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 503
    More: Sad, Halifax Regional Police, youth courts, Steubenville, Canadians  
•       •       •

20275 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Aug 2013 at 11:25 AM (36 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all
 
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.
 
2013-08-09 07:11:27 PM

fredklein: 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??


And yet, do a search on "rarely loses" and you'll come up with that being a description of teams that lose 1 in 10 games.

When it comes to formal complaints of rape, it's not merely uncommon (less than 50%) but, what, REALLY uncommon, but not rare? You're quibbling trying to make it look unreasonable when you're STILL operating in the under-10% rate.
 
2013-08-09 07:17:39 PM

Mike Chewbacca: The issue is that society makes women who have recreational sex feel ashamed that they had sex.


No one can "make" you feel a certain way. If she feels like a slut, it's because SHE thinks she's... a slut.

The issue is that society says women are not supposed to have or want to have recreational sex, because it's morally wrong.

And there's a reason for that. An archaic and out-dated reason, but a reason nonetheless. It involves the man knowing for sure that the kid his wife has is indeed his. If women are allowed to have sex with whoever they want, then a man might end up raising (and turning his family/business/kingdom over to) a biological stranger. If women can't sleep around, a man knows the kid is his.

Women have sex just like men have sex, and there's no shame in it for either party.

Correct.

Now, if only women would realize that.
 
2013-08-09 07:20:21 PM

vygramul: You're quibbling trying to make it look unreasonable when you're STILL operating in the under-10% rate.


Did you read the page I linked to? There are many more studies, some of which do indeed cross your '10%' barrier.
 
2013-08-09 07:32:19 PM

someonelse: 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.


Well, there you have it.  Seeing as you have no clue how drunk or sober the members of this tragedy were at the time of the events in question, it's time for you to shut the fark up.

BUT... BUT... I KNOW THEY COMMITTED RAPE, I'M SOMEONELSE ON FARK.COM AND I CAN TELL FROM READIN A farkIN WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE & SOME SENSATIONALIZED JOURNALISM THAT RAPE HAPPENED.  I CAN FEEL IT.

Well isn't it a damn shame that your feelings can't be presented in court.  Now these obviously guilty rapists will get away with it due to a minor technicality like A COMPLETE LACK OF EVIDENCE.  But dammit all, you can totally tell from that one article you read that they are guilty~!!!!!!

Remember, vomiting is evidence of drinking, not rape.  Stop making a fool of yourself.
 
2013-08-09 07:40:53 PM

fredklein: vygramul: You're quibbling trying to make it look unreasonable when you're STILL operating in the under-10% rate.

Did you read the page I linked to? There are many more studies, some of which do indeed cross your '10%' barrier.


Sorry, it must be lost in the walls of text. The highest you posted was 8%.
 
2013-08-09 07:42:21 PM

DrewCurtisJr: 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.


And yet there are plenty of people in this thread who are quite sure yet my position is the offensive one, despite being the more likely.
 
2013-08-09 08:07:08 PM

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.


Yes, I'm sure it IS beyond you.
 
2013-08-09 08:12:02 PM

Tumunga: 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.

What color am I?


You're red to me.  But I do have you down as having said something "insightful" once, if that helps.
 
2013-08-09 08:22:44 PM

ciberido: Or maybe it already exists and I just haven't been let in on the secret yet.


Sex offender list, but it only lists those that have been caught.  Going by recidivism stats and such, you should almost be more worried about random joes not on the list.  :(

Mike Chewbacca: 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.


I've vomited when drunk.  Felt a lot better afterwards, but certainly wasn't passed out and/or unable to act.  I guess it depends on your definition of 'profusely', the source I remember simply said vomited, without the 'profuse'.

I'm with many of the others in that I wouldn't want to be farking a girl in that condition, but then I'm also a 'pure body' type that think people shouldn't  be doing drugs period.  But because I'm not an asshole, I don't demand this of others(I'll advise, not demand).  It's close enough that I chose to trust the cops.

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.

What's the evidence, other than the parent's statements, that THIS was the cause of her suicide?  Still, I agree with the distribution eventually making porn charges appropriate.  I was more thinking about the initial investigation, where I would have said 'get rid of the pictures'.

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.

True.  Remember my point wasn't that they're innocent or don't deserve punishment, it's that there was insufficient evidence to impose punishment.
 
