Post: #1

We are indeed at war. I am starting to spreed to word, in person, to other fellow man.



Commuter who walked past actress at Waterloo station cleared of 'bizarre' sex assault claim, but CPS approved sex assault charge anyway.

Post: #2

The article:

Quote:A commuter has been cleared of sexually assaulting a well-known actress after a jury rejected claims the crime could have taken place in a brief half-second contact in a busy railway station.

Mark Pearson, a 51-year-old artist and picture framer, was accused of brushing against the actress, who cannot be named for legal reasons, in a mass of train passengers at London’s Waterloo station.

CCTV footage showed Mr Pearson, who was a complete stranger to the alleged victim, did not break his stride as he walked past the woman, who was heading to a rehearsal.

"I feel I have undergone a form of mental torture sanctioned by the state.”
Mark Pearson

The defendant, who said he had endured a year-long “Kafkaesque nightmare” as a result of the complaint, blamed the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) for forcing him to endure “mental torture” as a result of the charge.

A jury at Blackfriars Crown Court took 90 minutes to clear Mr Pearson of the charge of “sexual assault by penetration”, the Mail on Sunday newspaper said.

The CCTV did not conclusively prove there was any form of physical contact between the two strangers, but it still led to the CPS presenting a case that the man was able to penetrate the actress, who is in her 60s.

In a three day trial Mark Bagshaw, defending, said the allegation could not have taken place in the half-second time frame shown on CCTV, especially as Mr Person was carrying a newspaper in his left hand – the one he was alleged to have used in the assault – and holding his bag in his right.

Mr Pearson told the court: “I would have had to crouch down, put my hand up the woman’s skirt... penetrate her, take my hand out again... all while holding the newspaper and walking along the concourse.

“It’s preposterous.

“It is against everything I believe in as a human being. I did nothing.”

There were no witnesses, no forensic evidence and the actress failed to pick out Mr Pearson in an identity parade of video images following the alleged incident in December 2014.

The actress was wearing a coat and jacket and a thin dress over “training pants” following a yoga class, the jury heard.

Mr Pearson, who was traced by police from his Oyster travel card records, told the newspaper: “‘One of the many frightening aspects is that this could have happened to anyone.

“For me, half a second turned into a year of hell. I feel I have undergone a form of mental torture sanctioned by the state.

"It is just bizarre.”

His partner Carol Ho, 41, said: “None of us believed for a second that he was capable of doing what this woman said.”

The case raises further questions about the CPS’s decision-making in sexual assault cases, which has been under intense scrutiny following a series of failures.

A CPS spokesman said: “There was sufficient evidence for this case to proceed to court and progress to trial. We respect the decision of the jury.”

Post: #3

jesus christ, "Kafkaesque" doesn't begin to describe that.

Not as bad as the Toronto twitter trial, with 3 years to resolve and not the guarantee of success that this had, but still very horrible. Seriously, how do you penetrate someone in a split second as you're walking by them without slowing down your speed?

Never should have gone to trial and there need to be ramifications against those who permit this nonsense to go through. But hey, government employees... justifying themselves is a rarity.

Post: #4

Absolutely incredible. I don't know what the laws are like over there, but here, any prosecutor trying to proceed on this "case" would be laughed out of town. (I hope).

There is not even the slightest bit of good faith basis for such a charge.

I think it would meet the elements for a civil claim of "malicious prosecution." According to Wikipedia (never the final authority, of course, but a decent overview):

(1) intentionally (and maliciously) instituting and pursuing (or causing to be instituted or pursued) a legal action (civil or criminal) that is (2) brought without probable cause and (3) dismissed in favor of the victim of the malicious prosecution. In some jurisdictions, the term "malicious prosecution" denotes the wrongful initiation of criminal proceedings, while the term "malicious use of process" denotes the wrongful initiation of civil proceedings.

It's revealing that the "actress" is protected, but the innocent accused person here is not. Looks like the authorities were pandering to this "actress" who for some sick reason claimed to have been assaulted.

There is not even the slightest amount of probable cause. How did this case get past the preliminary hearing stage? Or was there an indictment? If so, how could any grand jury see this as an indict-able offense?

A vile and despicable incident. He needs to sue.

Post: #5

What the Hell is going on!! I keep on thinking that this shit is fake, but I know it's real, and still can't believe it!! Half second penetration in public???... and it went to court!! No NO No!! This is a clear case of the Government saying Fuck you to it's citizen and making an exemple out of somebody for the hell of it!

Post: #6

I was against the instant replay camera for football. Now it looks like every man needs it for his life.

Post: #7

(02-07-2016 04:32 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  A vile and despicable incident. He needs to sue.

Agreed. That was a witch hunt.

When a man can't even walk in public without being accused of being a rapist, is not that the definition of DEFCOCK 1?

