Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(CNN)   Two young men rape a 15-year-old girl, share the pics with their friends. Police investigate, and opt not to press charges. Until the Internet finds out. Difficulty: not Steubenville, and a bit too late for the girl   ( cnn.com) divider line
    More: Sad, Halifax Regional Police, youth courts, Steubenville, Canadians  
•       •       •

20394 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Aug 2013 at 11:25 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-08-09 04:50:01 PM  

vygramul: Given that one can have an orgasm while being raped, no still can tell you squat about consent.


In pron this is called a whoregasm

ciberido: You ARE as bad as the person you pretend to be.


The difference is I don't defend myself, I know I am an asshole and say inappropriate things that can offend some and entertain others. U mad bra?
 
2013-08-09 04:51:13 PM  

someonelse: Alonjar: this was a normal thing for her,

Getting f*cked by multiple guys while puking drunk? I guess that means that there are a lot of guys in her circle who will f*ck a puking drunk girl. It's a shame there's no telethon for these poor saps who get in trouble for f*cking girls who are puking drunk. Won't someone think of the guys who see falling-down-drunk-girls and think, "we can all stick our dicks in her"?


to be fair, this is Fark... we've seen stories of guys doing horses, guys being done by horses... to death, guys doing dead dogs... in public... in front of a daycare... we are possibly more jaded than most when it comes to being able to imagine 'deviants' that will fark almost anything... at any time under almost any circumstances...
 
2013-08-09 04:53:33 PM  

someonelse: Won't someone think of the guys who see falling-down-drunk-girls and think, "we can all stick our dicks in her"?


They need their cock cozys
 
2013-08-09 04:53:43 PM  

vygramul: Too bad that consent was never given.


Apparently you aren't paying attention to the case. Her friend testified to the police that she was consenting when she left the apartment. So we know, or at least strongly indicate, that consent was given. What we don't know is if consent was withdrawn. Atleast not that night.  Nor in the messages she had with the boys in the days after where she indicated consent according to the police.

We do know that consent was withdrawn a week later, hence the rape charge.  These boys should have known that that was a possibility. We should be honest with ourselves and society of the fluidity that "consent" as taken in the present day, and teach this to young boys so they don't wind up in these situations.
 
2013-08-09 04:55:22 PM  
even if it wasnt rape but a bad decision, she didn't deserve anything but thanks from those assholes.

Glad they thought it was cool to send child porn to friends though, if that's how they got nailed. so to speak. may they be killed in jail.
 
2013-08-09 04:55:25 PM  

ChuDogg: I'm just saying it's not fair to them that they weren't told that consent can be withdrawn at a later time.


You know what? If those boys had treated that girl with the respect she deserved and not farked her from behind while she was vomiting profusely out a window, and not taken pictures of her while having sex, and not shared those photos with all the kids in their school, and not bullied and harassed her until she killed herself, they wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. I don't think these particular boys would have behaved any differently if they'd been told by their parents that women can retroactively withdraw consent. Why? Because they're assholes, and they're teenagers, and teenaged assholes have very poor decision-making skills. If they had just stopped at any point along their highway to hell, this wouldn't have happened, that girl would probably be alive, and the boys wouldn't be facing felony charges.
 
2013-08-09 04:57:09 PM  
like rapists, Harry Freakstorm believes what he wants to believe

/douchewitz
 
2013-08-09 04:57:49 PM  

ChuDogg: Her friend testified to the police that she was consenting when she left the apartment


Nope. Her friend stated that Rehtaeh was making out with two guys while shirtless. That does not mean she consented to having sex with them. Unless you think that every girl you get to second base with automatically agrees to have sex with you?
 
2013-08-09 04:58:46 PM  

Nadie_AZ: The law allows victims, among other things, to sue their alleged cyberbullies. If a bully is a minor, the bully's parents can be held liable.

I'm sorta confused, here. The issue was whether or not it was legal to arrest some cyberbullies?

I thought the issue was:

Two 18-year-old men face child pornography charges in connection with the case of a 17-year-old girl who hanged herself after she was allegedly gang-raped and bullied online, Canadian authorities said Thursday evening.

A police statement did not provide details, but the family of Rehtaeh Parsons has said she developed suicidal thoughts after she was sexually assaulted in 2011 and a picture of the incident was shared by phone and online.

How could the police fail to act on this? They raped her. Gang raped her. Then took pictures and put them online.

If this were my 15 year old, I would have probably gone vigilante.


I've only heard second or third hand, but it apparently has something to do with one of the boys... and perhaps not even one of these two, but a third involved party... being related to someone with some power/$$$.

Plus "stupid teens, whatareyagonnado?", "boys will be boys" and "she was asking for it".
 
2013-08-09 04:59:24 PM  

DrewCurtisJr: vygramul: In this case, we don't have to guess. She told us. The odds are profoundly in her favor for telling the truth, and rape statistics bear this out. Rape accusations are rarely unfounded.

WTF?


It's true. The number of unfounded rape allegations is in the single-digit percentages. You may be comfortable in needing a 20 to hit, but I'll go with 2 to 20.
 
2013-08-09 05:02:02 PM  

Boris S. Wort: Nadie_AZ: The law allows victims, among other things, to sue their alleged cyberbullies. If a bully is a minor, the bully's parents can be held liable.

