We'll help you find the right solution for your needs
Does this sound like your topic?
I got laid with a woman in her office, before she accompanied me to the airport to catch a flight the next morning. Ever since the moment I landed, I have been accused of sexual assault by this woman. She told the police she asked for a night shift and let me (then allegedly an ordinary friend) in at night, so that I could deposit my luggage and have some sleep for the next morning's flight; there and then I mounted a totally unexpected sexual assault on her. What her other direct evidences reflected, however, was that there were also intimacies that afternoon, preceding her letting me in her office that night. Is this discrepancy sufficient to prove her consent both that afternoon and that evening?
All directly evident on her own submission of evidence, except the "unexpected" piece.In those other direct evidences, she also accused me of sexual assault that afternoon, claiming that the "yesterday afternoon and evening things" keep flashing back and making her "shudder", and spent pages portraying her psychology as "I'm afraid, I'm afraid, I'm afraid" and stuff. She's a university-trained psychologist. She said I assaulted her in the afternoon, and she and I inferrably went outside her on-campus office before she let me in her office again that night. She actually offered me dinner at a restaurant during the time we were outside. Doesn't her act of letting me in her office again prove she was not afraid of me and did not consider the afternoon intimacies as an assault? I of course have more circumstantial evidences suggesting we were dating and she even later acknowledged consent that night elsewhere, but I'm just curious as to why these above-mentioned direct discrepancies are not enough.