Important men shouldn’t be locked up in prison with the common herd of lowlifes.
Why not?
If Rikers is such a horrible place, and I assume Ben is correct about that, then we shouldn’t be locking anybody up there.
However, Ben is correct that the maid may indeed be lying. This is a binary case, either he’s lying or she is. Until the trial has taken place, we should give the frog the presumption of innocence.
I thought Ben’s claim that he can’t be guilty because others would have accused him previously quite silly. Maybe he has indeed had a pattern of such behavior and has gotten away with it till now because he is rich and powerful.
Indeed.
“I thought Ben’s claim that he can’t be guilty because others would have accused him previously.”
An odd Bill Clinton defense Ben is making.
I.e.: “Clinton can’t be guilty because others would have accused him previously”
What we DO know is that women WILL lie about these things. A lot of them anyway.
I don’t know if the man is guilty, or not. I wouldn’t mind seeing him thrown in jail for being a thieving, taxing socialist. Would that it were against the law.
But he may, or may not, have sexually assaulted this woman. Without corroborating evidence, he should be found “not guilty”. The unsupported word of someone is never enough to convict, IMNSHO