Post: #8

According to the accusation, during the split second of possible contact, he didn't merely fondle her but "penetrated" her. How would this be possible unless she was going commando?

Post: #9

A random man, traced by his Oyster* card. If he hadn't chosen to register it, he never would've been tracked down for this non-crime.

*Oyster is a cashless system that Transport For London uses.

Post: #10

This is actually making it look like Roosh got off easy.

Post: #11

What are the "legal reasons" to not name your accuser?

Post: #12

You know, when I read political analysis about how the elites work, I read it, and understand it, but often, I don't really internalize it because I don't actually see it.

But then the migrant crisis comes along and I think, man, the elites really do have utter contempt for anyone but their cronies.

Or when I read manosphere writing, I mean, I comprehend that men are belittled and ridiculed because they are the true threats to any ruling class, and must be neutralized early, and marginalized constantly.

Then I see this whole recent mess with Roosh, and it is all so blatant, the lies and distortions, when the lies are about someone who you at least tangentially know something about, and then to hear from a major NY paper that Roosh cancelled meetings in Canada because a woman's boxing club has him running scared. I mean I ask you!

They really hate us. They hate men, especially the idea of groups of men meeting in real life. Even if they are just talking about game and shooting the shit, the idea of men getting together is seen as a potential threat. It's true. It's really true, or they wouldn't mobilize the way they do.

But this one. This poor bastard who would obviously be considered not guilty, even by a jury of people with Downs Syndrome, and then his name is published and his accuser's is not?

He doesn't even look like he brushed against that woman. This is more evidence and confirmation that the rulers of the world are so scared of men, that they want them constantly walking on eggshells. I mean, this can't be just about this particular incident, it just can't be. This is a warning to all men who read about it in the papers. It doesn't matter if it is right or wrong.

What matters is putting the fear of condemnation in every man's heart. Anywhere. Any time. All the time.

Post: #13

You don't need to analyse anything here guys.

Remember, we are the nation who allowed Rotherham to take place, boy rapists in the highest of political, media and business life to go un-punished and constant false rape reports on footballers by sluts who chase money and fame.

Ofc we will pursue a man who by random chance, happened upon some idiot woman who truly believed she was raped in the briefest of seconds in Waterloo Station, during the day with 1000+ potential eye witnesses and not a shred of evidence to prove otherwise.

This is Great Britain Plc. Enjoy the madness while it lasts.

Post: #14

(02-07-2016 05:12 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  You know, when I read political analysis about how the elites work, I read it, and understand it, but often, I don't really internalize it because I don't actually see it.

But then the migrant crisis comes along and I think, man, the elites really do have utter contempt for anyone but their cronies.

Or when I read manosphere writing, I mean, I comprehend that men are belittled and ridiculed because they are the true threats to any ruling class, and must be neutralized early, and marginalized constantly.

Then I see this whole recent mess with Roosh, and it is all so blatant, the lies and distortions, when the lies are about someone who you at least tangentially know something about, and then to hear from a major NY paper that Roosh cancelled meetings in Canada because a woman's boxing club has him running scared. I mean I ask you!

They really hate us. They hate men, especially the idea of groups of men meeting in real life. Even if they are just talking about game and shooting the shit, the idea of men getting together is seen as a potential threat. It's true. It's really true, or they wouldn't mobilize the way they do.

But this one. This poor bastard who would obviously be considered not guilty, even by a jury of people with Downs Syndrome, and then his name is published and his accuser's is not?

He doesn't even look like he brushed against that woman. This is more evidence and confirmation that the rulers of the world are so scared of men, that they want them constantly walking on eggshells. I mean, this can't be just about this particular incident, it just can't be. This is a warning to all men who read about it in the papers. It doesn't matter if it is right or wrong.

What matters is putting the fear of condemnation in every man's heart. Anywhere. Any time. All the time.

This spectacular post should be read and understood by every man, but unfortunately only a few of us will read & grasp it!

Post: #15

(02-07-2016 04:32 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  Absolutely incredible. I don't know what the laws are like over there, but here, any prosecutor trying to proceed on this "case" would be laughed out of town. (I hope).

There is not even the slightest bit of good faith basis for such a charge.

I think it would meet the elements for a civil claim of "malicious prosecution." According to Wikipedia (never the final authority, of course, but a decent overview):

(1) intentionally (and maliciously) instituting and pursuing (or causing to be instituted or pursued) a legal action (civil or criminal) that is (2) brought without probable cause and (3) dismissed in favor of the victim of the malicious prosecution. In some jurisdictions, the term "malicious prosecution" denotes the wrongful initiation of criminal proceedings, while the term "malicious use of process" denotes the wrongful initiation of civil proceedings.

