DC, the paper was quite clear it was the purpetrator's semen in her underwear. ANd good journalists know that when reporting criminal cases, the laws are quite strict (and even in places where they might not be totally enforced, most good journalists will still adher to these rules as it's a matter of ethics) about privacy and what you can and cannot publish. Most of us won't, for example, publish a victim's name, and will refer to the purpetrator as 'the accused' or 'alledgedly' until they've been found guilty.
Stop blaming the paper for this: they didnt' make this up, this actually happened, and you should be appalleda t the judiciary and this man, NOT at the paper for reporting it! Why on earth would they make such a thing up? the national is not some tabloid!
More importantly: even if he had just jerked off on her underwear, that could still be considered a crime. Assault isn't just full on penetrative sex you know-- any unwelcomed contact is a violation.
DC, the paper was quite clear it was the purpetrator's semen in her underwear. ANd good journalists know that when reporting criminal cases, the laws are quite strict (and even in places where they might not be totally enforced, most good journalists will still adher to these rules as it's a matter of ethics) about privacy and what you can and cannot publish. Most of us won't, for example, publish a victim's name, and will refer to the purpetrator as 'the accused' or 'alledgedly' until they've been found guilty.
Stop blaming the paper for this: they didnt' make this up, this actually happened, and you should be appalleda t the judiciary and this man, NOT at the paper for reporting it! Why on earth would they make such a thing up? the national is not some tabloid!
More importantly: even if he had just jerked off on her underwear, that could still be considered a crime. Assault isn't just full on penetrative sex you know-- any unwelcomed contact is a violation.