I'm sorta confused, here. The issue was whether or not it was legal to arrest some cyberbullies?

I thought the issue was:

Two 18-year-old men face child pornography charges in connection with the case of a 17-year-old girl who hanged herself after she was allegedly gang-raped and bullied online, Canadian authorities said Thursday evening.

A police statement did not provide details, but the family of Rehtaeh Parsons has said she developed suicidal thoughts after she was sexually assaulted in 2011 and a picture of the incident was shared by phone and online.

How could the police fail to act on this? They raped her. Gang raped her. Then took pictures and put them online.

If this were my 15 year old, I would have probably gone vigilante.

I've only heard second or third hand, but it apparently has something to do with one of the boys... and perhaps not even one of these two, but a third involved party... being related to someone with some power/$$$.

Plus "stupid teens, whatareyagonnado?", "boys will be boys" and "she was asking for it".


That's my guess, seeing as how no one was arrested for rape, or making and distributing child porn, or for one of the males stabbing one of Rehtaeh's friends.
 
2013-08-09 05:02:23 PM  

vygramul: fredklein:
Exactly how many pics of a smiling face would you need to conclude the person is happy??

In this case, we don't have to guess. She told us.


Yes, she did. By not accusing them of rape the next day, or the day after, or the day after that, or the day after that....

In fact, iirc, she didn't cry 'rape' until she was embarrassed by the pic they shared around.

Let's look at the timeline:

She has drunken sex with them
She DOESN'T cry rape.
They pass a pic around, embarrassing her.
She THEN cries rape.

Sounds to me like she only cried rape BECAUSE OF the pic.

Rape accusations are rarely unfounded.

Now I KNOW you're trolling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape
David Lisak's study, published in 2010 in Violence Against Women, classified as false 8 out of the 136 (5.9%) reported rapes at a major northeastern university over a ten-year period.

6% were false. What would the false reporting rate of, say, burglary be? (See below)

Oh, and a report was only counted as false if "there was evidence that a thorough investigation was pursued and that the investigation had yielded evidence that the reported sexual assault had in fact not occurred.", so it was only considered false if it could be PROVEN to be false. All 'questionable' cases were considered real.

A large-scale study was conducted in Australia, with 850 rapes reported to the Victoria police between 2000 and 2003. Using both quantitative and qualitative methods, the researchers examined 812 cases with sufficient information to make an appropriate determination, and found that 2.1% of these were classified by police as false reports.

So, 2%+. But, again, these were one they actually had enough evidence to PROVE, in fact: All of these complainants were then charged or threatened with charges for filing a false police report.

and

FBI reports from 1996 consistently put the number of "unfounded" rape accusations around 8%. In contrast, the average rate of unfounded reports for "Index crimes" tracked by the FBI is 2%.

8%. Compared to 2% for other crimes. In other words, false reports of rape are 4 times as high as false reports of other crimes.

"rarely unfounded" my ass.

e the abused hounded her until she killed herself. I'm going to suggest their characters are not ones that lend confidence to their telling the truth.

The accused didn't. The other kids at school did.
 
2013-08-09 05:04:17 PM  

DrewCurtisJr: vygramul: In this case, we don't have to guess. She told us. The odds are profoundly in her favor for telling the truth, and rape statistics bear this out. Rape accusations are rarely unfounded.

WTF?


The devil is in the details. You see. We present surveys to random samplings of women on whether they had sex without consent. Then compare it to the number of proven false rape allegations. So we arrive at 99.99 to .01 ratio of rapes versus false rapes.

Of course we don't know whether the women consented at the time, only whether they consented at the time of taking the survey. At any point during the time frame, for any reason, from the act to the time of the survey her consent can be withdrawn. We know this because it is never asked any details of the actual event. It's not even worth looking into. It is irrelevant to know if a woman consented at the time of the act, all the matters is if she consents at the point in time of being asked. Whether on a survey, with friends, or to the police.

I'm just looking logically at my current milieu as we have had a number of these debates in society, and the only logical continuance is that consent can be withdrawn at any period in time in the present or in the future.

I accept that, if that is what is being put forward by my peers. I won't argue against it or some fallacious "just world" theories of how things "ought to be". I just think it should be legally codified and acknowledged and taught to future generations of men so they can understand appropriate conduct that can mitigate risks presented to them during their sexual activities. And this will protect women as well. Retroactively being raped by revoking your consent can be a very traumatic experience .
 
2013-08-09 05:05:39 PM  

ChuDogg: Her friend testified to the police that she was consenting when she left the apartment.


Was Rehtaeh having sex when her friend left the apartment?
 
2013-08-09 05:06:32 PM  

fredklein: In fact, iirc, she didn't cry 'rape' until she was embarrassed by the pic they shared around.


Did you ever think that seeing the pictures is when she realized something had gone on that she hadn't remembered and didn't consent to?
 
2013-08-09 05:08:17 PM  

ChuDogg: vygramul: Too bad that consent was never given.

Apparently you aren't paying attention to the case. Her friend testified to the police that she was consenting when she left the apartment. So we know, or at least strongly indicate, that consent was given. What we don't know is if consent was withdrawn. Atleast not that night.  Nor in the messages she had with the boys in the days after where she indicated consent according to the police.

