Token “Blacks For Trump” member, sexual groper, lies. Sounds like someone Trump would nominate to his cabinet or the Supreme Court.
Excuses for protecting men who harrass women…so tired of it.
So he’s standing in a bar surrounded by lawyers and lawmakers, groping whichever women fall within his wingspan, and it’s too difficult a case to prove?
Christ, what’s it take?
“Look at my African-American over here. Are you the greatest? You know what I’m talking about?"
— Toadglans von McMario-Kart, singling out the only token POC in a Redding, California rally crowd.
Did he use the new “Trump says it’s okay” defense?
Video, or witnesses whose careers don’t depend on the Indiana justice system.
Let me guess: He likes beer. I mean, he really likes beer…
In his report on the investigation released Tuesday, Sigler said there was not sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt “that Hill’s intent in the touching was rude, insolent or angry,” as required for a battery conviction.
I can believe that Hill was not angry, but as for rude and insolent …
Anyway:
In a case of this nature, the problem with the appointment is obvious.
She said Hill leaned toward her, put his hand on her back, slid it down and grabbed her buttocks. The Munster lawmaker says she told Hill to “back off,” but he approached again later in the night, put his hand on her back and said: “That skin. That back.”
In his report on the investigation released Tuesday, Sigler said there was not sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt “that Hill’s intent in the touching was rude, insolent or angry,” as required for a battery conviction.
Say what?? If this isn’t rude and insolvent, what the hell is? Sure seems like open season in Indiana.
That’s one weird battery statute.
Some of these statutes seem to be written in a manner in which to allow prosecutors to manifest their inner biases.
It’s a hell of a standard. It sounds like it’s almost impossible to meet. Usually the unwanted touching is enough and the mens rea goes simply to the unwanted contact.
I vote for rude.
“It was in a bar. It was in the early morning hours. Free alcohol was being served and flowing.”
IOW - what the hell else were these women expecting in that place, at that time, under those circumstances? Sigler’s rendition was more nuanced than mine, but it pretty much boils down to the same thing. Same old, same old - boys will be boys (especially with some booze in their veins), and girls should know better than to put themselves in those situations.
Excuse me while I puke my guts out.
-
She said Hill leaned toward her, put his hand on her back, slid it down and grabbed her buttocks.
-
Sigler said he found the allegations from the four women credible
-
Sigler said there was not sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt “that Hill’s intent in the touching was rude, insolent or angry,” as required for a battery conviction.
Let a jury decide, Sigler. You have you have evidence beyond reasonable doubt that a drunk man was roaming a bar and groping women. The jury might disagree with you that being drunk gave Hill immunity from a battery charge.
Exactly.
Right?! “Insolent” sounds like what you charge the slave or servant with.
It means “lacking in respect,” which is essential to the behavior that Hill is accused of here.
Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill will not be criminally charged in the alleged drunken groping of a state lawmaker and three legislative staffers at a party this year.
I don’t know why that would be so difficult to prove.
Thanks for the mansplain.
It is also a synonym for “insubordinate”. And it is a dog-whistle, similar to ‘uppity’.
That it is used in this way in the statute suggests the legislators were more concerned with protecting their chattel than women’s body autonomy.