3 ms·
no, that is not the same thing. In a case where the two people have differing accounts of consent, and there is no other usable evidence, the person is found "
by tehwalrus 11y ago
no, that is not the same thing.
In a case where the two people have differing accounts of consent, and there is no other usable evidence, the person is found "not guilty" (not the same as innocent) because it cannot be proved. This is not the same thing as assuming consent, it is applying the principle of the law.
Assuming consent is a much more insidious thing, which means actually disbelieving the victim on principal, because of the type of crime. This is not a problem in e.g. theft, because nobody assumes people want their stuff stolen.
- parennoob 11y ago> This is not a problem in e.g. theft, because nobody assumes people want their stuff stolen. This could actually be a huge problem if the thief is someone you know. Imagine you find some items missing from your house in the course of a normal day. You then go and tell the police that the potential suspects are your friends, your SO, and everyone else who was in your house. Do you think the police (in any country) will be serious about investigating your case?