Maybe a jury will buy his “love” story, but legally no testifying of the victim is required under the Mann Act and in fact historically most convictions were made (wrongly) with uncooperative “victims”

There is a federal statutory rape law?

So far he is only charged with Mann Act...but the complaint can be amended to add further charges

That’s why there is a Mann Act charge (one of the few times I’ve seen a real one)...consent doesn’t matter.

You mean the conversation you started? I’m trying to figure out what support you have for your comments. I imagine we agree on more things politically than we disagree, but your arguments amount to cherry picking at best and hypocrisy at worst. This latest comment was a prime example. Feinstein is held to a different…

What experience do you want for Transportation Secretary? In addition to spending 8 years in another cabinet position, she was also deputy secretary of..wait for it...Transportation. She was also CEO of the United Way and Director of the Peace Corps. You can disagree with her conservative views (as I do), but it is…

did the black guy get lost and walk into the wrong room?

I’m torn. Surely many of the women especially early in her career would not have had a chance without her fighting for them. At the same time she seems to seek out the spotlight and high profile cases perhaps more for her own benefit than her clients. Perhaps I’m just suspicious of anyone who becomes known as a…

so surely you are also calling on all the dems who voted for her to retire?

again though you aren’t saying what makes her unqualified.

Why is Ross more unqualified to be commerce secretary than Pritzker?

I’d say your absolutest approach is the problem and no different than the tea party saying no to everything with no intention of working together or with understanding that not everyone in the country has the same views. “Standing up to the GOP” does not consist entirely of pointless no votes particularly those that…

Which cabinet points in particular and on what grounds? Advice and consent doesn’t mean just vote no on everyone because you don’t like Trump especially not to old school senators that understand that government needs cooperation to function. She voted no on the lunatics like Devos and Perry. She voted no on Sessions,…

now if only the ghost of Teddy Roosevelt had come out and kicked all their asses...

No she only prosecuted slam dunk cases and either didn’t charge or gave great deals. Look it is fine that you want to just believe she was always amazing, but I followed here DA tenure closely and have many longtime friends in the prosecutors office who found her less than stellar (perhaps only looking better relative…

well sure that happens, but I doubt there were 12 SF homicides in two years where they had zero evidence and randomly picked up a gang member to try to get him to offer accomplice testimony. Some things just don’t pass the straight face test. Besides, most gang members have been in contact with the cops multiple times…

who says she has lost touch with the voters? Even the vocal people at the town hall agree with most of her positions, they just want her to be more vocal against Trump. California is a big state and she represents all constituents, not just some. What evidence do you have that she is out of touch to what the voters…

Why would an accomplice confess if there was no evidence? If there is evidence, then it probably would also apply to the defendant.

It is hard to say what the exact evidence was without looking at the specific cases. However, if the only evidence of the identity of the offender was the testimony of the accomplice, how would they know that the person was an accomplice? If there isn’t evidence to support that the defendant and the witness are…

You would have thought that if she wanted the Feds involved they might have reached out to them directly rather than just telling the SFPD no charges? Also, while FRE 404 is broader, I doubt these cases (12) were being brought where the only source of evidence was accomplice testimony. The California rule only says…

popular and powerful are not the same thing