If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Lincoln Journal Star)   Farkette's friend was attacked in her home. She was tied up, had anti-gay slurs cut into her skin, and had her home set on fire   (journalstar.com) divider line 1301
    More: Sick, going to bed, Raymond Strozier, zip ties, Lincoln Journal Star, friends, Human Rights Campaign  
•       •       •

26942 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Jul 2012 at 5:32 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1301 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-25 01:12:05 PM

Monophtalmos: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: I was 90% sure it was a hoax, but this bumps it to 99.9%. I would be shocked if this turned out to be a legitimate hate crime and not some bizarre self-inflicted attention grab.

I would have been neither shocked by a hoax nor a real hate crime. Though I am still shocked that there are so many morans who don't see how fishy this story was from the beginning. If they are only enjoying a good internet flame: OK, granted. Most of us like to vent on Fark. But if they really didn't harbour any doubt at all and aggressively attacked anybody who ventured to utter "I call shennenigans" out of a position of righteous wrath then they have to be truly morans in need of getting a brain. Though being less than 18 years old would be a mitigating factor.


I think its the proclivity of people who espouse a certain viewpoint to lower their threshold of belief when it comes to claims that would further their viewpoint. Confirmation bias, basically.

In other words, I think there are many people ITT that are pro-LGBT rights (as I am) yet who are also willing to suspend their faculties for rational thought in order to believe in a story that furthers their views on percieved LGBT persecution.

Now, I'm totally pro LGBT rights in every way, and I know that there is a substantial portion of the American public that are anti-gay and that some are even prone to violence against gays, but those facts don't make this particular account make any more sense than it does on its own.

Yes, there are hate crimes against gays. Yes, that's abhorrent. But this story in particular seems suspect. And no, being skeptical of this story doesn't make one an indecent human, or a bigot, or a troll.
 
2012-07-25 01:15:20 PM

Monophtalmos: Though I am still shocked that there are so many morans who don't see how fishy this story was from the beginning. If they are only enjoying a good internet flame: OK, granted. Most of us like to vent on Fark. But if they really didn't harbour any doubt at all and aggressively attacked anybody who ventured to utter "I call shennenigans" out of a position of righteous wrath then they have to be truly morans in need of getting a brain. Though being less than 18 years old would be a mitigating factor.

~
~
Absolute gold

I read the link after 500 comments were already down. First thing I did was go back to the comments page, CTRL+F, "hoax".... and sure enough, Farkers did not disappoint.
 
2012-07-25 01:16:09 PM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Monophtalmos: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: I was 90% sure it was a hoax, but this bumps it to 99.9%. I would be shocked if this turned out to be a legitimate hate crime and not some bizarre self-inflicted attention grab.

I would have been neither shocked by a hoax nor a real hate crime. Though I am still shocked that there are so many morans who don't see how fishy this story was from the beginning. If they are only enjoying a good internet flame: OK, granted. Most of us like to vent on Fark. But if they really didn't harbour any doubt at all and aggressively attacked anybody who ventured to utter "I call shennenigans" out of a position of righteous wrath then they have to be truly morans in need of getting a brain. Though being less than 18 years old would be a mitigating factor.

I think its the proclivity of people who espouse a certain viewpoint to lower their threshold of belief when it comes to claims that would further their viewpoint. Confirmation bias, basically.

In other words, I think there are many people ITT that are pro-LGBT rights (as I am) yet who are also willing to suspend their faculties for rational thought in order to believe in a story that furthers their views on percieved LGBT persecution.

Now, I'm totally pro LGBT rights in every way, and I know that there is a substantial portion of the American public that are anti-gay and that some are even prone to violence against gays, but those facts don't make this particular account make any more sense than it does on its own.

Yes, there are hate crimes against gays. Yes, that's abhorrent. But this story in particular seems suspect. And no, being skeptical of this story doesn't make one an indecent human, or a bigot, or a troll.



There's a reason that you show up in green.
 
2012-07-25 01:30:27 PM
Subby has been posting, and I believe I posted around midnight last night when my character was called into question. I have a job, and I'm sorry that I can't monitor Fark all day.

I just submitted the story to start a dialoge, which happened, as that's what Fark is about. If it's a hoax, it's a hoax, and I feel sorry that she felt she had to do that for whatever reason. If it's not a hoax, then I feel sorry that people like this are out there.

Someone up farther asked about donations, so I posted the only link I know where they're accepting donations. I don't solicite donations.
 
2012-07-25 01:33:17 PM

Big Ramifications: I read the link after 500 comments were already down. First thing I did was go back to the comments page, CTRL+F, "hoax".... and sure enough, Farkers did not disappoint.


I was lenient on younger Farker on purpose. When I was in my late teens there were hoax hate crimes in my region - and I fell for them. So I know from first hand experience that as a naive young person you tend to still believe in "right vs. wrong" and this tends to skew your critical thinking. I learnt from it and grew more skeptical. Not only when it comes to "convenient" hate crimes but it generally taught me a lesson to check your sources and not to underestimate the criminal energy of people pretending to be "good guys". I simply hope that nobody who refused to allow any doubts was over the age of 20. Because that would be an indicator for a immaturity or simple stupidity.
 
2012-07-25 01:35:05 PM

EmmaLou: Subby has been posting, and I believe I posted around midnight last night when my character was called into question. I have a job, and I'm sorry that I can't monitor Fark all day.

