The judge is just saying that what he was found liable for could be construed as rape as the word is commonly used even if it’s not legally. Regardless of that, this article also makes the distinction that he is not convicted of anything due to it being a civil trial and not a criminal one. Saying he is a convicted rapist is still not correct.
The judge is just saying that what he was found liable for could be construed as rape as the word is commonly used even if it’s not legally. Regardless of that, this article also makes the distinction that he is not convicted of anything due to it being a civil trial and not a criminal one. Saying he is a convicted rapist is still not correct.
gotcha, today I learned. thanks.