Article: No Suspension For Miguel Sano

[prouster]

Widespread toleration? Can you honestly point to any sector of American life where sexual assault occurs, is witnessed/made known publicly, and then collectively given a pass? Horrible events occur in life, but the fact that they exist doesn't mean they're tolerated.

 

The fates of both Keillor and Weinstein and the #metoo movement would suggest the exact opposite, i.e. sexual assault isn't tolerated in America.

You are wrong. Wrong wrong wrong. Ask basically any woman who has been in public. Universally, women experience degrading behavior based explicitly on their gender and bodies. Not all of that constitutes sexual assault, but all of it is gross. That Me Too exists isn't evidence of a culture resistant to sexual assault. It is a movement that is trying to change a culture that for centuries has dominated women--i.e. the tolerance of assault and other forms of degradation. You want specific industries? Hollywood. Academia. Publishing. Television. Finance. Electronic component distribution. Major League Baseball. Yes, sexual assault is illegal and nominally "not tolerated." But the fact of the matter is that it *is* tolerated. Most assaults aren't reported, because victims are afraid of being ridiculed, harassed, attacked, etc. They're afraid of these things because people always and inevitably rush to label them a money grubber, or hysterical, or a misguided soul who has coerced into believing she has been raped, or someone who just plain has a bad memory. Just look at this exact thread. Look at the world we live in. We have a commander in chief who said some astonishing things on tape. We have numerous people in congress who have been caught abusing their subordinates. We have many, many athletes who have been found guilty by their leagues, who are still making millions of dollars as fans forget the awful things they've done. Times are changing, yes, but we are a culture that stubbornly, and I say infuriatingly, refuses to self-reflect and admit that we've turned a blind eye to this problem for far too long.

[PseudoSABR]

 

If that were remotely true, literally 100% of sexual assault cases would result in a conviction. The alleged victim's testimony is never evidence. 

The jury would still have to believe them (obviously, they aren't required to accept the testimony as true) but no additional evidence is necessary for a conviction. 

 

Many, many child-sexual-assault convictions are based on nothing more than testimony from the victim.  

Edited March 24, 2018 by PseudoSABR

[PseudoSABR]

 

Sufficient evidence for what - a conviction?  Yes, if the jury believes it, the victim's testimony alone could be enough.  

 

But that doesn't really mean much because the alleged victim's testimony is not the only evidence presented at a trial.  Whether the jury believes the victim will often hinge on how well it matches the other evidence presented.

 

In this case, given that there was no independent evidence to substantiate the allegations, and possibly evidence to contradict them, it would be pretty tough to sell a jury on proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

But often there is no other evidence, and in many cases the victim's testimony carries the day.  

 

But without corroborating evidence, the case can be hard to prove, which is why many sexual-assaults go unprosecuted. 

[KirbyDome89]

 

You are wrong. Wrong wrong wrong. Ask basically any woman who has been in public. Universally, women experience degrading behavior based explicitly on their gender and bodies. Not all of that constitutes sexual assault, but all of it is gross. That Me Too exists isn't evidence of a culture resistant to sexual assault. It is a movement that is trying to change a culture that for centuries has dominated women--i.e. the tolerance of assault and other forms of degradation. You want specific industries? Hollywood. Academia. Publishing. Television. Finance. Electronic component distribution. Major League Baseball. Yes, sexual assault is illegal and nominally "not tolerated." But the fact of the matter is that it *is* tolerated. Most assaults aren't reported, because victims are afraid of being ridiculed, harassed, attacked, etc. They're afraid of these things because people always and inevitably rush to label them a money grubber, or hysterical, or a misguided soul who has coerced into believing she has been raped, or someone who just plain has a bad memory. Just look at this exact thread. Look at the world we live in. We have a commander in chief who said some astonishing things on tape. We have numerous people in congress who have been caught abusing their subordinates. We have many, many athletes who have been found guilty by their leagues, who are still making millions of dollars as fans forget the awful things they've done. Times are changing, yes, but we are a culture that stubbornly, and I say infuriatingly, refuses to self-reflect and admit that we've turned a blind eye to this problem for far too long.

We're talking about assault, not lewd comments or whatever other boorish choice some idiot decides to spew towards a woman. 

 

AFAIK assaults in those industries are met with the same scorn as the examples you provided earlier. Unless you can point to actual assaults that are taking place, made public, and are disregarded as a whole by American society my point stands. 

 

I'm not naive enough to think that all cases are reported, but I also don't believe we can include a number that cannot be substantiated in any way as evidence for a society that tolerates assault.  

 

I agree, it's sad to see people in the public spotlight commit acts of assault but I think we have to be realistic about how that compares to the general population. The number of athletes who commit these crimes is very small compared to the total number of their cohort. The same can be said for the general population; the number of individuals who feel it's ok to physically assault women is infinitely smaller than those who don't feel that way. That doesn't mesh with a society that tolerates assault. 

