Post: #1

Mansfield police determined that 18-year-old Sean Murphy began kissing the 17-year-old girl after meeting her at the concert on Sunday, and then took her away from her friends to another part of the outdoor amphitheater. She said that she went with him because “she was afraid of what would happen” if she didn’t agree.

After removing the girl’s shorts and underwear, Murphy reportedly began having sex with her.

Police said that 15 or more concert-goers gathered around to watch, and even recorded the incident on their cell phones. Some of those photographs and videos had been recovered as evidence.

“My friend told me to look over there and there was a couple on the ground having intercourse. So we looked at it, and we took pictures and we thought it was consensual,” one witness told WFXT.

The attack only allegedly came to an end when a woman asked the victim if the act was consensual.

“Do you want this?” the woman was heard saying.

According to a police report, the girl said, “no,” and then a witness “saw the female break free and run.”

The girl’s friends later brought her to police, and gates to the venue were closed until the suspect was found.

The police report said that Murphy admitted that he had been intoxicated from drinking Jack Daniels, but “stressed that he did not force himself on her.”

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/07/30/ma...-ma-police

I want to go on record now with a prediction: this is a false rape accusation. Charges will either be dismissed, or Murphy will be pressured to plead to something minor so the prosecutors and cops can save face. This girl got caught up in the moment and started fucking this guy. When she realized everyone could see and film them, her anti-slut defense started acting up; the bystander asking if she wanted it gave her the perfect escape hatch (and put her in the position of either crying rape, or admitting that she wanted to be fucked by a stranger in front of a crowd).

Fortunately there's video and plenty of bystander witnesses, at least some of whom saw it as consensual.

Post: #2

I thought slut shaming empowered women. Women care more about how it looks than what it is.

Post: #3

Remember:

Women care more about how things look than how things actually are.

This guy's mistake was doing things public, just like this Einstein.

   

Post: #4

Women can't seem to unify their stance on weather they think they are strong and independent or if they have the intellectual capacity of 5 year olds... "I was afraid of what would happen if I didn't go with him", "I was afraid to yell for help even though I was surrounded by hundreds of people", are you fucking kidding me?

Once again, just imagine the genders being reversed here.
"I was afraid of what would happen if I didn't go with her."

Post: #5

(08-13-2014 12:10 PM)Ryre Wrote:  Mansfield police determined that 18-year-old Sean Murphy began kissing the 17-year-old girl after meeting her at the concert on Sunday, and then took her away from her friends to another part of the outdoor amphitheater. She said that she went with him because “she was afraid of what would happen” if she didn’t agree.

After removing the girl’s shorts and underwear, Murphy reportedly began having sex with her.

Police said that 15 or more concert-goers gathered around to watch, and even recorded the incident on their cell phones. Some of those photographs and videos had been recovered as evidence.

“My friend told me to look over there and there was a couple on the ground having intercourse. So we looked at it, and we took pictures and we thought it was consensual,” one witness told WFXT.

The attack only allegedly came to an end when a woman asked the victim if the act was consensual.

“Do you want this?” the woman was heard saying.

According to a police report, the girl said, “no,” and then a witness “saw the female break free and run.”

The girl’s friends later brought her to police, and gates to the venue were closed until the suspect was found.

The police report said that Murphy admitted that he had been intoxicated from drinking Jack Daniels, but “stressed that he did not force himself on her.”

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/07/30/ma...-ma-police

I want to go on record now with a prediction: this is a false rape accusation. Charges will either be dismissed, or Murphy will be pressured to plead to something minor so the prosecutors and cops can save face. This girl got caught up in the moment and started fucking this guy. When she realized everyone could see and film them, her anti-slut defense started acting up; the bystander asking if she wanted it gave her the perfect escape hatch (and put her in the position of either crying rape, or admitting that she wanted to be fucked by a stranger in front of a crowd).

Fortunately there's video and plenty of bystander witnesses, at least some of whom saw it as consensual.

I'd second that assessment. As soon as she realized there was going to be evidence that could most likely end up on the Internet (my prediction) where her friends and family would be able to find it she started re-considering her stance; or in this case, her position (HEY-OH).

I don't buy for a second that this was a rape. Perfect excuse: "He was drunk and I was scared". Bullshit.

Post: #6

This is an outrage -- beyond parody level. It's not a matter of "prediction" -- we know it's a false rape accusation. When someone is fucking you in front of 20 other people it's not "rape" unless those 20 others are ISIS dudes waiting for their turn in line.

