Man to sue after rape trial collapse

And look at what happens with no jury to people like Bill Cosby, Roger Ailes, Harvey Weinstein and all those other innocent men.

You seem to have an unlimited supply of straw.

As soon as someone comes forward defending those ********, you might have a point. Until then, you're just shifting goalposts.
 
... and to be proven guilty, you have to have evidence that there was indeed a crime (and no, "it's not totally impossible that there was one" is not evidence).

Which is how we know most reports of rape are of course whores trying to bring good men down.
 
You seem to have an unlimited supply of straw.

As soon as someone comes forward defending those ********, you might have a point. Until then, you're just shifting goalposts.

Innocent until proven guilty. They might be ****** but you are the one moving goalposts if we shouldn't consider them to be pure as the driven snow.
 
No I just said that nothing actually contradicts the testimony. So most likely yes he raped her.

Why are you blaming her for the cops clear bad actions?



Clearly we need to clear the names of Weinstein, Spacy, OReily and so on.

Wow, not even possibly a rapist now, 'most likely he raped her' .
What do you base that on , other than she said so , which she contradicted in her texts to her friends?
 
If you say so. Note that I didn't.

Yes you just keep to that on a case by case basis for all cases that don't have enough clear evidence for a conviction like this one. So 95% of people who report rape are such. 5% of them proven so in court by the failure to convict.
 
Yes you just keep to that on a case by case basis for all cases that don't have enough clear evidence for a conviction like this one. So 95% of people who report rape are such. 5% of them proven so in court by the failure to convict.

Just out of interest: In your mind, what would a non-credible rape accusation look like?
 
Last edited:
No I just said that nothing actually contradicts the testimony. So most likely yes he raped her.....

She contradicts her own testimony, by telling her friend it was consensual.

She lacks credibility as a witness because of that and the other messages she sent him. There is nothing other than her discredited claim which is evidence he did rape her.

So, with due respect to human rights and a lack of evidence, he did not rape her.
 
She contradicts her own testimony, by telling her friend it was consensual.

She lacks credibility as a witness because of that and the other messages she sent him. There is nothing other than her discredited claim which is evidence he did rape her.

So, with due respect to human rights and a lack of evidence, he did not rape her.

Yep and anyone who does not initially claim that it was rape is clearly lying, help really get at who the psychos making up rapes to destroy men are. Anyone who does not immediately tell their friends and the police about it are clearly lying. And if it takes them time to realize that their not fighting back does not equal consent well of course it does if they don't tell their friends about it being rape but say it is consensual.

Really there is a very rigid script that the "victim" has to follow for it to be considered a real rape.
 
How exactly did you take the moon leap to that conclusion?

Those are all the reported "rapes" that the "rapist" is either not prosecuted or found innocent. Clearly all psychos.

And people wonder why victims might now want to come forward.
 
Yep and anyone who does not initially claim that it was rape is clearly lying, help really get at who the psychos making up rapes to destroy men are. Anyone who does not immediately tell their friends and the police about it are clearly lying. And if it takes them time to realize that their not fighting back does not equal consent well of course it does if they don't tell their friends about it being rape but say it is consensual.

Really there is a very rigid script that the "victim" has to follow for it to be considered a real rape.

And anyone that denies rape is clearly lying?
 
Those are all the reported "rapes" that the "rapist" is either not prosecuted or found innocent. Clearly all psychos.

And people wonder why victims might now want to come forward.

I think she is a psycho because she sent 40,000 messages to the dude

Which at least to me shows things ain't exactly running on all 4 cyls up there

Not sure how this relates to the other 95% of cases
 
Yep and anyone who does not initially claim that it was rape is clearly lying,

Not true.

help really get at who the psychos making up rapes to destroy men are. Anyone who does not immediately tell their friends and the police about it are clearly lying.

Not true.

And if it takes them time to realize that their not fighting back does not equal consent well of course it does if they don't tell their friends about it being rape but say it is consensual.

Really there is a very rigid script that the "victim" has to follow for it to be considered a real rape.

Not true.

Are you trying to be "ironic"? As a police officer I dealt with the victims and reports of rape, fictitious and truthful. Your attitude, even if you are trying to be ironic is disgusting and your knoweldge of the crime is woefully lacking.
 
ponderingturtle, you have come up with about a dozen different straw positions that no one else here has proposed, endorsed, or even come close to..

Rape, obviously, is a very serious and emotional matter, but dialing up the hyperbolic vitriol to 11 whenever someone even slightly disagrees with you, makes it very difficult to take you seriously.

Do you think the people here just casually dismiss the prevalence of rape? Your polar black/white "with me or against me" attitude doesn't lead to much fruitful discussion.
 

Back
Top Bottom