We do know that consent was withdrawn a week later, hence the rape charge.  These boys should have known that that was a possibility. We should be honest with ourselves and society of the fluidity that "consent" as taken in the present day, and teach this to young boys so they don't wind up in these situations.


False - you are extrapolating that.

What we do know is that she was so hammered she was incapable of giving consent. Their own testimony is that she was passed out. A passed-out person cannot consent to sex. Therefore, it is rape.
 
2013-08-09 05:11:46 PM  

vygramul: A passed-out person cannot consent to sex.


Apparently if you consented to any degree of sexual contact prior to passing out, you can be passed around from dick to dick like a meat puppet. Because, slut.
 
2013-08-09 05:14:09 PM  

someonelse: pedrop357: You're presuming that one party was sober enough to recognize that other person's consent wasn't well thought out.

No I'm not. You're presuming that being drunk excuses someone from breaking the law. You can't claim you cheated on your taxes because you were drunk when you filled out the form.


Stop dodging the question dumbfark.

If 2 people are equally drunk, past the point of consent, which one of them is the rapist when they have sex?

Are they both rapists?  Should they both go to jail?  No and no obviously.  So your whole "too drunk to provide consent" argument has a gaping farking hole in it.  Acknowledge it, and grow the fakr up, and recognize that the world isn't black and white.
 
2013-08-09 05:16:30 PM  

fredklein: Yes, she did. By not accusing them of rape the next day, or the day after, or the day after that, or the day after that....


Many rape victims never come forward at all. Hesitation when she's being slut-shamed is not an indication of no rape.

fredklein: Rape accusations are rarely unfounded.

Now I KNOW you're trolling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape
David Lisak's study, published in 2010 in Violence Against Women, classified as false 8 out of the 136 (5.9%) reported rapes at a major northeastern university over a ten-year period.

6% were false.


Just what is rare in your book? It's not hard to find someone using "rare" when they mean 9%.
 
2013-08-09 05:16:44 PM  

Mike Chewbacca: ChuDogg: I'm just saying it's not fair to them that they weren't told that consent can be withdrawn at a later time.

You know what? If those boys had treated that girl with the respect she deserved and not farked her from behind while she was vomiting profusely out a window, and not taken pictures of her while having sex, and not shared those photos with all the kids in their school, and not bullied and harassed her until she killed herself, they wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. I don't think these particular boys would have behaved any differently if they'd been told by their parents that women can retroactively withdraw consent. Why? Because they're assholes, and they're teenagers, and teenaged assholes have very poor decision-making skills. If they had just stopped at any point along their highway to hell, this wouldn't have happened, that girl would probably be alive, and the boys wouldn't be facing felony charges.


I understand their conduct was less than exemplary, and won't object to them being erroneously charged in this case when consent was revoked a week later.

But this can be a teachable moment for everyone involved.  So that maybe future generations of men won't act with the same conduct that they exhibited. Maybe the next teen gang bang when the girls gags and goes outside the window, the boys will come up behind and asking "are you okay?" in a consoling voice before continuing on with the gang bang. Maybe when they have photos on their phone and think, "man, i really gotta show this to the boys" they will stop, and think, "damn, i really don't want her to revoke the consent she gave us" and they'll just keep them in private on their encrypted hard drives like the rest of us.

All of this can be done simply by acknowledging what's on everyone's mind during all of these sketchy drunken hookup stories.  We don't even need to argue whether she was drunk / drunk but not too drunk / how drunk is too drunk/ do you vomit when you are too drunk? / i vomit when im not too drunk

All of that is rendered irrelevant by simply accept the fact that as a woman you can revoke your consent at any time. So the only question is, when being asked, do you consent to what you did? No = automatic rape charge. And men now have to make a conscious effort to insure that any consent they were given is never withdrawn.

So it's a win-win for everyone involved.
 
2013-08-09 05:18:06 PM  

ChuDogg: DrewCurtisJr: vygramul: In this case, we don't have to guess. She told us. The odds are profoundly in her favor for telling the truth, and rape statistics bear this out. Rape accusations are rarely unfounded.

WTF?

The devil is in the details. You see. We present surveys to random samplings of women on whether they had sex without consent. Then compare it to the number of proven false rape allegations. So we arrive at 99.99 to .01 ratio of rapes versus false rapes.

Of course we don't know whether the women consented at the time, only whether they consented at the time of taking the survey. At any point during the time frame, for any reason, from the act to the time of the survey her consent can be withdrawn. We know this because it is never asked any details of the actual event. It's not even worth looking into. It is irrelevant to know if a woman consented at the time of the act, all the matters is if she consents at the point in time of being asked. Whether on a survey, with friends, or to the police.

I'm just looking logically at my current milieu as we have had a number of these debates in society, and the only logical continuance is that consent can be withdrawn at any period in time in the present or in the future.

I accept that, if that is what is being put forward by my peers. I won't argue against it or some fallacious "just world" theories of how things "ought to be". I just think it should be legally codified and acknowledged and taught to future generations of men so they can understand appropriate conduct that can mitigate risks presented to them during their sexual activities. And this will protect women as well. Retroactively being raped by revoking your consent can be a very traumatic experience .