I just submitted the story to start a dialoge, which happened, as that's what Fark is about. If it's a hoax, it's a hoax, and I feel sorry that she felt she had to do that for whatever reason. If it's not a hoax, then I feel sorry that people like this are out there.

Someone up farther asked about donations, so I posted the only link I know where they're accepting donations. I don't solicite donations.


Hey hang in there. You didn't do anything wrong. Do what you gotta do and don't worry about what anyone here says. If a friend of mine was just cut up and in bad shape, I don't think I'd be all like "PROVE IT!". Just know that there are a lot of folks who, for one reason or another, are skeptical and try not to take it personally, even the things that have been directed at you personally.

Take care. If I were you, I would let this thread go. Nothing good is going to come out of here now.

/one of the skeptics
 
2012-07-25 01:44:15 PM
No one will see this, but..

What if the initial intention was to sneak into the house, put some slurs in an out of the way place(Basement), and leave.

The purpose be to scare her!


Point is, no one knows what happened...

All you know is,

1: Spray Painted Slurs
2: Slurs Cut on her
3: Fire started
4: She said 3 men in masks did it.

Personally, I believe in innocence until prove guilty. So she is innocent of a hoax in my mind, until proven otherwise.

If you believe it is real or a hoax is more of a statement about yourself than anything.

I would rather wrongly give someone my sympathy, than wrongly give my scorn!


Don't let the actions of others harden your heart! Be the best you can be, regardless, you will be a better person for it.
 
2012-07-25 01:46:13 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: The vote is coming up in November, this will gain the LGBT position tons of sympathy. The attackers would have to be ultimately stupid to not realize this, she is now as close to a martyr as it gets.


You think that someone who would bind, beat and slice a woman would carefully reason about or even care about the long-term political consequences, or even personal consequences of the attack?

Psychopaths are often bafflingly incapable of planning for even the near-term consequences of their actions, even if it means pain or death for them personally---so much that this is part of the diagnostic criteria for antisocial personality disorder.

Your skepticism in this regard makes no sense: by this logic, all crimes are probable hoaxes, because any rational criminal would weigh the long-term risk of prison that comes from a life of crime.

2)Spray paint on basement wall does not appear to me male handwriting, also hate message would soon be destroyed if house burned down as intended, rendering the act pointless. The attackers would have to be ultimately stupid.

It's one thing to gauge gender from penmanship, but from spray paint handwriting? This point is just tea leaves.

3)Cuts- on arms and stomach are suspect. Both spots are easily self inflicted, also no significant damage was done as the victim was treated only briefly at the hospital.

Why is that suspect? If someone holds you down and carves LOSER into your forehead, is that supposed to somehow damage your internal organs?

Additionally, hate messages would be pointless if the victim burned to death, messages wouldn't be visible. The attackers would have to be ultimately stupid.

This is probably the dumbest of your arguments. Are you under the impression that people carve slurs into someone's body as a communications channel, and are concerned about transmission losses?

4) zip tie, one of the few methods of restraint that can be self applied in a believable manner.

What methods of restraint can't be self-applied in a believable manner?

5) fire, a fire started with gasoline that caused only $200 worth in damages must be a result of spectacular ineptitude,

Only to armchair quarterbacks with Internet Degrees in Internet Physics.

6)Masks, the attackers wore masks even though the attack was carried out within her home, and they intended her to burn in a house fire. If she would soon be dead, what is the point of wearing a mask?

Here I think you are so committed to your belief that you will feign impossible ignorance to hold on to your point.

You don't see the point of wearing a mask? What about other witnesses seeing them leave? What about the possibility of the victim surviving? What if the victim comes home with 12 friends and they have to scram? What if the plan wasn't to kill someone, or wasn't originally? What if they wanted to terrorize someone that much more? There are obvious reasons to wear a mask, and you seem to be trying hard not to think about them so that your contrived little theory can remain hovering an inch off the ground.

However in this one instance, the attackers suddenly have become overcautious, a trait not seen in literally any of the items listed previously.

How is wearing a mask overcautious? Did the attackers pay a penalty for wearing them?
 
2012-07-25 01:48:29 PM

Rogan999: No one will see this, but..

What if the initial intention was to sneak into the house, put some slurs in an out of the way place(Basement), and leave.

The purpose be to scare her!


Point is, no one knows what happened...

All you know is,

1: Spray Painted Slurs
2: Slurs Cut on her
3: Fire started
4: She said 3 men in masks did it.

Personally, I believe in innocence until prove guilty. So she is innocent of a hoax in my mind, until proven otherwise.

If you believe it is real or a hoax is more of a statement about yourself than anything.

I would rather wrongly give someone my sympathy, than wrongly give my scorn!


Don't let the actions of others harden your heart! Be the best you can be, regardless, you will be a better person for it.


i think i sort of suggested the same thing earlier
 
2012-07-25 01:50:23 PM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom:
Yes, there are hate crimes against gays. Yes, that's abhorrent. But this story in particular seems suspect. And no, being skeptical of this story doesn't make one an indecent human, or a bigot, or a troll.


Yup. I'm a strongly live-and-let-live, or more accurately, "you leave me the fark alone and I leave you the fark alone" kind of guy. But when my instinct tells someone *may* be perpetrating a vile hoax, I'll speak up. Of course if it turns out to not be a hoax, then I'll apologize for trusting my instincts and join the crowd calling for a triple crotch-kicking on the perps.
 
2012-07-25 01:51:15 PM

Rogan999: Personally, I believe in innocence until prove guilty. So she is innocent of a hoax in my mind, until proven otherwise.


