How can they say you were doing something they never witnessed?

  • orcrist@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    23 hours ago

    The jury decides what has been proven, not you. It really is that simple. People get convicted all the time of crimes where nobody saw them do it. Because of other evidence and common sense.

    And look, think about the standard that you’re trying to push. If we have text messages before and after, plus video of them going in and coming out of the hotel room. Is that good enough for you? They could always say that they thought about sex but settled for monopoly and were only joking around later… Maybe you would believe that story, but maybe the average juror would laugh.

    • Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      23 hours ago

      The prosecution must convince the jury that there is no other reasonable explanation that can come from the evidence presented at trial, leaving no doubt in their minds about the defendant’s guilt.

      • orcrist@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        21 hours ago

        No. The expression you looking for is “proof beyond a reasonable doubt”. What you wrote is proof beyond any doubt, which is not the legal standard.

        Also, please take a look at Florida Chapter 796, or if you were concerned about another location, look at the state or local laws for that location. You will probably see that actually engaging in the act of sex is one of several ways that you could violate prostitution laws.