I will disagree. I think that when the State of New York set it up the legal definitions that way because of the new law to allow civil suits for indefinite periods of time. Rape as a NY State crime still has a statute of limitation.
What does any of that have to do with that I'm saying?
Sexual Assault is not a defined crime in New York.
It is a category. Everything in Article 130 is a sex offense.
You complained that he wasn't found liable of sexual assault and it was inappropriate to say he was.
I am just pointing out he was - it is totally appropriate to say it.
Unless - again - you are the kind of person who wants to say that no one can commit rape in Canada because there is no criminal charge called rape here.
If someone is found guilty of manslaughter, do you complain when someone says they were found guilty of homicide?
Making things up about why New York defines things the way they do to suit some narrative you want isn't something you normally do.
When men come to TERB to argue about Trump the rapist they generally run into two realities you and I can't change.
First, the TERB membership isn't really all that sympathetic to "MeToo" or "Believe Her".
Second, the American public taken as a whole don't seem to be all that impressed with the 1995 incident.
Maybe the third reality is Harris' own choice of words.
Again, that you (and indeed the people on TERB) are generally unsympathetic to Carrol has nothing to do with what I said.
That Harris, as a former lawyer, uses the exact term also has nothing to do with it.
You complained that it was wrong to say he was found liable of sexual assault because that isn't the exact term.
Sexual abuse
is sexual assault in New York.
I don't understand why you feel compelled to play word games about this.