That would also mean that the "3 masked men" accused of doing this are also innocent of doing this until proven otherwise, which would mean that it WAS a hoax since they're innocent.

I would rather wrongly give someone my sympathy, than wrongly give my scorn!

3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-07-25 01:58:30 PM
Xcott

When even some of the most ardent supporters of LGBT rights aren't on your side, you might want to consider the idea that your vision is clouded. Your counterpoints don't even make enough sense to warrant a direct response. You just sound overly angry, which is strange since this happened to neither you nor anyone you personally know. As someone stated earlier, I think you're suffering from confirmation bias, you're taking the word of a person you never met over a series of facts that when considered as a whole, cast strong doubt on the story. I believe you just want it to be true, despite a fairly large list of events that are uncharacteristic of traditional violent attacks.
 
2012-07-25 02:29:44 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Xcott

Your counterpoints don't even make enough sense to warrant a direct response.


You forgot to add, "and furthermore, I th-HEY LOOK OVER THERE! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH"
 
2012-07-25 02:30:11 PM

EmmaLou: Subby has been posting, and I believe I posted around midnight last night when my character was called into question. I have a job, and I'm sorry that I can't monitor Fark all day.

I just submitted the story to start a dialoge, which happened, as that's what Fark is about. If it's a hoax, it's a hoax, and I feel sorry that she felt she had to do that for whatever reason. If it's not a hoax, then I feel sorry that people like this are out there.

Someone up farther asked about donations, so I posted the only link I know where they're accepting donations. I don't solicite donations.


If this turns out to be a hoax, you damn sure did things wrong. You solicited money for a false cause. You biatched and over dramatized every single post by anyone who questioned it. You don't get off that easy, not now, not after it's already been pointed out you don't really know this person and are just an ex co-worker of theres from a long time ago.
 
2012-07-25 02:31:43 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: genius.


BraveNewCheneyWorld: And you're back to subtle name calling. The hallmark of a farker arguing from a losing position.


Do tell.
 
2012-07-25 02:37:08 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Spray paint on basement wall does not appear to me male handwriting, also hate message would soon be destroyed if house burned down as intended, rendering the act pointless. The attackers would have to be ultimately stupid.


Only if they planned the whole thing out ahead of time.

If it was done on the fly ... "hey, I just found some spray paint, I'm gonna wrirte shiat on the walls" ... "look, here's some gasoline, let's light it on fire, that'll really scare her" ... then just about anything is possible.

If we're looking at which of two parties carefully planned an event like this -- the person who claimed it happened or the people who supposedly did it -- one would think that the person who claimed it happened, having as much time as they needed to carefully plan every aspect of it, would be most likely to do things "right" (whatever that means in the context of committing a crime). For instance, making sure the spray-painted writing looks like what you'd expect of typical punks. Remember, if this is a hoax, it's one perpetrated by someone so concerned with authenticity that she cut herself multiple times and set her house on fire, so isn't it likely that she'd be "properly" sloppy with the spray paint? Actually, all the arguments you're presenting in favor of it being a hoax -- basically, that real intruders would have planned better -- seem to me to support the idea that it isn't, because someone planning a hoax has a lot more time to think about it while a real wanna-be thug is likely to be making stuff up as he goes along. At this point you're doing a better job of convincing me the story is true then the opposite.

Remember, also, that most people who commit felonies don't set out to do so. A few young guys (and they're almost always young, and almost always guys) go to the convenience store, and one of them insults that homeless dude in the parking lot. They all gather around. One of them shoves him. Then they start pushing him around. Someone hits him. It keeps on escalating. By the time they're done, they're facing murder charges. They never set out to murder anyone; they just went to buy some beer. But they egged each other on, or tried to one-up each other, or did whatever else causes people to lose all sanity in those situations, and they killed a guy for no reason at all. It's a small-scale version of the mentality that leads to a mob ("an organism with hundreds of feet but no brain").

So if this incident did unfold as described, there's no reason why it couldn't have escalated in exactly that fashion. The three guys wanted to (or were paid to; there's always my psycho-landlord scenario) throw a scare into "that lesbo chick." One thing led to another, and the whole works led to the newspaper. Frankly, that makes more sense to me than believing anyone planned it, because too many details are inconsistent with anyone doing much planning, on either side.
 
2012-07-25 02:46:49 PM

EmmaLou: ginandbacon: Can we help in any way? Is there somewhere we can send donations to help her with hospital bills or to set up new housing?

http://starcitypride.org/victim-recovery-fund/

Subby here. posting from my phone so I can't format link. this is the site for helping. she has no insurance. this girl is such a sweetheart with the best heart. she just wants to live her life and rescue dogs. this should never happen to anyone!


So you said you were the subby and solicited donations.

EmmaLou: Subby has been posting, and I believe I posted around midnight last night when my character was called into question. I have a job, and I'm sorry that I can't monitor Fark all day.

I just submitted the story to start a dialoge, which happened, as that's what Fark is about. If it's a hoax, it's a hoax, and I feel sorry that she felt she had to do that for whatever reason. If it's not a hoax, then I feel sorry that people like this are out there.

Someone up farther asked about donations, so I posted the only link I know where they're accepting donations. I don't solicite donations.


And here you say both that you aren't subby, you are subby, and you don't solicit donations.
 
2012-07-25 02:50:41 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: And zero organ damage after having messages carved into her stomach? You really think people who would do that would be careful to not cause any vital injury? That doesn't strike you as a bit odd?