It's revealing that the "actress" is protected, but the innocent accused person here is not. Looks like the authorities were pandering to this "actress" who for some sick reason claimed to have been assaulted.

There is not even the slightest amount of probable cause. How did this case get past the preliminary hearing stage? Or was there an indictment? If so, how could any grand jury see this as an indict-able offense?

A vile and despicable incident. He needs to sue.

The problem being that the CPS is probably going to be protected by some form of Sovereign Immunity. The prosecutor would run the line that he did not step outside his prosecutorial role in that he just put forward the evidence that he had been given and that in his view it was a prima facie case.

As I've said in the past, this has to be expected when it comes to virtually any rape allegation in a Westminster jurisdiction. Prosecutors are too gutless to be tagged with the "anti-woman" moniker because they won't run a case to trial, and it sounds to me that while the actress remains anonymous, she was prominent enough that the prosecutor didn't have the guts to say there was no prima facie case. If the woman is an actress, she has immediate pull with the media. In short, the prosecutor didn't want the responsibility of saying "No" to the complainant, so he let a jury do it instead. Which I agree is dereliction of the public prosecutor's function since they're meant to stop wasting public money on this sort of rubbish case.

In short, it'll be like a referee in the last ten minutes of a close match. They know better than to make a controversial call. They'll "let the players play". Same goes (off on a tangent here) for the FBI and Hilary Clinton: no Attorney-General wants to be tagged as the guy who had a political agenda to stop the first female President from getting her place in the White House. They will let the players play.

About all you can hope for is that the presiding judge made a call to the DPP's office afterward and read him the Riot Act over why he was forced to sit for days to hear a hysterical old bat testify about something that plainly did not happen. This guy is not going to sue - he's lost a year of his life defending the claim, why would he throw good money after bad?

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #16

(02-07-2016 05:45 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  You don't need to analyse anything here guys.

Nevertheless, I stand by my analysis.

Post: #17

...and guess who's head of the CPS?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/l...cases.html

Are we surprised? Prosecutions to match a popular agenda. Imagine that.

Post: #18

WarMachine Wrote:...and guess who's head of the CPS?

Are we surprised? Prosecutions to match a popular agenda. Imagine that.

I've been thinking this for a while, and how disturbing it truly is.

In the UK, you as a heterosexual white male can no longer depend on the "justice" system to protect you if you are innocent, especially in any matters to do with a woman.

The problem with striking fear of condemnation of any sort of contact with a woman in public, no matter how small or innocuous, is that this fear is now rational. If this man can catch a false charge and have it go all the way to trial, just by walking past a woman, what do you think would happen to a man who tries to "pick up" women on the street? You go indirect, you don't even touch her, not even on the top of the shoulder to get her attention as some do, she merely has to feel victimized.

As non-retards, we all know that feeling something =/= actually being something. Try telling that to all these mentally unhinged, professional victims. A bitter, agitated 60 year-old SJW hag feels she was a victim when this man walked past her, well, the UK legal system now agrees that she is a victim.

Most girls in the day time I find react either positively or neutrally. But every now and then there is one who is really uncomfortable and although it's a small percentage they are there. I try not to pick the ones who have obvious red flags (tattoos, piercings, neon hair etc.) but it's not possible to eliminate it 100%. Of course I politely eject ASAP if she hasn't kept walking already, but I cannot prevent the slight bit of discomfort a small majority of women feel, even though daygame for me in comparison can sometimes be brutal indeed.

This is just another attempt to stop men from meeting their physical and emotional needs, and they wonder why men are killing themselves in record numbers in the UK, more than three times the number of women. If you as a man don't actively approach women, you will get nothing. Women don't understand this because they just have to stand there, but men must be the initiators. We either initiate or get nothing.

So what should british men do? Knowing that this kind of shit is now possible if you so much as look at a woman or walk past her the wrong way, it wouldn't be irrational to stop approaching during the day. To get good at daygame requires a lot of approaches. Can you now do this without risk to your freedom? Or, do you simply accept that risk and continue? Or, do you GTFO to a country that is DEFCOCK 3 or above? But not everyone is location independent and your job may demand that you stay in the UK. In that case you approach knowing you are in DEFCOCK 2 environment. And if you do continue as normal in this environment, are you dumb or courageous for doing so?

I've noticed based on my travels that my primary fear in the day time is not of rejection by women. It is of doing something that is socially different and opposed to the common feminist narrative, who would have every man who ever approaches a woman locked up. I don't care if a bunch of freaks think I am a disgraceful player or feel that I should be locked up... what I do take into account is whether the government and the law takes a similar view. The courts can have me locked up, feminists directly cannot. That's why despite officially greater corruption in Russia, for example, I felt far more at ease approaching women. Even here in France there is a big difference for me in DEFCOCK value vs the UK. France isn't DEFCOCK 3 but it does not feel like DEFCOCK 2. The higher the DEFCOCK value of a place, the less I fear and the more I enjoy day game.