 

 

[one_eyed_jack]

 

But often there is no other evidence, and in many cases the victim's testimony carries the day.  

 

But without corroborating evidence, the case can be hard to prove, which is why many sexual-assaults go unprosecuted. 

 

But it's not like the victim's testimony is the first and last thing that happens at a rape trial and jurors are required to assess it in a vacuum. 

 

Plenty of other types of evidence are introduced:  eyewitnesses who saw either the accuser or the defendant after the alleged incident, witnesses who knew both parties to describe their relationship, alibi witnesses for the defendant if the defendant is claiming it wasn't him, surveillance video if they were together in a public police before it happened, credit card receipts, medical records, expert testimony, social media posts, text messages, and phone records for starters

 

(Even in this incident, which happened 2 years ago and was not reported to anyone at the time, the MLB found 20 witnesses to interview.)

 

It may well be that none of the other evidence corroborates the accuser's account, making it hard to get a conviction, but that's why the constitutional presumption of innocence exists - so that the state can't rip you from your home and lock you in a cage without proof you did anything wrong; it's a feature, not a bug.

 

 

 

 

[KirbyDome89]

1) If a family member or friend of mine made an accusation I would support them 100%, no matter what the story was, or how credible it was perceived to be. I believe everybody on here would do the same. It shouldn't be a surprise then that there are some individuals on here who are staunchly in the corner of the accuser. 

 

2) Some posters start from the default position that the accuser is to be taken at their word. Perhaps they have more skin in the game, i.e. somebody close to them has gone through a similar situation, or maybe it just boils down to personal preference. It's a viable viewpoint whether you agree or disagree with it.

 

3) Some choose to take a more middle ground approach. Asking questions about inconsistencies in the stories told by either side side, or refusing to pass judgement until the process has been allowed to play out isn't a "gross take." Those actions aren't victim blaming, or exonerating the accused. They're trying to get to the truth, which should be the goal of everybody monitoring the case. 

 

Obviously, some aspects of these views are incompatible and IMO there is nothing wrong with debate along those lines. It goes without saying but the same level of understanding should be shown for all rational or calculated views, not just those that have the luxury of claiming the moral high ground. 

[wickedslider]

Funny how the article in the Strib mentions that Sano's accuser is Betsy Bissen, photographer for Twins Daily, but that Twins Daily failed to mention that in their story.

[jimmer]

 

Funny how the article in the Strib mentions that Sano's accuser is Betsy Bissen, photographer for Twins Daily, but that Twins Daily failed to mention that in their story.

Funny, Twins Daily has had a few articles on this situation and made it well known she was affiliated with them.  

Edited March 24, 2018 by jimmer

[DrNeau]

Funny, Twins Daily has had a few articles on this situation and made it know she was affiliated with them.

Funny also that Twins Daily supports claims without evidence.

[FargoFanMan]

And this. This whole thread is why I come hear to read the interesting articles and rarely comment anymore. It has become just another place for “Joe Blow” to pretend he has any idea of what he is talking about because he read a book once. Read an article once. Did some minor thing in his life to where he can all of a sudden stand on top of the mountain and claim “I am right and you are wrong!” Why? Because I know how to follow what someone else thinks. I am right because I want to stand out and be important. You are wrong because you don’t think like I do. While the other guy says the same exact thing. And this goes on and on for 6 pages. Each person proclaiming to know more than the other. Fighting and clawing for every inch of moral high ground in a matter that has nothing to do with any of us. Just because you know her. Just because you know him. It doesn’t matter. I used to come here to read a good baseball article about a team I liked. Not loved. Liked. And maybe read a few comments to get some good insight into it. Just like everything whether it be social media or anything else. It’s gotta be all about who’s right and who’s wrong. You’re an idiot for this and that. Not only are we masters of baseball now but we’ve also jumped on the bandwagon of being master lawyers, master arbitrators, master detectives, master prosecutors, masters of everything under the sun. Why? Well, there’s someplace to write about it. I’m important right? I seen her once. We said hi. I seen him. I was there and watched him say something once. I know everything about them. I know everything about this situation. Why? Well I know them. I seen them on tv once. Or read her article. We’re basically friends. We hang out all the time. We were in the same building once. I believe her. Well I believe him. Oh ok. Did anybody here read the reports from the investigation? Was anybody here in the interviews? Did anybody here interview her? Did anybody here interview him? Was there anybody in here at the so called event that this supposed interaction took place? Anybody? Anything? No? Well, then that is speculation. It doesn’t serve any purpose in anything let alone baseball. Which is what we come here for. I used to think so anyways. This has just turned into another place where Mr. A can go argue against Mr. B about why you’re wrong as opposed to me being right. Why don’t we discuss politics on here? Or whose a better band? How about abortion? Right or wrong? Hmmm... why don’t we argue that for 16 pages worth of nonsense from people who know literally nothing about it. What else can we conjure up? Anything? Any other topics? The End.

[ashbury]

Hard to pick a more appropriate moment to close this thread to further comments.