This is ridiculous. It’s fortunate for her that she was pregnant.
One would hope that this would be used as a case study on why this technology is dangerous, especially when in the hands of obviously incompetent or just malicious actors, but I doubt that’ll happen.
The fact that she was pregnant had no bearing on the case being dropped, it only got dropped because the alleged victim didn’t appear at court. I wish her well in the lawsuit.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !technology@beehaw.org
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
This is ridiculous. It’s fortunate for her that she was pregnant.
One would hope that this would be used as a case study on why this technology is dangerous, especially when in the hands of obviously incompetent or just malicious actors, but I doubt that’ll happen.
The fact that she was pregnant had no bearing on the case being dropped, it only got dropped because the alleged victim didn’t appear at court. I wish her well in the lawsuit.
That’s good info; this article was pretty ambiguous about the actual case itself and made it sound like her pregnancy was the deciding factor.
It’s absolutely ridiculous that the pregnancy didn’t just invalidate the entire thing, though…