2013-08-09 08:25:35 PM

GF named my left testicle thundercles: ciberido: You have to understand that cman thinks "trolling" means "saying something I don't like."  Well, inasmuch as cman THINKS.

its funny how people think that you can shame someone into silence on the internet. everyone here is pixels on a screen, not a human being that can be intimidated. a better strategy would be to form an argument and to attack a position that you disagree with.


It's funny how you think I'm trying to shame cman or silence him.  He's either already full of shame or incapable of it; either way nothing I say would make him feel any more or less of it.  And he can shoot his mouth off all he likes.  The "ignore button" is here for those who don't care to put up with him.

Also, you might not be aware of this, but "9/10" isn't a "position that I disagree with," so thanks for the advice, but I don't hink I'll bother to form an argument to "attack cman's position" with.
 
2013-08-09 08:29:46 PM

vygramul: And yet there are plenty of people in this thread who are quite sure yet my position is the offensive one, despite being the more likely.


Are they basing that on information about this particular case or misusing statistics like you are?
 
2013-08-09 08:35:19 PM

IdBeCrazyIf: 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?


Mad?  Not really.  Scornful, maybe.  It's not really so much a question of my emotions as my judgement.  However unfair it may seem to you, or as much or as little as you may care, I classify you as a "bad" person without regard to whether or not you claim to only be joking.

And, sure, it's fine if it makes you think less of me in turn, or if you simply don't care.
 
2013-08-09 08:39:56 PM
Firethorn: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?

That sounds reasonable.  Does this mean I'm not an ultrafeminist?
 
2013-08-09 09:30:43 PM

DrewCurtisJr: vygramul: And yet there are plenty of people in this thread who are quite sure yet my position is the offensive one, despite being the more likely.

Are they basing that on information about this particular case or misusing statistics like you are?


You'd have to find me misusing statistics first.
 
2013-08-09 09:45:45 PM
This irritates the shiat out of me, not the least of which is because I would've wrecked it but sure as hell wouldn't have raped her. I hope these asshats die in jail.
 
2013-08-09 10:12:24 PM

ciberido: That sounds reasonable. Does this mean I'm not an ultrafeminist?


Not sure, that's a 'balance of evidence' with me, and there's a reason I said 'ultrafeminist' as opposed to simply 'feminist'.  I could of said 'feminazi', but I didn't want to insult the nazis.  ;)

You're certainly off to a good start though.
 
2013-08-09 10:18:08 PM

ChuDogg: 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 t ...


Ok, so, basically, you're a liar.  Got it.
 
2013-08-09 10:25:08 PM
how is there a lack of evidence when there is pictures of the event?
 
2013-08-09 10:35:27 PM

armageddonbound: how is there a lack of evidence when there is pictures of the event?


It's a bit like DNA - context matters.  If a woman is murdered in her home and they come in and swab the place down and find the husband's DNA(he also lives there) all over the place, what have you really learned?  In addition, consider the people who step through video frame by frame to find the 'bedroom eyes' when somebody is blinking.  A single image can be deceptive.  Even a set can be.

The end result isn't that there is NO evidence, so they don't completely lack evidence.  What they lacked(in the beginning) was sufficient evidence to press charges.  The pictures didn't show a lack of consent, the witnesses reported a general ethos of consent, etc...
 
2013-08-10 12:01:39 AM

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.


You just gotta be a burr under the saddle don't you?
 
2013-08-10 12:03:22 AM

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

Some of the same Farkers who are George Zimmerman fans say the police have insufficient cause to go after the rapists.


Maybe the poor girl should have stood her ground.
 
2013-08-10 12:07:51 AM

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.


your rape white knighters are guidos?
 
2013-08-10 01:41:51 AM

S.A.S.Q.U.A.T.C.H.: I'd better just go ahead and kill myself.


Please do.

/and nothing of value was lost
 
2013-08-10 01:46:37 AM

tricycleracer: reklamfox: [i43.tinypic.com image 640x494]

True in the same way that wearing gold chains in a Bentley convertible in downtown Detroit doesn't cause armed robbery.

When among predators, do your best to not look like a meal.


Or people could just not rape one another.

/asking boys to not "be boys" is sooooo hard though!
 
2013-08-10 01:59:19 AM

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.


Because it doesn't address the fact that we need to be teaching young men where the line is and that they should not cross it instead of putting all of the responsibility on the shoulders of the females.
 
2013-08-10 02:03:31 AM

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.


No, but you would be okay with somebody being raped so long as they weren't living life according to your standards.
 
