68
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2024
68 points (95.9% liked)
Asklemmy
44157 readers
1573 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
You mean like text messages? If you have texts and then video cameras of two people going into a hotel room, that's mighty fine evidence. What the hell else were they gonna do? Yoga?
You don't need eyewitnesses to get convictions. That is not the legal standard.
You are not proving they had sex. You're proving someone PAID for the sex.
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.
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.
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.