So I guess, whether I continue or not, I can't help the fact that current groupthink has permeated through the legal system in the UK and I find it difficult to enjoy it with stories like this at the back of my mind.

Post: #19

Next... you will hear a case where a woman charges a man for sexually harrassment for looking at her.

I'm calling it where i predict in the next 1-2 years!

Post: #20

"He walked by me, and some of the air from his movement blew on me! RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPE!"

Post: #21

(02-07-2016 10:41 PM)eatthishomie Wrote:  "He walked by me, and some of the air from his movement blew on me! RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPE!"

This sounds ridiculous but it's pretty much the way we're going. I think every man in the UK should consider recording any and every interaction with a woman, no matter how small. Implementing this however is such an inconvenience not to mention practically impossible. Every single day I go out I walk past women, as the man in the OP did. I can't remember to or pay for the huge data requirements of recording 12 hours a day every day.

Maybe I will find some middle ground and start recording all my approaches from start to finish. I used to think this was lame, you know like certain PUAs like to post their approach videos to promote their products. Now all of us may be forced to do it just to remain free.

Post: #22

I would say you are all not far off the truth.

The other truth is any heterosexual man is a threat now, so we must act accordingly.

Post: #23

(02-07-2016 05:12 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  They really hate us. They hate men, especially the idea of groups of men meeting in real life. Even if they are just talking about game and shooting the shit, the idea of men getting together is seen as a potential threat. It's true. It's really true, or they wouldn't mobilize the way they do.

They fear the potential ramifications of a group of conscientious men --- men of action who are fed up with this shit already --- gathering together and finding ways to undermine the establishment and to restore some semblance of sanity to their reality.

Even if it's ostensibly just a happy hour, when smart men gather they think of smart things.

That's what they're afraid of and that's why they try to nip it in the bud.

The hierarchy looks like this:

- Lob accusations on Twitter and write hit pieces
- Manufacture bullshit "news" stories
- If your target is still alive, syndicate the stories far and wide (repeat a life enough times...)
- Get governments/police/citizens involved on the basis of these lies to threaten physical safety

Women understand that MEN are in possession of the ultimate trump card: violence.

It's only through the violence of OTHER men towards their fellow man that women can enforce their whim...uh, I mean will.

They'd like nothing better than to have Hitlary as president so she can further exonerate them of all responsibility for anything, ever, and to beat men down into a state of cowardice, weakness, lack of reason and submissiveness through punitive laws, courts and social constructs.

They've already come this far.

You think they're just going to let men take away the privilege of being able to act like amoral slobs?

And you think the media is going to sit back and let the men who have the minerals to restore some dignity to this world organize unmolested?

Like Roosh said, this has been a good dry run.

It shows us what kind of machine we're up against, and with whose interests neomasculinity conflicts.

Namely:

- The cowards in the mainstream media (barring rare exceptions)

- Liberalissimo Silicon Valley tech companies who use their clout as a means to push their agendas (and silence detractors)

- The government-industrial complex

- Hollywood

- Academia

- Pussies, weaklings, homos, LGB-whatevers, perpetual victims, lazy bums and government cheese-eaters everywhere

We joke a lot about conspiracy theories around here.

Well, if the media can lie about one man and deliberately misrepresent what he stands for, we have to ask ourselves: why?

Are they just whoring themselves out with shocking headlines for pageviews, truth be damned? Probably.

Are they being handed down orders from the likes of Rupert Murdoch and his ilk? Probably.

Are they mostly lazy pot-smokers with college degrees who have never done a legitimate piece of journalism in their whole life? All signs point to yes.

Post: #24

State-endorsed false rape accusations in the UK are throwbacks to Victorian England, especially when false Jack the Ripper accusations are precursors to what we are witnessing right here, right now.

Seriously, this is why the Anglosphere is gynocentric, especially since Victorian England.

Post: #25

I commute in London everyday and to think I could be in line for something like this is quite frankly concerning. My demeanor has noticeably changed over the last few months. I observe female body language more than ever, as I get my fair share of female attention being as tall as I am with presence, I am starting to tell the cunts from the "sane" women. It's a skill I recommend we all develop.

But what to do about this?

Do we have to exert a silent strong frame to ward off any chance of a woman thinking she could do something like this?

Does it matter what the man looks like, whether she is attracted to him whether she would do this? If he is a smaller guy, does she feel she is above him in stature so he can easily be victimized? Would she dare do this to a jacked 6'3 dude who she perceives as "dominant" or "Alpha"?

Would be interested discussion on the possible psychological elements to this so wo can holistically break this down from source and create a plan of action, or awareness.

Thoughts?