanding was that sexual assault had to be physical, though I may (probably) be wrong. EDIT: Thanks for the clarification, all. As many have pointed out, there's also the harassment portion. I guess my question is now: how do you prove intent? I know nothing about due process, so I'm curious. I suppose in this case it really matters what it says in the texts.

vkou 9y ago
The texts are trivially verifiable proof of harassment, AFAIK, there is no trivially verifiable proof for the assault.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
runevault 9y ago
Legal definition of assault is not what you'd think it is, and I'd assume sexual assault legally is the same thing, just in a sexual manner. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/assault http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/assault edit: For reference the actual physical acts are battery in the legal sense.
kinkrtyavimoodh 9y ago
There's also harassment, which can be textual.
bsder 9y ago
Not in and unto themselves, but they certainly establish a pattern and lend more credence to the actual charges being brought. They help move the needle from simply "He said; she said."
jimrandomh 9y ago
No, but they can be strong evidence if they include people talking about what happened.
lmkg 9y ago
Texts would be an example of "sexual harassment." Some types of sexual assault can be proven by medical examination, if the exam happens soon after, although many actions that qualify as sexual assault will either not show up on an exam, or can be proven to be "sexual" but not "assault." However, in cases like this where there is an ongoing relationship before and after the incident, the text messages will often refer to physical events. These can be evidence that a physical event happened, and what the attitudes and beliefs of the involved people were towards the incident at the time. Although even that is still a large amount of he-said-she-said and drawing large inferences from circumstantial data.
- Alex3917 9y ago
  > Texts would be an example of "sexual harassment." Sexual harassment law only applies to the workplace.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    Sexual harassment exists and is a thing people can be publicly accused of even where it is not legally prohibited. An action need not be legally actionable to be newsworthy, or to be important for people who might want to know of their risk of being subjected to similar action.
dragonwriter 9y ago
> Are texts really an example of "sexual assault?" He is accused of sexual assault and harassment. The particular harassment is, in principle, more readily demonstrable (though perhaps not legally actionable, “sexual harassment” short of assault isn't always illegal, though it may well be newsworthy, without an employment relationship.) OTOH, in the case of a VC against people seeking funding, some forms of what would analogous to quid pro quo sexual harassment in employment could shade into the crime of soliciting prostitution.
darkerside 9y ago
Article said groping
dragonwriter 9y ago
> I guess my question is now: how do you prove intent? In a legal case (which is not now pending from any information published, but that could change), any facts from which an observer could infer that the intent at issue was more likely than it would be in the absence of those facts are evidence (providing that they aren't inadmissible for other reasons.) Legal proof isn't mathematical proof; in general, the ways you'd forms belief about something in your daily life are how it is “proved” in a court of law. The degree of certainty a juror is expected to have for a conviction in a criminal cases is very high, but that's not a matter of how it is proved, but how conclusively it must be proved.