>>3005674>She shamelessly supports incestYes congratulations. I'll just forget the fact that she blushes hard while stating this and protests when questioned. I guess the driver is also guilty of first degree murder.
>>3005684>everyone must judge themselves on Ruri's standardThat's essentially what you're doing. The trial aims to determine if the driver is a murderer in the eyes of the law. Similarly we are trying to determine if Ruri is shameless by a reasonable definition that was implied by the initial events and statements. By your reasoning, considering intent means that the law changes to whatever the driver thinks it should be, and shamelessness changes to whatever Ruri thinks it means. If you had initially claimed that you either somehow didn't notice the underwear on the mousemat or that you were too retarded to recognise it as shameful, and then claimed that Ruri is "just as shameless", I would have agreed with you and this argument wouldn't have happened.
>"Kyousuke AND Ruri have shameful thoughts."That was always implied
>is also wearing leather shoesSo let it be, who is wearing the shoes is beside the point for the above reason. You're suggesting that the law changes so that everyone is guilty
>Now what?"because she thinks he is" is implied to mean "because he has shameful thoughts" here. Whether he's shameless for other reasons is irrelevant
The evidence that you put forth as proving her shamelessness says nothing of her intent, it's only proof of her shameful behaviour and is equivalent to the CCTV footage of the driver. The evidence you put forth as determining intent in the murder trial is equivalent to my counter evidence in which she always reacts with shame or scorn to overt sexuality, which proves her prudery and suggests that she has no intention of being shameful or shameless.
