Does it prove that a conviction does not always mean guilt?
In this particular case, it proves absolutely nothing.
Someone accused of a different crime under different circumstances was found guilty and later exonerated.
To try and apply that situation to this one is ridiculous.
That would be like me throwing you out of an airplane and expecting you to survive because Vesna Vulovic did once.
Garl said:
So tell me, womens rights champion, why did Marta choose to stay with Slava and go back to that backwards country. She had him in her hands, if she decided to press the charges, he would have been jailed, stripped from all of his posessions and deported with no pardon afterwards. And instead, she goes with him and they have two children together. Why?
You think the fact that she is still with Slava proves that he didn't do it?
Do you know anything about female assault victims?
Maybe she forgave him. Maybe she thinks he's still worth living with. Maybe she's emotionally or financially dependent on him.
It has no bearing on whether the original assault occurred.
A court of law determined that it did, using the available evidence, including the wife's testimony.