Thread by @AdamTurks

Couldn't sleep last night.
Couldn't stop thinking about the sexual assault trail jury that I was on.
There was nowhere near the volume of evidence presented. No injury, internal or external, just her word against his
I watched the prosecution lawyer introduce the regret narrative

Considering, the jury all agreed that the victim's was the most convincing testimony. People believed her. Literally everyone on the jury. Likewise everyone believed that at best the accused was so drunk he had no idea what was going on, but he certainly wasn't telling the truth.

But still 8 said not guilty, inc all the women.
There was absolutely a sense in the jury that this was a drunken night that went wrong. That a verdict of guilty would be harsh on the wee lad who just wanted a ride. Everyone m/f could relate to an drunken advance that went wrong.

I found the whole thing unbelievable. At this point there is ENORMOUS pressure on the 4 to change their minds. The 8 just want to go home, the judge wants a decision. He'll take a majority. 2 cave. It's acquitted. I walk out with the other guilty juror both of us going 'WTF?'

It seems getting a conviction for any sexual crime is clearly really hard. And getting a conviction for a sexual crime when the victim has been drinking is close to impossible. From experience people rush to victim blame if alcohol has been taken. This has GOT to change.

So when someone calls me a barstool lawyer or says I wasn't at the trail when I say #IBelieveHer I've seen how the system works close up. When 5 weeks of evidence is dismissed in 4 hours, SOMETHING isn't right.
I can't make it today but I be there in spirit

I mean defence lawyer obv.