ChillDoubt - "If the judge and jury did not feel that the incident was a sexual assault, then why has Travis been convicted of that offence, and sentenced accordingly?
-------------------
So we are in agreement that he has been convicted and sentenced accordingly, so what are you adding to the discussion?"
My response began with agchristie's assertion that Travis has suffered enough given the lengths of the trials and the financial and physical toll on Mr Travis - I pointed out that in my view, these factors are not relavent, and a discussion has developed from there.
Most on this thread believe he's been sentenced appropriately and see no point in pursuing this further, so what is your continuing argument?"
I have no put forward an argument about the length of sentence, none of my posts are concerned with that aspect of the case.
"That the wording of his offence didn't carry enough gravitas? That he ought to be deemed a sexual predator as opposed to just a 'dirty old man'?"
I refer to my previous answer - I am not concerned with the wording of the offence, or any reference to Mr Travis's character, and have offered nothing in my posts on either subject.
Others do appear willing to debate, which is why the thread has not stopped yet - you appear to think I am arguing issues which I have not mentioned. If you wish to argue my views, feel free, but that is not the same as suggesting notions which have not been mentioned by me, or anyone else.