2013-08-10 02:13:23 AM

pedrop357: Wouldn't it be preferable to raise a 15 year old who doesn't get so drunk as to lose control like this?


I would prefer raising boys who aren't so vile as to rape anyone.
 
2013-08-10 02:38:53 AM

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.


Boo farking hoo.
 
2013-08-10 02:42:30 AM

fredklein: 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.


Really? Sounds to me like she didn't find out about the rape until her idiot rapists decided to share their photographic proof.

When her friends left, she consented to making out topless. Making out topless is not the same as sex, last I tried.
 
2013-08-10 02:44:26 AM

wolfpaq777: 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.


The one who decided that inserting themselves into the other person while trashed would be a good idea.

Why do you dumbfarks keep bringing up this line of questioning? Trying to plan your weekends?
 
2013-08-10 02:46:42 AM

browntimmy: 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."


It's that you chose to address the girl's action instead of putting the blame where it belongs: disgusting rapists.
 
2013-08-10 04:55:50 AM

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.


Dude, it's Canada. We don't play by the same rules.

/Hispanic? Up here?
 
2013-08-10 08:24:33 AM

sleeps in trees: 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.

Dude, it's Canada. We don't play by the same rules.

/Hispanic? Up here?


Actually, the migrant workers who go through here from Mexico are sometimes on their way to Canada.
 
2013-08-10 09:11:42 AM
The My Little Pony Killer
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.

Because it doesn't address the fact that we need to be teaching young men where the line is and that they should not cross it instead of putting all of the responsibility on the shoulders of the females.


How many children have you killed on dirty zebra crossings because of your inability to acknowledge anything but pure black and white?

/ don't teach children to look for traffic, teach drivers not to run over children!
 
2013-08-10 09:33:35 AM

The Voice of Doom: The My Little Pony Killer
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.

Because it doesn't address the fact that we need to be teaching young men where the line is and that they should not cross it instead of putting all of the responsibility on the shoulders of the females.

How many children have you killed on dirty zebra crossings because of your inability to acknowledge anything but pure black and white?

/ don't teach children to look for traffic, teach drivers not to run over children!


That doesn't even make sense...
 
2013-08-10 09:42:04 AM

LoneWolf343: That doesn't even make sense...


Apparently, it's possible to accidentally rape people.

Or maybe it's saying that if the kid didn't look, it's ok for the driver to gun it.
 
2013-08-10 10:29:18 AM
Or maybe it's about people who attack others for merely mentioning it's a good idea to also look out for your own safety while you're waiting for the last individual among several generations of billions of people to be successfully educated and form an idealized, crimefree society.
The post I replied to implied that those things are mutually exclusive.
 
2013-08-10 10:40:56 AM

The Voice of Doom: Or maybe it's about people who attack others for merely mentioning it's a good idea to also look out for your own safety while you're waiting for the last individual among several generations of billions of people to be successfully educated and form an idealized, crimefree society.
The post I replied to implied that those things are mutually exclusive.


If we had a history of putting away football players who rape women, I'd start working on that problem. But so long as the Paternos of this world keep covering for their players, and the community keeps protecting high school "rape crews", then I'm going to concentrate on the larger problem.
 
2013-08-10 11:23:38 AM

vygramul: The Voice of Doom: Or maybe it's about people who attack others for merely mentioning it's a good idea to also look out for your own safety while you're waiting for the last individual among several generations of billions of people to be successfully educated and form an idealized, crimefree society.
The post I replied to implied that those things are mutually exclusive.

If we had a history of putting away football players who rape women, I'd start working on that problem. But so long as the Paternos of this world keep covering for their players, and the community keeps protecting high school "rape crews", then I'm going to concentrate on the larger problem.


our crippling lug nut shortage?
 
2013-08-10 11:30:44 AM

hasty ambush: "It is more important that innocence should be protected, than it is, that guilt be punished; for guilt and crimes are so frequent in this world, that all of them cannot be punished.... when innocence itself, is brought to the bar and condemned, especially to die, the subject will exclaim, 'it is immaterial to me whether I behave well or ill, for virtue itself is no security.' And if such a sentiment as this were to take hold in the mind of the subject that would be the end of all security whatsoever" John Adams


If virtue itself were a security, 15 year-old girls wouldn't get gang-raped.
 