Except that's not how the FBI compiles its statistics on this.

You also keep lying about consent being retractable after-the-fact.
 
2013-08-09 05:20:27 PM  

ChuDogg: Mike Chewbacca: ChuDogg: I'm just saying it's not fair to them that they weren't told that consent can be withdrawn at a later time.

You know what? If those boys had treated that girl with the respect she deserved and not farked her from behind while she was vomiting profusely out a window, and not taken pictures of her while having sex, and not shared those photos with all the kids in their school, and not bullied and harassed her until she killed herself, they wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. I don't think these particular boys would have behaved any differently if they'd been told by their parents that women can retroactively withdraw consent. Why? Because they're assholes, and they're teenagers, and teenaged assholes have very poor decision-making skills. If they had just stopped at any point along their highway to hell, this wouldn't have happened, that girl would probably be alive, and the boys wouldn't be facing felony charges.

I understand their conduct was less than exemplary, and won't object to them being erroneously charged in this case when consent was revoked a week later.

But this can be a teachable moment for everyone involved.  So that maybe future generations of men won't act with the same conduct that they exhibited. Maybe the next teen gang bang when the girls gags and goes outside the window, the boys will come up behind and asking "are you okay?" in a consoling voice before continuing on with the gang bang. Maybe when they have photos on their phone and think, "man, i really gotta show this to the boys" they will stop, and think, "damn, i really don't want her to revoke the consent she gave us" and they'll just keep them in private on their encrypted hard drives like the rest of us.

All of this can be done simply by acknowledging what's on everyone's mind during all of these sketchy drunken hookup stories.  We don't even need to argue whether she was drunk / drunk but not too drunk / how drunk is too drunk/ do you vomit when you ...


Especially for rapists, who genuinely appreciate the help.
 
2013-08-09 05:21:10 PM  

Macular Degenerate: She's young, cute, and white. Queue the internet shiatstorm.

I wonder what would have happened if she was chubby, Hispanic, and had mild teen acne.


For that matter, would you rather your investment broker looked like Aaron Eckhardt, or like George Lopez?
 
2013-08-09 05:26:04 PM  
I see most of my favourite fark rape-apologists are out today, although a few key ones are missing.

Is is just me, or does anyone else have a problem with the fact that her friend's mother came and tried to get her to leave, and just gave up? You would think that a responsible adult would, y'know, forcibly remove the girl, call other parents, and/or the cops to break up an underaged party that had gotten out of hand.

Also, those calling her a drug addicted slut, pretty sure those comments were disproven in the last threads by pointing out that several of her posts were lyrics to popular rap songs, and she wasn't a cokehead, but went off the rails after the attack. If she was such a drug-addict, how would her parents be able to donate her organs? Pretty sure they don't allow that.

In addition, the cops were given the photo back when this first occured and they ruled it wasn't child porn back then, which was incredibly horrible. As pointed out in this thread:

a) cops in Canada haven't realised the dangers of social media. Amanda Todd, Lin Jun, and Rehtaeh Parsons cases weren't taken seriously until after the fact, and the very same social media that killed them and/or showed their victimisation became outraged by it
b) the boys got connections, as they reportedly stabbed some of Parsons's peers. Many people around here seem to think their dad is a local politician or on the police force.

Also, Cole Harbour is a freaking rough area, always has been, always will be. It's almost as bad as Fairview, and about on par with Spryfield.
 
2013-08-09 05:27:34 PM  

someonelse: browntimmy: What I've learned from certain people here is that rape cases are always black and white and even mentioning that she may have made some stupid choices is the same thing as saying it's 100% her fault and the rapists should go free.

Stupid choices aren't against the law. Rape is. Would you think twice about charging someone with theft if they posted pictures of themselves stealing your wallet and robbing your apartment while you were passed out? Would you hesitate to charge someone with assault if they fractured your skull while you were puking and then posted it on Facebook? Jeez, this is 2013 and we're still dealing with these medieval attitudes about women and sex. Grow the hell up.


Here's a good example. You essentially took me saying, "Hey, it's not your fault but maybe next time don't leave your car doors unlocked in a sketchy neighborhood" and twisted it into me saying, "You screwed up so the criminals should go free."
 
2013-08-09 05:29:34 PM  

vygramul: Their own testimony is that she was passed out.


I have not seen this presented anywhere. If you have a link you should update the wiki.

Their own father made a passionate defense that vomiting = rape

The two boys involved in taking and posing for the photograph stated Rehtaeh was throwing up when they had sex with her. That is not called consensual sex. That is called rape

You would think if he had knowledge that she was passed out he would have mentioned it.
 
2013-08-09 05:31:18 PM  

lockers: Weaver95: I note the very careful and presumably deliberate avoidance of mentioning contributions made by anonymous in pushing this case forward....it wouldn't do to make the hackers look good in the press now would it? That just doesn't fit the narrative.

Why does it take the collective anger of unnamed people to, you know, do something about this? What happened before the internet could rage?


Victims were ignored and marginalized.
 
2013-08-09 05:43:56 PM  

wolfpaq777: If 2 people are equally drunk, past the point of consent, which one of them is the rapist when they have sex?


