
You should go read the transcript and the judges reasoning. It wasn’t just “oh there’s a lack of evidence” the judge actually came to the conclusion that the evidence proved she consented instead. You guys are defending a girl that lied and ruined a bunch of men’s lives when there is literally proof to back them
I did and a the judge basically just said they didn’t do enough to prove it and while she may have said the words there’s the difference between actual consent and words of consent when there’s a bunch of hockey men who are physically bigger than you between you and the exit you’re choosing the words that will minimize the harm to you that’s not real consent real consent means that no is a real option and no was not a real option for her