2013-08-10 11:43:32 AM

Mouser: hasty ambush: "It is more important that innocence should be protected, than it is, that guilt be punished; for guilt and crimes are so frequent in this world, that all of them cannot be punished.... when innocence itself, is brought to the bar and condemned, especially to die, the subject will exclaim, 'it is immaterial to me whether I behave well or ill, for virtue itself is no security.' And if such a sentiment as this were to take hold in the mind of the subject that would be the end of all security whatsoever" John Adams

If virtue itself were a security, 15 year-old girls wouldn't get gang-raped.


Apparently, Hasty Ambush doesn't think that presumption of innocence applies to filing a false police report. It's ok to accuse someone of that based on no evidence.
 
2013-08-10 12:59:56 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: pedrop357: Wouldn't it be preferable to raise a 15 year old who doesn't get so drunk as to lose control like this?

I would prefer raising boys who aren't so vile as to rape anyone.


You obviously didn't read the post I responded to.

They were talking about what they would do if this happened to their daughter.  I would think it would be better to teach the girls self control so that they can't end up in that type of situation.

Obviously if they have boys, you teach them not to get so drunk that they have sex with someone who is or just threw up.  Along with that, you teach them that if they take pictures of the sexual enocounter, it's absolutely wrong to share them with others.
 
2013-08-10 01:01:52 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: fredklein: 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.

Really? Sounds to me like she didn't find out about the rape until her idiot rapists decided to share their photographic proof.

When her friends left, she consented to making out topless. Making out topless is not the same as sex, last I tried.


No, but it does lend credibility to the position that she consented to sex as well.  Any evidence she withdrew consent?
 
2013-08-10 01:03:32 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: The one who decided that inserting themselves into the other person while trashed would be a good idea.

Why do you dumbfarks keep bringing up this line of questioning? Trying to plan your weekends?


Why do dumb farks like you keep dodging the point that both parties were drunk (and possibly high as well) and it wasn't a one sided issue of being too intoxicated to give consent.  You also ignore the fact that she apparently sent out messages to friends saying that it was consensual in the days that followed.
 
2013-08-10 06:44:26 PM

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.


See what happens when you start s*** and cause trouble? No one cares when you actually do anything good afterwards.
 
2013-08-10 10:40:20 PM

Jocktopus: someonelse: ChuDogg: Whatever your opinion on the vomiting vs consent, its not as a black and white situation as "teen boys violent gang rape girl against her will and the police did nothing"

It is if you've been taught not to f*ck anyone who is too drunk to give consent. And if you have to ask yourself if someone is too drunk to give consent, the answer is always YES.

/rape rationalization. so, so tired of it

What if both people are precisely the same level of drunk?


So if I break into your house while drunk it's OK?

What's your address?
 
2013-08-10 10:44:55 PM

Profedius: ChuDogg: umad: So gang rape is ok in Canadia but don't you dare take any pictures while you are at it. That would just be wrong.

Well its does help to know some important details of the case. One is that she and her friend were at the guys party, and her friend wanted to leave multiple times. At one point her friend left and came back with her parents (the friend's) and she gave a "I'll do what I want response". The last time her friends saw her that night she was making out with the two guys in their bed with her top off.

So her friend leaves and the orgy begins. The major fact is that at one point she begins to vomit and sticks her head out the window, so one of the guys came up behind her began having sex with her. The other dude snaps a pic which is the one that went around.

so everything's fine until about a week later somebody tells her about the picture going around. When the police investigated it creates a murky situation, clearly at the beginning she was cognizent and consented. I believe even her father recognized this fact. But does the act of vomiting automatically withdraw her consent?

Some people would associate vomiting immediately with "unconscious" or "near unconscious". But based on my experience as a teenager drinking, I don't known if that's correct. After all, we did have a saying called "puke and rally"

Whatever the case, the police decided that was not enough to prosecute.

Its a grey area to be sure. Whatever your opinion on the vomiting vs consent, its not as a black and white situation as "teen boys violent gang rape girl against her will and the police did nothing"

I came here to provide the same information. I do not see this as rape and though passing the pictures around is distributing child pornography I can clearly see teenage boys sending around pictures, because they are immature. I do not want to find myself labeled as a defender of rapists, because this case is not about rape. This girl did not claim to be raped until aft ...


Do you know why she didn't immediately report it the next morning?

There's a few pretty farking obvious reasons why a distressed, raped, shamed, abused girl wouldn't announce to her parents over cornflakes at the breakfast table that she got drunk and gang raped last night.

And some equally obvious reasons why she wouldn't go to the police either.

Hint - It's because a lot of people, police included, think like you do.
 
Displayed 50 of 503 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report