Was everyone involved in this incident equally drunk? One of them puked and passed out. Others f*cked her and took pictures of it.

As to your hypothetical, if you're talking about both people being so drunk they could not give consent or understand consent if given, congratulations to them for being able to get tab A into slot B. But if you are sober enough to be asking for sex, you are expected to be sober enough to determine if the person you are asking can give consent.
 
2013-08-09 05:48:48 PM  

someonelse: wolfpaq777: If 2 people are equally drunk, past the point of consent, which one of them is the rapist when they have sex?

Was everyone involved in this incident equally drunk? One of them puked and passed out. Others f*cked her and took pictures of it.

As to your hypothetical, if you're talking about both people being so drunk they could not give consent or understand consent if given, congratulations to them for being able to get tab A into slot B. But if you are sober enough to be asking for sex, you are expected to be sober enough to determine if the person you are asking can give consent.


Past the point of consent doesn't necessarily mean equally drunk.
Again, if two people are drunk and screwing around and they're both equally or similarly drunk, who's the rapist?  If both are 'smashed' and no force is used, how do you determine who the victim is, or even if there even is one?
 
2013-08-09 05:52:00 PM  

give me doughnuts: Harry Freakstorm: Rehtaeh

reh-ta-eh? (Canadian pronunciation)
reht-a-eh?
ret-tan-a?

I just refer to her as "backwards Heather."


Damn, good detective work there, Lou.
 
2013-08-09 05:53:03 PM  

vygramul: It's true. The number of unfounded rape allegations is in the single-digit percentages. You may be comfortable in needing a 20 to hit, but I'll go with 2 to 20.


Saying we know it is true because she says it was is ridiculous. Especially given the other statements and facts in the case.
 
2013-08-09 06:04:32 PM  

DrewCurtisJr: vygramul: It's true. The number of unfounded rape allegations is in the single-digit percentages. You may be comfortable in needing a 20 to hit, but I'll go with 2 to 20.

Saying we know it is true because she says it was is ridiculous. Especially given the other statements and facts in the case.


What facts? Like the boys were scumbags who farked a chick who was actively vomiting, took photos of the incident, shared those photos with friends and strangers, and bullied the girl so much she killed herself?
 
2013-08-09 06:10:24 PM  

HindiDiscoMonster: Latinwolf: Krymson Tyde: cman: Pr1nc3ss: vygramul: Isn't this a followup?

/Waiting for the guys I fav'd as rape fans to come to the thread and white knight the rapists again

You did that too? All of my rape white knighters are orange.

Huh, interesting idea for a new category for me

Mine are piss yellow.

Funny that's the color I use for Conservatives.

OOH OOH color fight!


I have both a color-coding and a numerical system (because I'm that obsessive or anal-retentive or whatever).  I use yellow and orange for "mixed" farkers, who have said both good and bad things.  There's quite a lot of them for me, because most Farkers eventually say something that makes me glad I didn't just toss them on ignore the first time they said something stupid.

That said, there are always exceptions.
 
2013-08-09 06:12:02 PM  

Mike Chewbacca: DrewCurtisJr: vygramul: It's true. The number of unfounded rape allegations is in the single-digit percentages. You may be comfortable in needing a 20 to hit, but I'll go with 2 to 20.

Saying we know it is true because she says it was is ridiculous. Especially given the other statements and facts in the case.

What facts? Like the boys were scumbags who farked a chick who was actively vomiting, took photos of the incident, shared those photos with friends and strangers, and bullied the girl so much she killed herself?


That makes them total assholes, scumbags, etc. but not rapists.  The rape part was considered to be unfounded given the evidence that the time.
 
2013-08-09 06:12:42 PM  

pedrop357: That makes them total assholes, scumbags, etc. but not rapists.  The rape part was considered to be unfounded given the evidence that the time.

 
2013-08-09 06:15:49 PM  

Profedius: I do not want to find myself labeled as a defender of rapists, because ...


www.hindustantimes.com
 
2013-08-09 06:20:37 PM  

Mike Chewbacca: What facts? Like the boys were scumbags who farked a chick who was actively vomiting, took photos of the incident, shared those photos with friends and strangers, and bullied the girl so much she killed herself?


From My GF Named... link above:

But, in fact, as Postmedia News reported this spring, the sexual assault case was a dog's breakfast of shifting accounts from Rehtaeh herself and credible statements from a witness - almost unheard-of in sexual assault complaints - who was at the house that night and said that the sex that took place was consensual.

And there never were four boys involved, that allegation coming only from Rehtaeh's mother.

The sexual assault side of the case had huge problems that made it difficult to take to court, chiefly Rehtaeh's own conflicting statements to police and independent evidence, including retrieved social media messages, that she had agreed to sex with two of the boys.
 
2013-08-09 06:22:24 PM  

Mike Chewbacca: fredklein: In fact, iirc, she didn't cry 'rape' until she was embarrassed by the pic they shared around.

Did you ever think that seeing the pictures is when she realized something had gone on that she hadn't remembered and didn't consent to?


No. Not based on the facts in this case.
 
