Yet another stomach-churning story, this time from overseas. Key flaws in the defence's arguement - swallowed by the judges include:
Firstly they claim a discrpancy between the number of men accused and the number of men she said raped her. The offence they are charged with is "sexual aggression" so presumably the fourth guy sexually assaulted her without actually raping her. She also claims to have been blindfolded throughout the attack. So how is she supposed to count the number of guys attacking her while blindfolded?
Secondly - and this is the really nauseating bit - they claim "she had invited them to have sex "without a word". ". Yup "without a word". So she consented silently? Guys here's an idea - before having sex with a woman, ask her if she wants to have sex with you. Clever huh? Do I get a prize?