[Leonelf]

> I wholeheartedly agree and support this notion and I sincerely hope it will be signed into law at once.

Why would you invert innocent until proven guilty for this particular matter but not others? And how exactly would the accused prove themselves innocent? Not having to prove an assault occured means that anyone could accuse anyone without reprimand.

EDIT: I agree that there's a problem in society and sometimes law regarding cases like in the other post, where the jury sees clear evidence and pretends like "it isn't rape because she had a short skirt" etc, this is obviously wrong. But for cases where it's testimony against testimony, the only realistic approach is to pressure the perp until they admit to it. I don't see how the opposite would be viable.