2013-08-09 06:28:41 PM  

Theaetetus: tricycleracer: Do women get raped by horrible men at drunken parties?  Yes.  Should women take steps to mitigate this possibility or avoid the situation altogether?  Yes.

Agreed - women should publicly broadcast who these men are, as well as who the people are who support or condone their actions, so that they don't get invited to the same parties. There should be the equivalent of the scarlet letter R on these people, and they should be shunned by all decent people everywhere.

Oh, wait, you meant that women shouldn't go to parties.

Here's your R.


In another rape thread, I suggested mandatory "rape apologist" tattoos on the forehead, but it hasn't been made law yet.

On a more serious note, I have sometimes wondered if there is an electronic solution: couldn't/shouldn't there be some sort of database somewhere with a list of guys who are a little too indulgent about rape, or spend a little too much time harping on "all the false accusations."  Maybe call the database "Boys will be boys."  Guy asks you out, you check the list to see if his name is on there.  Or maybe it already exists and I just haven't been let in on the secret yet.
 
2013-08-09 06:30:58 PM  

ChuDogg: tricycleracer: Do women get raped by horrible men at drunken parties?  Yes.  Should women take steps to mitigate this possibility or avoid the situation altogether?  Yes.

The idea that you can do whatever you want and go wherever you want with complete immunity is a dumb concept.  There are horrible people out there and you can't go around trusting everyone.

How this is considered "blaming the victim" is beyond me.

Likewise, I think we should just come out and acknowledge a concept of retroactive withdrawal of consent. Plenty of people clearly believe this to be the case, perhaps even the majority.



Is it?  Do we?  What exactly do you think "retroactive withdrawal of consent" is?  How does it work?  Who seems to be advocating it or arguing it?
 
2013-08-09 06:32:56 PM  

tricycleracer: Theaetetus: tricycleracer: Do women get raped by horrible men at drunken parties?  Yes.  Should women take steps to mitigate this possibility or avoid the situation altogether?  Yes.

Agreed - women should publicly broadcast who these men are, as well as who the people are who support or condone their actions, so that they don't get invited to the same parties. There should be the equivalent of the scarlet letter R on these people, and they should be shunned by all decent people everywhere.

Oh, wait, you meant that women shouldn't go to parties.

Here's your R.

Go fark yourself.  I would never rape anyone.



Perhaps not, but you ARE a rape apologist, which is what the "R" was for, I believe.
 
2013-08-09 06:44:39 PM  

DrewCurtisJr: vygramul: It's true. The number of unfounded rape allegations is in the single-digit percentages. You may be comfortable in needing a 20 to hit, but I'll go with 2 to 20.

Saying we know it is true because she says it was is ridiculous. Especially given the other statements and facts in the case.


It's less ridiculous to take the 90+% of the time true than it is to champion the less than 10% chance. It's one thing to express caution, it's another to white knight.
 
2013-08-09 06:48:00 PM  

vygramul: DrewCurtisJr: vygramul: It's true. The number of unfounded rape allegations is in the single-digit percentages. You may be comfortable in needing a 20 to hit, but I'll go with 2 to 20.

Saying we know it is true because she says it was is ridiculous. Especially given the other statements and facts in the case.

It's less ridiculous to take the 90+% of the time true than it is to champion the less than 10% chance. It's one thing to express caution, it's another to white knight.


That, in itself, is ridiculous. Under no circumstances should you go by statistics or probability. You guy by direct evidence alone. Period. That's the only way a justice system can work.

My statement has nothing to do with how I feel about this case, nor should it reflect any assertion that any justice system could ever work like it "should".
 
2013-08-09 06:53:09 PM  

pedrop357: One time that may not be as cut and dry as you make it out to be is if they other party is only a little less drunk.


A good point; given that I have a few views:
1.  The rule for guys(If it's rape to screw a drunk chick) is good for girls(it's rape to screw a drunk guy)
2.  Given that DUI is a crime; I take the position that if you become voluntarily inebriated that you're responsible for your actions.  Certain exemptions apply for things that can be more or less readily rolled back(contracts, marriages, returnable purchases, etc...), but since drunken sex, like a drunk car accident, can't be 'rolled back', you're stuck with it.
3.  Given #2, if you assume #1 it's possible to commit 'mutual rape'.  As I find this ridiculous*, I reject #1.
4.  If you're so drunk that you can't EXPRESS consent, then you're back to rape.

Yes, there's still a fair bit of grey in there.  Look up my earlier post about recommending people don't get drunk enough to be stupid.  Well,as another poster mentioned, not around non-close friends.  "Hide the body" type true friends, not rats.


*I'm sure I could come up with a standard where two people both rape each other outside of this, but you're talking some torturous logic.  An underage kid having voluntary sex with a drunk adult?  The adult is guilty of statutory rape, the kid for raping a drunk?

GoodHomer: That being said, why prosecutors didn't nail these kids with making and distributing child porn before this is beyond me. Farking teenaged pricks.


'Farking teenaged pricks' is the correct answer.  Presumption of innocence here; it's not fair to tack 'child porn' charges on a teenager taking stupid photos of another teenager of more or less the same age.  I'm sure the laws will eventually adjust to reflect this, but it's going to be a long while.  They're only charging it now in order to 'enhance' the rape charge.

