Antonio Brown accused of rape

[NewCreation435]

FOXBOROUGH, Mass. -- Antonio Brown took part in his first practice with the New England Patriots on Wednesday afternoon, a day after his former trainer filed a civil lawsuit in the Southern District of Florida accusing him of sexually assaulting her on three occasions.
Brown, who has worn the No. 84 throughout his career, was wearing No. 1, his temporary number, at practice.

article and video here
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/27593966/brown-no-1-practicing-trainer-nfl-meet

Antonio has been accused of rape today and a civil lawsuit has been filed by a former trainer. He is currently a player for New England Patriots that was signed just within the last week. Do you think he should be allowed to play while this is dealt with? What do you think the process should be when someone like this is accused of a crime? The NFL has not commented yet about this incident.

 

[tango]

If it's proven to be true he needs to go to jail. If it's proven to be a malicious accusation the accuser needs to go to jail. In the meantime there's no reason for him to stop what he's doing - it's absurd to say everything has to stop because of an allegation.

 

[NewCreation435]

If it's proven to be true he needs to go to jail. If it's proven to be a malicious accusation the accuser needs to go to jail. In the meantime there's no reason for him to stop what he's doing - it's absurd to say everything has to stop because of an allegation.

It is a civil law suit not a criminal one so he wouldn't be going to jail regardless. We don't know why at this point a criminal case was never brought

 

[psalms 91]

The fact he has not been charged and it is a civil matter leads me to believe that it is baseless and a way to get money and I am no fan of that overblown ego but fair is fair

 

[tango]

It is a civil law suit not a criminal one so he wouldn't be going to jail regardless. We don't know why at this point a criminal case was never brought

Sometimes a civil case can be easier to prove. In the UK a criminal case typically relies on proof "beyond reasonable doubt" whereas a civil case relies on "the balance of probability".

Personally I think something that is specifically covered by criminal law needs to be tried as a criminal case because otherwise it looks like it's more about getting some easy money than in about seeking justice, particularly when sex crimes can so easily turn into little more than questions after the fact relating to whether someone consented or not, whether consent was actively sought, specifically withdrawn or whatever and, by their very nature, don't tend to happen with witnesses around and so turn into "he said, she said" situations.

 

[NewCreation435]

Sometimes a civil case can be easier to prove. In the UK a criminal case typically relies on proof "beyond reasonable doubt" whereas a civil case relies on "the balance of probability".

Personally I think something that is specifically covered by criminal law needs to be tried as a criminal case because otherwise it looks like it's more about getting some easy money than in about seeking justice, particularly when sex crimes can so easily turn into little more than questions after the fact relating to whether someone consented or not, whether consent was actively sought, specifically withdrawn or whatever and, by their very nature, don't tend to happen with witnesses around and so turn into "he said, she said" situations.

And that appears to be exactly what has happened here