Actually, no, it doesn't.

We haven't seen a picture of the woman in question, but it would not be unusual for her to have at least half an inch of subcutaneous fat on her abdomen (or six inches, if she lived around here). It's actually fairly hard to cut the human body if you're trying to write something recognizable instead of just stabbing. Shallower cuts are much easier to do, and if you're not trying to kill someone, just scare them, they're entirely sufficient. If you are trying to kill someone, you cut their throat and go back to shallow cuts for your writing.

You can damage skin enough to leave a significant scar (ask anyone who's allergic to flea bites and can't help scratching) without ever even reaching the lower layers of the skin, let alone penetrating the fat, muscle, etc., between the surface of the skin and any vital organs.
 
2012-07-25 02:50:52 PM

Monophtalmos: Big Ramifications: I read the link after 500 comments were already down. First thing I did was go back to the comments page, CTRL+F, "hoax".... and sure enough, Farkers did not disappoint.

I was lenient on younger Farker on purpose. When I was in my late teens there were hoax hate crimes in my region - and I fell for them. So I know from first hand experience that as a naive young person you tend to still believe in "right vs. wrong" and this tends to skew your critical thinking. I learnt from it and grew more skeptical. Not only when it comes to "convenient" hate crimes but it generally taught me a lesson to check your sources and not to underestimate the criminal energy of people pretending to be "good guys". I simply hope that nobody who refused to allow any doubts was over the age of 20. Because that would be an indicator for a immaturity or simple stupidity.



Another important point - in my experience, I've found that people tend to fall into one of two categories. People whose thought processes are dominated by emotion, and people whose thought processes are dominated by logic and calculation. Both are absolutely needed in a society, but I believe that more emotion-driven people are more likely to believe stories like this because of the emotional reaction that it provokes in them.

It's a huge part of why people like Nancy Grace have wildly successful shows - people love a good Appeal to Emotion.

Though, in the interest of full disclosure, my only psychology credential is a recent stay at a Holiday Inn Express.
 
2012-07-25 02:52:48 PM

xl5150: Rogan999: Personally, I believe in innocence until prove guilty. So she is innocent of a hoax in my mind, until proven otherwise.

That would also mean that the "3 masked men" accused of doing this are also innocent of doing this until proven otherwise, which would mean that it WAS a hoax since they're innocent.


The "3 Masked Men" are guilty. The people who are arrested for it are innocent until proven guilty.

 
2012-07-25 02:57:14 PM

EmmaLou: Worldwalker: EmmaLou: With the TF that I don't have?

Worldwalker: A month of TF costs less than a deli sandwich.

EmmaLou: And? Money isn't the issue. Criminey people, I just wanted to submit a link like people do every day.


You said you had to submit this particular link because you don't have TF. I pointed out that TF is not exorbitantly expensive. Now you're saying "money isn't the issue." So if money isn't an issue, and you needed TF, you'd have TF, invalidating your whole argument.

Y'know, you're doing as much to convince me this story is a hoax as BraveNewCheneyWorld is to convince me it isn't. Isn't it supposed to be the other way around?
 
2012-07-25 03:02:59 PM

Epiphany: If this turns out to be a hoax, you damn sure did things wrong. You solicited money for a false cause. You biatched and over dramatized every single post by anyone who questioned it. You don't get off that easy, not now, not after it's already been pointed out you don't really know this person and are just an ex co-worker of theres from a long time ago.


Can a brother get a THIS^^
 
2012-07-25 03:03:27 PM

Deucednuisance: BraveNewCheneyWorld: genius.

BraveNewCheneyWorld: And you're back to subtle name calling. The hallmark of a farker arguing from a losing position.

Do tell.


You don't see the difference between name calling alone, and sarcastically calling someone genius along with an explanation as to why they're wrong? Your argument is so weak that you have nowhere else to turn in the argument but to attack me (and fail).

Worldwalker: one would think that the person who claimed it happened, having as much time as they needed to carefully plan every aspect of it, would be most likely to do things "right"


And what happened to the argument that "criminals are criminals because they're stupid"?

Worldwalker: Remember, also, that most people who commit felonies don't set out to do so.


Because they originally intended to have a well mannered debate? Things just spiraled out of control and they always happen to carry around zip ties, knives, gasoline, spray paint, and masks, right? If there were attackers, they had to plan it as well, they also had to fail spectacularly. I'd say the odds of one person failing spectacularly is greater than 3 people working together failing spectacularly as at least one of the other two should notice that something is being done wrong most of the time. I'll be happy to admit I was wrong if in the following weeks, this turns out to be true, however I suspect it's the people who are so fiercely defending the alleged victim's story who will be shown to be lacking in sound judgement.
 
2012-07-25 03:13:37 PM
SkunkWerks


>>> OnlyM3: Looks like you're the only one dragging that into this thread.



There's a plank in your eye, by the by.

Seeing as though I didn't not take a position on the issue herein, you're lying once again, but I expect no better from bigots like yourself. Try just once to stay on topic. Changing the topic and ad hominems may work on your playground, but they're invalid.
 
2012-07-25 03:18:35 PM

BigNumber12: Another important point - in my experience, I've found that people tend to fall into one of two categories. People whose thought processes are dominated by emotion, and people whose thought processes are dominated by logic and calculation.


