This is crucial, in my opinion. His case, if I understand, never came to court—he was arrested under suspicion, but then the state decided not to press charges, for whatever reason (lack of evidence, potential credibility issues regarding the accuser, etc.).tricky said:Actually, technically he 'wasn't proved guilty', it is only inference that he was by default 'not guilty'. You can still be guilty of the offence even if it is never proven in a court.
But consider: when is the last time a professional athlete got done for rape? In comparison to athletes who are accused and have a case that never comes to trial?
Sexual assault remains a serious and underreported crime, and moving forward on accusations is outstandingly difficult, especially when the defendant is someone with a high-profile—just like a professional athlete, who could always argue on the stand that he's an athlete, he has tons of women who would eagerly fuck him. Why would he bother raping a woman? OTOH, he's also a professional athlete, and they have massive egos and outlandish senses of entitlement…
So while I believe in the rights of the accused to be considered not guilty until proven so in a court of law, the fact that he was even arrested means, to me, in Flav's delicious bon mot, that he has a stink of it on him.
The stink implies that the guy is slime, as I wrote earlier. And that's the case before he pulls on his football shirt, no matter the badge on it. No thanks. A Spurs title is not worth that.