One of the saddest cases I know about turned out to be a preteen girl sending explicit pictures and video of her pleasuring herself to people, including a non-pedophile adult she wanted to fark.  Consensus was that they didn't want to convict her of child porn, that she was messed up in the head, but it was all they had - and the scenario was definitely never considered by those that drafted the law.  As I understand it the case disappeared into juvenile court.

Inchoate: Everybody who's not an asshole also knows that taking a common risk isn't a reason to write off someone's humiliation and suicide as the just deserts of a stupid kid.


Everybody who's not an ultrafeminist knows that we shouldn't ruin somebody's life without sufficient evidence, even during a rape accusation.  The people I've been seeing have(mostly) not been excusing what the boys(they were under 18 at the time) did, but pointed out that due to the circumstances around the event, that reasonable doubt has been reached.  Yes, it sucks.  But that's the life; any defense lawyer for the boys would be able to shoot down the case very easily, so why bring a case you know you can't win?

gadian: Well, that's not really rape apology / support as much as it is grandiose douchebaggery. If anyone attempted to keep a list of all of the callous douchebags on fark...well, you can see how that would end up.


So sort of like the free space?

midigod: Not to me. I thought the whole idea behind sex with a minor was that they were not legally able to give consent. Thus, it's rape no matter what. Does anyone know what "the age of consent" legally means in Canada?


Romeo&Juliet clauses.  It's my understanding they were within a year of each other.

DROxINxTHExWIND: That would discourage people from reporting rape. There are many more rapist than there are false accusers. Also, I didn't say they should all die. I said they should all face the death penalty when they are tried.


Look, I'm a DP advocate, and I don't support this in normal circumstances.  My goal is one of constantly increasing penalties.  You can't really go past the DP, and I don't want rapists turning into murderers because the penalty isn't any worse and they're more likely to get off(or perceive that they're more likely to get away with it) if they kill their victim.  That happens too much as is.  :(
 
2013-08-09 06:56:36 PM  

vygramul: fredklein: Yes, she did. By not accusing them of rape the next day, or the day after, or the day after that, or the day after that....

Many rape victims never come forward at all.


Which I find hard to believe. The entire system is designed to be biased FOR the woman. She gets her name withheld from the papers, while the accused (not 'convicted', just accused) guy(s) get their name plastered all over as "accused rapists". Women are pretty much automatically believed in court, and people (not unlike you) are pushing more and more for a woman's word to be automatically and irrevocably considered the truth, no matter what the evidence.

Why wouldn't a woman come forth, if she were really raped? Because the medical exam is uncomfortable? Because she doesn't want to 'live through it' again in court? Like a guy who got beaten up just loooves to tell the cops how he got his ass handed to him, and repeat the tale in court, on the public record.

Hesitation when she's being slut-shamed is not an indication of no rape.

The hesitation was before she was "slut shamed" (umm... if she's not a slut, she shouldn't feel ashamed).

Just what is rare in your book? It's not hard to find someone using "rare" when they mean 9%.

Rare
1. not widely known; not frequently used or experienced; uncommon or unusual
2. occurring seldom

A rate of around 1-in-12 (8%) is Not "rare". If one of every 12 eggs were rotten, would you say rotten eggs were "rare", when you get one in every dozen??
 
2013-08-09 06:59:24 PM  

Firethorn: Presumption of innocence here; it's not fair to tack 'child porn' charges on a teenager taking stupid photos of another teenager of more or less the same age.


Actually, I'd say it's fair because the two boys shared the photos with their school and the internet without the girl's consent. That goes far beyond naughty pictures.

Firethorn: Everybody who's not an ultrafeminist knows that we shouldn't ruin somebody's life without sufficient evidence, even during a rape accusation.


True. But keep in mind these boys decided that farking a girl who was vomiting profusely out a window was totally appropriate. Then they took photos. Then they shared those photos without her consent with the rest of their school, and those photos made it onto the internet. Then they and the rest of their friends bullied the girl so much that she took her own life. We're not talking about two angels that were in the wrong place at the wrong time. We're talking about two assholes who very much broke child porn laws, and destroyed this girl's life. If you destroy someone's life then you do deserve some sort of punishment.
 
2013-08-09 07:05:07 PM  

fredklein: vygramul: fredklein: Yes, she did. By not accusing them of rape the next day, or the day after, or the day after that, or the day after that....

Many rape victims never come forward at all.

Which I find hard to believe. The entire system is designed to be biased FOR the woman.
She gets her name withheld from the papers, while the accused (not 'convicted', just accused) guy(s) get their name plastered all over as "accused rapists". Women are pretty much automatically believed in court, and people (not unlike you) are pushing more and more for a woman's word to be automatically and irrevocably considered the truth, no matter what the evidence.

Why wouldn't a woman come forth, if she were really raped? Because the medical exam is uncomfortable? Because she doesn't want to 'live through it' again in court? Like a guy who got beaten up just loooves to tell the cops how he got his ass handed to him, and repeat the tale in court, on the public record.

Hesitation when she's being slut-shamed is not an indication of no rape.

The hesitation was before she was "slut shamed" (umm... if she's not a slut, she shouldn't feel ashamed).

Just what is rare in your book? It's not hard to find someone using "rare" when they mean 9%.