Conspiracy theories and hoax theories are not really dominated by logic and calculation. Their proponents often speak in a way that imitates the cadence of logical argument, but their underlying arguments are nonsensical and tenuous, just bulleted lists of derpy pseudologic like "fire doesn't melt steel" or "the first tower to be struck was the second one to fall."

Look for example at the enumerated list of hoax arguments higher up on this page of comments, and how they don't stand up to even mild ratiocination. An emotional response might cause people to believe that the attack happened as described, but it isn't a logical response that causes people to believe in hoax theories based on facts they mostly made up.
 
2012-07-25 03:27:15 PM

Xcott: but it isn't a logical response that causes people to believe in hoax theories based on facts they mostly made up.


You really need to stop repeating this lie. We're interpreting the facts presented, there's a huge difference.

Creationist type logic(aka people who believe the victim's story): I was told this story, so I believe it even if some facts don't fit well.

Rational logic(people who suspect a hoax): I have these facts available, so I will piece them together based on things I've observed before.

People who say this is a hoax are at least using their brain.
 
2012-07-25 03:27:39 PM

Worldwalker: EmmaLou: Worldwalker: EmmaLou: With the TF that I don't have?

Worldwalker: A month of TF costs less than a deli sandwich.

EmmaLou: And? Money isn't the issue. Criminey people, I just wanted to submit a link like people do every day.

You said you had to submit this particular link because you don't have TF. I pointed out that TF is not exorbitantly expensive. Now you're saying "money isn't the issue." So if money isn't an issue, and you needed TF, you'd have TF, invalidating your whole argument.

Y'know, you're doing as much to convince me this story is a hoax as BraveNewCheneyWorld is to convince me it isn't. Isn't it supposed to be the other way around?


You know she means that she didn't submit the link to solicit money, right? Because you are talking about something entirely different.
 
2012-07-25 03:30:14 PM

Worldwalker: Remember, also, that most people who commit felonies don't set out to do so.


It's like there's a bunch of Farkers here who've never seen

www.destgulch.com

I just think I'm gonna barf!
 
2012-07-25 03:35:13 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: they always happen to carry around zip ties, knives, gasoline, spray paint, and masks, right?


Assumes facts not in evidence.

Disallowed.

BraveNewCheneyWorld: however I suspect it's the people who are so fiercely defending the alleged victim's story who will be shown to be lacking in sound judgement.


Don't count me among them, I've stated clearly "I don't know what happened".

But your explanations are lame, and I'm not the only one who thinks so. (Britney, is that you?)
 
2012-07-25 03:48:58 PM

Deucednuisance: BraveNewCheneyWorld: they always happen to carry around zip ties, knives, gasoline, spray paint, and masks, right?

Assumes facts not in evidence.

Disallowed.


Your shtick is not only used up, it is completely stupid.

That partial sentence if taken alone does not remotely represent the though I was conveying. Essentially, you're argument relies on a lie of omission.

Deucednuisance: BraveNewCheneyWorld: however I suspect it's the people who are so fiercely defending the alleged victim's story who will be shown to be lacking in sound judgement.

Don't count me among them, I've stated clearly "I don't know what happened".


I certainly will count you among them. You're fighting anyone who argues that it might be a hoax. Have you argued against anyone who believes the official story?

Deucednuisance: But your explanations are lame, and I'm not the only one who thinks so.


I'll be especially funny if the reports in the following weeks support my position. Will they be "lame" then? It'll mean everyone who believes this is a hoax is that much better than you at discerning the truth.
 
2012-07-25 03:51:04 PM

SkunkWerks: dforkus: Right, because these crimes are totally just like the incident in this article

Lessee...

1) they're all Hate Crimes.
2) they involved mutilating people- often carving symbols or messages in the people against whom they were committed.
3) They involved setting things (places or people) on fire.

I asserted that Hate Crimes often involve numbers 2 and 3.

You said I was wrong about this (and it had nothing to do with whether or not the victim survived, may I add). Clearly I'm not wrong though.

Honestly it took longer to link them than it took to actually find instances of these kinds of things as they coincided with hate crimes. Little bit longer admittedly on the "cutting" instances. But this was mostly because I was attempting to find instances other than this one and well, the first 5 pages or so of results on Google pertain to this case.

So, other than offering a weak, clumsy and unsubtle attempt to move goalposts, do you have anything else to offer? I suspect you do. I suspect it will be hilarious.

Come at me bro.


Sigh... The goalposts are quite fine where they are..

Yes, gay people have been attacked, and people have even been carved into on occasion. If you can't see the differences between those all-to-real instances instance, well I'm not really sure what to say...

1) Evidence left behind
2) People got seriously/permanently injured, or killed
3) None were "perfect" crimes, where suspects left no evidence

I see even the some of the most ardent supporters are starting to walk balk and/or qualify their support, does that mean we've infected them with our gay hate???

// Again, I vote democrat
// I support gay marriage, not "civil unions", but full-on marriage, like us straights can get, in all 50 states, no exceptions.
//I support making sexual orientation a protected status (like race), precluding any employer, public or private from discriminating based on it (most probably know this, but in some states, employes can fire an employee for homosexuality with absolutely no legal rammifications)
// I support gays, serving proudly and openly in our military.
 
2012-07-25 03:52:14 PM
If this is a hoax, etc...

Generally people like that fool everyone around them and close to them. In my gaming community some arsehole pretended to have cancer and took advantage of a whole lot of people for years. Some people who had a sense of...a whiff of...gee this is bullshiat were utterly condemned for being such insensitive doucheknucles yadda yadda. Earlier days of the internet when people were less suspicious of such. Those who believed might have at times been gullible, but that's the worst one can lay at their feet.

