I think you're confusing this with a court of law. This is a debating club. I'm advancing a factual hypothesis - - the guy's an experienced pervert, this is unlikely to be his first time experience. You're advancing a factual hypothesis - - this was a first for Craig.
He's not a criminal accused on trial, he doesn't get or need the procedural safeguards of our common criminal law - - the burden of proof lying on the accuser, etc. He's not facing any penalties in here except the penalty of our respective opinions, such as they are.
So don't hide behind the rules of the criminal court. Admit that you don't have any more evidence to support your opinion than I do to support mine. So far, we're on an equal footing. You say "first time" I say "not first time." You have no evidence, I have no evidence.
Well, then we reach for the next best thing to evidence: life experience, a sense of what's plausible and realistic and what's implausible and far-fetched. I will tell you, given the guy's age, past rumours and accusations, and the general facts of the arrest - - how would a first timer know the routine, eye contact through the gap at the side of the door, foot contact, no spoken words, etc.? Sounds to me like this would NOT be his first time.
Now if you want to tell me that based on your knowledge of human nature, experience of life, etc., it's your considered opinion that this WAS a first for old Larry, that's fine. I won't think much of your judgment and experience, I'll form a pretty low opinion of your knowledge of human nature, and I suspect most other reasonable individuals who have been around the block a few times would form pretty much the same opinion as I would of your judgment, but that's OK - - you're certainly entitled.
So let's hear it, BT - - in the absence of any evidence for or against this being Larry's first time hunting for sex in a men's washroom, just going on your general knowledge of human nature and experience of life, all things considered (Larry's age, the circumstances of his arrest, the late marriage to a woman with three kids after the first words of his alleged sexual preferences began to he heard) - - you tell me, first time or not first time? Your honest opinion.
And I'll tell ya something - -it's not that I give a shit what his sexual preference is. If he weren't like all the members of his party such a fucking hypocrite on sexual mores, it wouldn't make a damned bit of difference. But you're jerking me around here, you're impugning my opinion on ridiculously pseudo-legal grounds, arguing ludicrous points with such sophistry that I'm just not going to let you get away with it. So don't try to make this into a witch-hunting exercise, which it is not. A simple yes or no answer is all I'm looking for - - you REALLY THINK this was a first for old Larry or not?
