No, generally “having sex with someone without their consent” is the standard by which someone is a rapist. And the standard of proof in the public eye (that is, the point at which the public, BUT NOT NECESSARILY THE COURTS, can feel justified in assuming someone is) is generally “Is there a proof that’s pretty unambiguous”, such as several independent people reporting it happened to them, with documentation to show what happened.
The “article” bit is generally what we use to find out that this evidence exists. Articles are documents written by journalists that impart information to a wider audience.
You may want to learn about what makes someone a rapist by looking up “Rape” in a dictionary. You may also want to look up journalism and what it’s function in society is. Finally you may also want to look at the relative standards of proof for convicting someone criminally, and how they differ from the standard of proof needed for you and others to believe something personally and might share on an Internet discussion board.
And, FWIW, I’m sure if it turns out the article was just made up by a journalist who doesn’t care about their reputation being trashed and a libel suit, or alternatively the four women were “in on it” and made it all up, forging text messages and visit to rape crisis centers for LOLZ, Bleeping Lobster will retract what they said.
But at this stage I think everyone would be justified in not leaving their kids with Brand as a babysitter, and women would be justified in giving him a wide berth and bringing something or someone to help them defend themselves if they’re forced to be in close proximity with him. And people should know that.
No, generally “having sex with someone without their consent” is the standard by which someone is a rapist. And the standard of proof in the public eye (that is, the point at which the public, BUT NOT NECESSARILY THE COURTS, can feel justified in assuming someone is) is generally “Is there a proof that’s pretty unambiguous”, such as several independent people reporting it happened to them, with documentation to show what happened.
The “article” bit is generally what we use to find out that this evidence exists. Articles are documents written by journalists that impart information to a wider audience.
You may want to learn about what makes someone a rapist by looking up “Rape” in a dictionary. You may also want to look up journalism and what it’s function in society is. Finally you may also want to look at the relative standards of proof for convicting someone criminally, and how they differ from the standard of proof needed for you and others to believe something personally and might share on an Internet discussion board.
And, FWIW, I’m sure if it turns out the article was just made up by a journalist who doesn’t care about their reputation being trashed and a libel suit, or alternatively the four women were “in on it” and made it all up, forging text messages and visit to rape crisis centers for LOLZ, Bleeping Lobster will retract what they said.
But at this stage I think everyone would be justified in not leaving their kids with Brand as a babysitter, and women would be justified in giving him a wide berth and bringing something or someone to help them defend themselves if they’re forced to be in close proximity with him. And people should know that.
The only problem with this reporting is the fact this reporting was necessary for anything to be done about it.