syn13 wrote:
Sexual touching is the legal name they gave the charge to seperate it from the more serious/violent crimes, touching some-one sexually without their consent stills equals sexual assault.
As for your stupid equivalence argument in the later post - yes, if an NRLW player were charged with a sexual offence, she can have a long stint on the sidelines too.
No it does not. If it was a sexual assault, it would be charged as such. It wasn't.
Both charges exist independently for incidents of different severity. You already came to that conclusion in your post and then changed course. Odd really, almost like you want to push the narrative.