However, they are responsible for their own actions and opinions as well, and intolerance shown to those simply raising the skeptic flag...well those folks often didn't mend fences. There's friendships in that circle that had been around years, destroyed by an asshat named FatherMoose (infamous enough I'm sure ppl can google the rat bastage.)

EmmaLou, unless she's the person who actually committed the hoax (if it's a hoax, and yes it smells like one to me) IMHO isn't really at fault. We form opinions of people we've known and when something terrible happens, it's natural to want to help. We might even condemn ourselves for any stray skeptical thoughts as utterly craptastic and disloyal.

Only thing IMHO she's responsible for is lashing out at those skeptical, painting all with far too broad a brush. But stupid for a friend is at least a stupid I can grok. It's hardly evil. And given the emotional context of her believing such a horrific thing has happened to a friend...it's pretty understandable.
 
2012-07-25 03:52:38 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Xcott: but it isn't a logical response that causes people to believe in hoax theories based on facts they mostly made up.

You really need to stop repeating this lie. We're interpreting the facts presented, there's a huge difference.


No, you made up facts. You stated that the victim didn't go to the hospital until enough people called you out on it. You stated that the attackers intended to kill the victim---where did you get that "fact" from? You stated that zip ties are "one of the few" forms of restraint that can be self-applied. Where does this "fact" come from?

It is also far too charitable to spin a silly and easily debunked argument and call it "interpreting facts." I would like to remind you that every one of your enumerated hoax arguments has been refuted; this was because the arguments were invalid, regardless of the veracity of the factual information you used as a starting point for your speculation.
 
2012-07-25 03:53:37 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Worldwalker: Remember, also, that most people who commit felonies don't set out to do so.

Because they originally intended to have a well mannered debate? Things just spiraled out of control and they always happen to carry around zip ties, knives, gasoline, spray paint, and masks, right?


Wrong. And you're starting to look silly.

They originally intended to do something illegal but not felonious, like "give that biatch a good scare." Or not something they thought was a felony, anyway, though a good prosecutor can find felony charges that would apply to spitting on the sidewalk. If the story is as reported, my guess is they intended to scare her, and it just, as you say, spiraled out of control.

If you came here, you wouldn't have to carry around zip ties, knives, gasoline, or spray paint; you can find them all in my garage or my kitchen drawers (you would have to bring your own masks).

Your typical wanna-be thug probably does carry a knife, and the average kitchen will supply an assortment for someone who doesn't have their own. I use zip ties for all sorts of things, and I have everything from little 2" ones for computer cables to some that are probably around 2 feet, so I don't think it's unreasonable to have some around a house; if the thugs hadn't found any there, they could have used any number of other things, such as duct tape, cut-off electrical cords, etc., and would have expected to do so. I keep gasoline around for the lawnmower; pretty much everyone with a yard does, except for the ones who hire lawn services (and even then, they might want to be able to do touch-ups in between visits). There's spray paint there, too, plus a can on my back porch for some reason.

You're looking at the situation backward, seeing the reported events and assuming there was a plan to have those events happen exactly that way.

Detail as reported: Woman was bound with zip ties.

Your idea of thugs' plan: We will tie up this woman with zip ties.

Thugs' actual plan: We will tie up this woman with whatever we find; there's gonna be something.
(if they even got as far as "we will tie up this woman" at all)

How it would have worked: They brought masks because they didn't plan on killing the victim. They had knives, or just grabbed them from her kitchen. They tied her up with whatever they found there, which happened to be zip ties. And the gasoline and spray paint were serendipitous: "Hey, I found some gasoline, let's light it on fire."

Your arguments continue to persuade me that the story is true. Thankfully, we have EmmaLou here to provide equal weight to the hoax angle, so I can remain undecided and uncommitted to either version. But keep trying; you may in time persuade me that it's true despite EmmaLou's efforts.
 
2012-07-25 03:59:40 PM
A better update, not that it's going to help clear anything up. It just gives more detail about why they said they weren't ruling out a hoax. No, it doesn't involve any new information:

http://www.omaha.com/article/20120725/NEWS/707259886/1685

Also, the only thing that seems amiss that has been verified is that there weren't any signs of forced entry, but she said her doors were locked. However, if her landlord was in on it, or it was someone she knew/gave a key to, then it would follow there wouldn't be signs of forced entry. Or maybe they went in through a window that was open. That doesn't really mean anything, just that it would be nice if someone had kicked a door down.
 
2012-07-25 03:59:43 PM
Police not ruling out possibility hate crime didn't happen

Pretty sure this has already been posted, but I'll post it again: Link

"Police continue to investigate Sunday's reported hate crime but say they haven't ruled out the possibility that the 33-year-old woman staged the attack."

Does anyone really think police would be saying that unless they strongly suspect a hoax?
 
2012-07-25 04:02:04 PM
This thread:

"Wow... that story sounds pretty fishy. I'd bet it was a hoax."

"Have some compassion... hoax or not... it's a horrible story either way."

"It is pretty horrible, and I feel bad if it is indeed real... just saying that the whole story just doesn't seem right."

"You're a bigot and homophobe. Where i your proof that it's a hoax?!?!"

"No I'm not. Don't have any proof. Just saying the whole thing seems really suspicious."

"A- Ha!!! You just said you have no proof!!! I WIN!!!"