So you're fucking some drunk slut and then at the very end some monstrous hag intones the deadly question: "DO YOU WANT THIS?". And if the bitch says no then it was "rape" all along?

Everyone involved in making this outrageous false accusation deserves to be imprisoned for an extended period of time, and worse.

Post: #7

Poor fuckin kids name and face will be plastered all over social media and his city now. Never going to live this one down, and anytime someone Google's his name this is going to come up. Highly doubt it will even be mentioned in any online articles when the charges are (hopefully) dropped.

Post: #8

What did I fucking tell you.

"Prosecutors have dropped their case against an 18-year-old man accused of raping a 17-year-old girl at a summer Keith Urban concert at which dozens of people were treated for excessive drinking.

Prosecutor Mary-Elizabeth Mack said at a Thursday hearing in Attleboro District Court the case against Sean Murphy was ended after "extensive" conversations with the girl, who agreed with the decision...."

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/201...t-in-july/

Post: #9

Yes he may have been cleared but in the eyes of those who wanted him dead to rites he should be locked up. They will merely see this as some sort of pressure on the victim and will lobby for more powers in order to prevent victims from being questioned.

Post: #10

(09-27-2014 03:21 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  Yes he may have been cleared but in the eyes of those who wanted him dead to rites he should be locked up. They will merely see this as some sort of pressure on the victim and will lobby for more powers in order to prevent victims from being questioned.

Yeah that is often the case, but this time there were 15-20 onlookers who came forward, plus video.

Since the rule is now that 1 incident of domestic violence means you lose your multimillion-dollar job with the NFL, can we have a rule that if you falsely accuse a man of rape, you can never get a job anywhere ever? After all, a false rape accusation is a lot more serious than a punch in the face.

I understand why rape victims' names aren't released. But when an allegation is established as false--i.e. she is not a rape victim--shouldn't her name be released, so people can decide whether they want to associate, date, hire, etc. a person of such poor character?

Post: #11

Quote:The attack only allegedly came to an end when a woman asked the victim if the act was consensual.

“Do you want this?” the woman was heard saying.

This is what happens when you ask a girl an open ended question.
It isn't specified if "this?" meant "Do you want to be filmed having sex with this guy in public?" or "Do you want to have sex with this guy in public?" or "Do you want to have sex with this guy?"

Once you allow her to interpret the situation, it costs the taxpayers money.

Post: #12

(09-27-2014 03:36 PM)spokepoker Wrote:  

Quote:The attack only allegedly came to an end when a woman asked the victim if the act was consensual.

“Do you want this?” the woman was heard saying.

This is what happens when you ask a girl an open ended question.
It isn't specified if "this?" meant "Do you want to be filmed having sex with this guy in public?" or "Do you want to have sex with this guy in public?" or "Do you want to have sex with this guy?"

Once you allow her to interpret the situation, it costs the taxpayers money.

Also what happens when you trigger anti-slut defense. That question left her two possible answers: "Yes, I want to be filmed being fucked by a stranger in front of a crowd," or "I am being raped." Understandably, she picked #2.

Post: #13

[attachment=21812]

(09-27-2014 03:32 PM)Ryre Wrote:  

(09-27-2014 03:21 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  Yes he may have been cleared but in the eyes of those who wanted him dead to rites he should be locked up. They will merely see this as some sort of pressure on the victim and will lobby for more powers in order to prevent victims from being questioned.

Yeah that is often the case, but this time there were 15-20 onlookers who came forward, plus video.

Since the rule is now that 1 incident of domestic violence means you lose your multimillion-dollar job with the NFL, can we have a rule that if you falsely accuse a man of rape, you can never get a job anywhere ever? After all, a false rape accusation is a lot more serious than a punch in the face.

I understand why rape victims' names aren't released. But when an allegation is established as false--i.e. she is not a rape victim--shouldn't her name be released, so people can decide whether they want to associate, date, hire, etc. a person of such poor character?

It doesn't matter if there are 100+ onlookers. Your name is tarred and you may as well move away. Far away and hope nobody recognises you.

This was posted by Roosh in another thread and is relevant on the grounds that the girl he is arguing with says this;



"And a conviction doesn't matter!"

Let those words sink in. There are many, many people who think like this and will actively pursue you should this type of thing happen to you.

This is based on clear-cut video showing him grabbing girls butts in public. As stupid as that is the video portrays him as a rapist who needs to be destroyed in their world.

A conviction is a mute point for these people. They convict you based on their feelings alone. Lord knows how many men have suffered this fate.