Over here the age for criminal responsibility is 15, in Portugal it’s 16.
18-25 yr olds in England & Wales are sent to prisons that hold 18 to 25-year-olds, not a full adult prison. That’s a bit telling in itself.
I don’t agree a 19 yr old in 2023 is an adult personally, in the eyes of the law yeah but an adult in reality… not for me.
That’s not to say MG was right to breach the conditions of his bail, it could point to some extremely dark ploy on his behalf, although I won’t pretend to know how or why they got back in contact.
I’m fine with saying I don’t know the full story about any of it. My own moral compass doesn’t demand I pretend to know the ins & outs of everything.
At 19, you should know what a court order means, and if you break that order, you should be punished, whether you're 19 or 90, a pauper or a prince, a John Doe or a Donald Trump.
Even in Portugal, he still would have been criminally responsible for over 3 years, more than enough time to know what bail is. At 33, I wasn't allowed to see my daughters for nearly a month, after living with them for their whole lives. Don't you think the pull of parental love isn't as strong and overwhelming as teenage infatuation? Being in love is a bullshit excuse.
Isn’t that kind of the point of CNC though?
Disclaimer: I’m not saying it is that, very likely it’s something darker that we don’t have the full details to, likely Arnold had some more information on the longer tape. Once again, I don’t know and don’t feel we have the full story of how dark it was/wasn’t.
That said, it could also be that the rest of the tape involves them them getting into sex and it then quickly “sounding” consensual which would certainly explain why they don’t wanna release it to the public.
People should be fine with admitting they can’t possibly know the full story.
Everything you see, you see in 2D, 2D images of 3D objects.
Perception is using the 2D images and life experience to form the opinion of what the 3D object is. The same goes with how we percieve people.
Of everything, I think the bolded above is probably true, but more that she relented, so the sex itself wasn't non-consensual, but the but the *ahem* 'foreplay' was emotionally abusive.
That's the only thing I could imagine would fit with the United statement. Then her complaint of actual rape or sexual assault would have been for a different incedent, with the audio as evidence only of behavior, not the alleged crime, which would also fit to explain why she rexorded it in the first place. That would also mean that, on its own, the tape could not be evidence of the crime on its own.