/Scene
 
2012-07-25 04:02:39 PM

dforkus: If you can't see the differences between those all-to-real instances instance, well I'm not really sure what to say...

1) Evidence left behind
2) People got seriously/permanently injured, or killed
3) None were "perfect" crimes, where suspects left no evidence


1) Wait: you're claiming there was no evidence left behind in this attack?

How would anyone reading about it on the Internet even know that? How would anyone know that at all so early in the investigation of an assault?

2) I'm surprised you don't see what's wrong with this logic: of course people tend to be seriously injured in the kind of attacks that get reported in the news; people who just get punched in the face don't really end up grabbing the nation's attention. This doesn't mean that hate crimes tend to result in death, or that hate crimes that don't end in death are suspicious.

3) This was not a "perfect" crime: a fire was lit that burned out and did not spread, for example. If anything, the hoax theorists are seizing upon all the ways the attack didn't go perfectly, and claiming that only an improbably stupid criminal would commit a crime that played out the way it did.
 
2012-07-25 04:12:27 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: You're fighting anyone who argues that it might be a hoax.


No, I am arguing against YOU and your "reasoning". (And, I'll grant you, people who mis-state facts or make absurd arguments. But right now? Just you.)

I'll say it again, I don't know what happened.

But I think your explanations of why you conclude that it IS a hoax are weak.

Really wondering how I could say it any more plainly.

But I'm sure you'll find some way to argue against something I never said.

Again.
 
2012-07-25 04:13:22 PM

Worldwalker: They originally intended to do something illegal but not felonious, like "give that biatch a good scare." Or not something they thought was a felony, anyway, though a good prosecutor can find felony charges that would apply to spitting on the sidewalk. If the story is as reported, my guess is they intended to scare her, and it just, as you say, spiraled out of control.


Am I really a bad person for thinking this all sounds, well, just a little contrived? Like if you saw it in a movie, you'd think the writing was a little lazy/convenient?

"Spiraled out of control" to the point were a woman was forcibly tied up and carved on with knives, but not so far out of control that the woman was seriously/permanently injured, and no sexual assault..

"out of control" enough to attempt a gasoline arson, but the building didn't burn down or even get seriously damaged,

so "out of control" that graffiti was sprayed... neatly on the concrete walls of an unfinished basement...

I get that those who are emotionally invested because of their personal involvement may not find this series of events the least bit questionable, but I'm finding it hard to believe that anyone outside of this circle wouldn't find themselves a little bit skeptical...
 
2012-07-25 04:16:26 PM

Xcott: No, you made up facts. You stated that the victim didn't go to the hospital until enough people called you out on it.

She's in "hiding", so if they beat her, it wasn't severe enough to send her to the hospital, which is strange for people who are willing to carve her skin. And the cutting itself was shallow enough that no extended medical intervention was required, which is strangely careful for people who intended to burn her to death only moments later. That's pretty inconsistent behavior.


I stated that nothing was severe enough to keep her in the hospital, big difference. Stop lying.
I also stated that the beating itself wasn't enough to send her to the hospital. If she received severe force trauma, the'd likely keep her for observation.

Xcott: You stated that the attackers intended to kill the victim---where did you get that "fact" from?


They left her tied up in a house that they set on fire. Seems fairly self evident. Seriously, arguing that they didn't intend to kill her makes you seem beyond unreasonable.

Xcott: You stated that zip ties are "one of the few" forms of restraint that can be self-applied. Where does this "fact" come from?


Can you bind yourself with rope and make it look like someone else did it? Can you wrap yourself in duct tape the same way? A zip tie only requires a pinch point to hold the end and some force, how many other ways can you think of to bind yourself so easily?

Xcott: I would like to remind you that every one of your enumerated hoax arguments has been refuted; this was because the arguments were invalid, regardless of the veracity of the factual information you used as a starting point for your speculation.


Bald assertion.

Worldwalker: They originally intended to do something illegal but not felonious, like "give that biatch a good scare." Or not something they thought was a felony, anyway, though a good prosecutor can find felony charges that would apply to spitting on the sidewalk. If the story is as reported, my guess is they intended to scare her, and it just, as you say, spiraled out of control.


You're debunking my speculation with speculation!? You're welcome to your opinion but that doesn't shred any theory I've presented.

Worldwalker: If you came here, you wouldn't have to carry around zip ties, knives, gasoline, or spray paint; you can find them all in my garage or my kitchen drawers (you would have to bring your own masks).


What's more likely, they brought the items with them, or they rummaged through her house for hate crime supplies?

Worldwalker: Your arguments continue to persuade me that the story is true.


There was never any danger of you believing it was a hoax, who the hell do you think you're fooling?

Lsherm: Also, the only thing that seems amiss that has been verified is that there weren't any signs of forced entry, but she said her doors were locked.


good find, ty.

IPKnightly: Does anyone really think police would be saying that unless they strongly suspect a hoax?


That doesn't often come up in a story like this.
 
2012-07-25 04:17:54 PM
So, if I'm putting two and two together based on the blog post linked earlier in the thread, then its pretty obvious who the victim is: a former Olympic-candidate shot putter who ended up addicted to coke and meth and who was featured on A&E's intervention.

Since the show she's apparently relapsed and then also has a list of criminal activity including robbery and prostitution.

This whole thing is just crazy.
 
2012-07-25 04:18:08 PM

IPKnightly: "Police continue to investigate Sunday's reported hate crime but say they haven't ruled out the possibility that the 33-year-old woman staged the attack."