Rare
1. not widely known; not frequently used or experienced; uncommon or unusual
2. occurring seldom

A rate of around 1-in-12 (8%) is Not "rare". If one of every 12 eggs were rotten, would you say rotten eggs were "rare", when you get one in every dozen??


Are you farking kidding me????

As for that slut-shaming comment, well, congratulations you just slut-shamed her again. The issue isn't that if she wasn't a slut she wouldn't have been ashamed. The issue is that society makes women who have recreational sex feel ashamed that they had sex. The issue is that society says women are not supposed to have or want to have recreational sex, because it's morally wrong. Women have sex just like men have sex, and there's no shame in it for either party. You're part of the problem. If you want to have lots of sex with women, stop telling them they're sluts when they do.
 
2013-08-09 07:06:01 PM  

ciberido: Is it? Do we? What exactly do you think "retroactive withdrawal of consent" is? How does it work? Who seems to be advocating it or arguing it?


Well here's what I learned so far. Granted, this is not my opinion, just a representative of my milieu which I am trying to learn and adapt to.  I am not arguing for or against. Times changes. Values change. Etc. I get it. Now it's time to move forward and codify it into law and our education.

Obviously, it goes without saying, that consent is not enough.  There are number of reasons a woman can withdraw her consent or have it annulled.  Such as being drunk, too impaired, strung out on drugs, etc.  The problem is that every single one of these is subjective. Drunk (had a few beers), strung out (smoked a joint), even vomiting cannot be a clear indicator of incapacitation, as it could have resulted from particular sex acts themselves, and often people are able to compose themself evidently after vomiting at parties and things like that.

But in virtually every single one of these cases, the consensus is to automatically revert to the woman's opinion, not at the time of the act, but at the time of allegation. Looking at the time of event itself is an act of slut shaming and rape apology.  Even looking at the context after-the-fact such as text messages confirm consent is deemed irrelevant. The only relevant detail is the woman's opinion of her consent at the time of the allegation (and even then that can be annulled for various reasons, but that's another topic). And that can be at anytime in the future, whether days, weeks, months, years, etc.

And once an allegation is made, it should be assumed to be 100% correct with no verification of the facts. "False Rapes" are such a statistical anomaly it's assumed to not happen at all. Which is true, because logically, the current milieu states that her consent at the event is irrelevant, only her consent at the time of her allegation.  Many things could have changed from the event to the current time which actually annul her previous act of consent.  Such as the guys behaving like assholes, spreading photos, other girls finding out, parents finding out. etc.  Now, at this point she revokes her act of consent, and the men are assumed to be rapists regardless of police investigations, international media attention, federal oversight and investigation to the conduct of the police, new laws being introduced, and erroneous charges of child porn when they were roughly the same age as the minor in question (which is typically the consensus opinion during teen sexting incidents, especially when the producer of the pornography is the girl herself). Even with all of this, it is to be assumed that the men are ipso facto rapists by the allegation of rape itself, and anybody that questions the facts of the case is a rape apologist.  This is not a "false rape", it is indeed a rape, and should be consider as by everyone involved.

So if the allegation is all that is needed for to be evident of lack of consent, then logically we can deduce that consent can be withdrawn, revoked, or otherwise annulled at any point in time once an allegation is made.

Thus, we are teaching young boys a false narrative when we tell them "dont rape" "no means no, yes means yes" or "always get consent". Clearly, we need to take it one step further and clearly outline that consent can be withdrawn at anytime. Just because you have consent, does not mean that it will acknowledged after any series of incidents take place that revoke that consent.

We can keep obfuscating the issue by insisting it's only cases of alcohol or drugs, but the majority of teen and young adult hookup culture is surrounded by drugs and alcohol. And the presence of alcohol or drugs is simply not an objective metric of incapacitation.  And as long as we keep doing that, there will be boys brought up on rape charges. There will be girls suffering the trauma of retroactive rape once consent is withdrawn. And it's just generally a horrible experience for thousands of people nationwide.

All of this can be reduced (maybe not eliminated) simply by modernizing our system of laws that correctly identify the fluidity of the concept of consent, and acknowledge that consent is not a firm of indication of well, consent, as consent can be revoked at any time in the future. This is the reality of engaging in promiscuous sex and hookup culture.
 
2013-08-09 07:06:24 PM  

vygramul: It's less ridiculous to take the 90+% of the time true than it is to champion the less than 10% chance. It's one thing to express caution, it's another to white knight.


I'm not the one saying I am sure I know what happened.
 
2013-08-09 07:08:42 PM  

JonnyG: That, in itself, is ridiculous. Under no circumstances should you go by statistics or probability. You guy by direct evidence alone. Period. That's the only way a justice system can work.

My statement has nothing to do with how I feel about this case, nor should it reflect any assertion that any justice system could ever work like it "should".


The police absolutely SHOULD go by evidence alone. But we're not talking about the police, we're talking about people who insist this girl was a slut who changed her mind afterwards. My objection is that they're not applying the same defense to the accusation leveled at her (filing a false police report) that they are to the guys in the case. To argue about how the justice system should work is moving the goalposts of this exchange.
 
Displayed 50 of 499 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report