Does anyone really think police would be saying that unless they strongly suspect a hoax?


That depends: did the police hold a press conference and say, "we aren't ruling out the possibility of a hoax?" That would sound like they suspect it as a possibility.

On the other hand, what if they were simply asked by a reporter if they were ruling out a hoax, and honestly answered "no" because it's an ongoing investigation? That would not sound like the police suspect something.
 
2012-07-25 04:24:14 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: I'll be especially funny if the reports in the following weeks support my position. Will they be "lame" then? It'll mean everyone who believes this is a hoax is that much better than you at discerning the truth.


Not necessarily. You might be right for the wrong reasons.
 
2012-07-25 04:28:10 PM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: So, if I'm putting two and two together based on the blog post linked earlier in the thread, then its pretty obvious who the victim is: a former Olympic-candidate shot putter who ended up addicted to coke and meth and who was featured on A&E's intervention.

Since the show she's apparently relapsed and then also has a list of criminal activity including robbery and prostitution.

This whole thing is just crazy.


Except the woman who was allegedly assaulted is at least 5 years younger than the olympic-candidate shot putter.
 
2012-07-25 04:37:59 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Worldwalker: If you came here, you wouldn't have to carry around zip ties, knives, gasoline, or spray paint; you can find them all in my garage or my kitchen drawers (you would have to bring your own masks).

BraveNewCheneyWorld: What's more likely, they brought the items with them, or they rummaged through her house for hate crime supplies?


That they rummaged through her house.

Let's say they decide to go "scare that lesbo chick." They're figuring on beating her up or something, probably don't have much of a plan beyond that. They make up the rest as they go along. They see the spray paint, so they use it. They find some gasoline, so they use it. Etc. If they'd come across different items, they would have done different things.

Worldwalker: Your arguments continue to persuade me that the story is true.

BraveNewCheneyWorld: There was never any danger of you believing it was a hoax, who the hell do you think you're fooling?


Um, myself?

I don't know if it was a hoax or not. I didn't know when the story was reported, and I don't know now. And actually, all joking aside, there's nothing you (or anyone else who has posted here, except possibly EmmaLou) can do to persuade me in either direction. I'll know whether it's true or not when the people who are on the site and investigating come out with further information and a conclusion. Until then, I'm just kicking around ideas like everyone else. Anyone who has made up their mind (pro or con) based on what a newspaper printed of what a reporter wrote about what some other person said about something that happened to someone else is just deluding himself.

The fact that you see everyone who doesn't agree completely with you as agreeing with your opposition says more about you than it does about anything else.
 
2012-07-25 04:56:57 PM

WhippingBoy: Except the woman who was allegedly assaulted is at least 5 years younger than the olympic-candidate shot putter.


That's surprisingly comforting to hear.

'Cause that chick fell out of the crazy tree and hit every branch on the way down.
 
2012-07-25 05:03:30 PM

Worldwalker:
Let's say they decide to go "scare that lesbo chick." They're figuring on beating her up or something, probably don't have much of a plan beyond that. They make up the rest as they go along. They see the spray paint, so they use it. They find some gasoline, so they use it. Etc. If they'd come across different items, they would have done different things.


Right so these three guys mask up and do a home invasion for the purpose of scaring a lesbian they don't like (like there wouldn't be far easier ways to intimidate someone). Once inside the house our intrepid, smart-when-they-need-to-be, yet-spontaneous, yet-not-wreckless, group of criminals start ad-libbing, but only to an exent to where the victim isn't permanently injured, isn't sexually assaulted, a fire is started doing next to no damage, vandalism is commited, neatly, on the concrete wall of an unfinished basement..


I don't know if it was a hoax or not. I didn't know when the story was reported, and I don't know now.
Oh come now, this is the internet, you are allowed to have an opinion, are you really saying, after all you posted that you really don't have the slightest inkling either way?

sounds like weaselly bullshiat to me, perhaps a case of buyers remorse (you aren't the only one apparently)...

Anyone who has made up their mind (pro or con) based on what a newspaper printed of what a reporter wrote about what some other person said about something that happened to someone else is just deluding himself.
Nobody absolutely knows what happened besides the victim and the perpetrators. Is anyone disputing this? But I'm not going to delude myself and pretend based on what we all know, and we all read, that I don't find the crime, as it's been reported, HIGHLY questionable...

If we had a thousand bucks to wager, and then god himself would come down from the clouds and tell us with absolute metaphysical certainty would happen, I know where I'd put my chip.
 
2012-07-25 05:08:57 PM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: So, if I'm putting two and two together...


If you're right, then this person is very, very messed up and it is very, very likely that it was staged or at least not at all as reported. Also likely that any "help" she gets will continue to be an uphill battle.

Witness and acquaintance descriptions of a sweet and helpful person don't seem to match, though. Still gonna have to wait for official determination.
 
2012-07-25 05:13:22 PM

RatOmeter: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: So, if I'm putting two and two together...

If you're right, then this person is very, very messed up and it is very, very likely that it was staged or at least not at all as reported. Also likely that any "help" she gets will continue to be an uphill battle.

Witness and acquaintance descriptions of a sweet and helpful person don't seem to match, though. Still gonna have to wait for official determination.


Well, based on the age difference between the reported victim and the person in the blog, I may have been wrong to connect those dots... but yeah, I hope more info comes out soon to settle the debate.
 
Displayed 50 of 1301 comments

First | « | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report