Post: #251

(06-12-2016 07:59 PM)Chrome Wrote:  Since a typical Internet search will yield you page after page of histrionic, convoluted, pathologically pruned and deceitfully crafted garbage, here is a resource of the actual court documents for your perusal without the pundit propaganda.

http://documents.latimes.com/stanford-brock-turner/

May the truth be with you

Chrome, thank you for posting that. I've covered a lot of the ground but this is the most comprehensive collection of court documents I've seen so far and it's a good reference.

However, what we really need is the full trial transcript. That hasn't been posted anywhere, as far as I can tell.

Post: #252

Good find Chrome.

Achromaticmike posted a link that took you to only the Police report/Witness statements on the last page.

These would have formed the case and would have determined whether the case proceeded to trial or not.

Reasonable doubt?

Link again:

Here's a link to the police reports if you haven't seen them;
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documen...turner.pdf

Post: #253

The Judge from this case has been removed.

Post: #254

The judge has been removed from a sexual assault/rape case (as outlined in the video), but is still a sitting judge. There is a removal campaign that has by now gathered 1.4+ million signatures. With the media shit storm I now think it is impossible to obtain a fair hearing in a court of law. All judges, regardless of the recall campaign, will be extremely hesitant to act in an impartial fashion. This is the USA. I wonder how it is in the rest of the Anglosphere and the Western world?

Post: #255

(06-16-2016 06:44 PM)Thought Criminal Wrote:  The judge has been removed from a sexual assault/rape case (as outlined in the video), but is still a sitting judge. There is a removal campaign that has by now gathered 1.4+ million signatures. With the media shit storm I now think it is impossible to obtain a fair hearing in a court of law. All judges, regardless of the recall campaign, will be extremely hesitant to act in an impartial fashion. This is the USA. I wonder how it is in the rest of the Anglosphere and the Western world?

Ironically the rest of the Western world arguably has a more robust court system, because judges are not elected. They're appointed, typically for life.

I suppose it's just one of those other things I won't ever get about the US, not having been brought up there in that culture. I cannot understand for the life of me how it's rational to allow a member of the judicial arm of government to be elected. Separation of powers is meant to bring together three entirely disparate entities: the legislature which enacts the will of the people, the judiciary which interprets it, and the administration which carries it out.

An elected judge is, to me, an oxymoron. How can you possibly be an independent umpire, an independent interpreter of the law, if you are necessarily bound to the whim of the electorate by dint of having to stand for office? The only analogue I can think of that expresses the weirdness of the idea is to say an elected judge is the equivalent of a senator appointed for life. I find it difficult to reconcile the two. But as I said, the Westminster system back across the North Atlantic has a different culture attached to it. That said, I think the fact we don't elect judges focuses effort in the right direction: people understand you can't threaten electoral oblivion and thereby make individual judges increase sentencing, if you want higher sentences, you ultimately have to compel a legislature to raise them. Judges are meant to be able to stand apart from the mob and make an impartial choice. Elected judges, in my mind, can't do that.

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #256

Being brought up in the U.S. doesn't mean you get it either.

Post: #257

(06-17-2016 12:06 AM)Paracelsus Wrote:  An elected judge is, to me, an oxymoron. How can you possibly be an independent umpire, an independent interpreter of the law, if you are necessarily bound to the whim of the electorate by dint of having to stand for office?... Judges are meant to be able to stand apart from the mob and make an impartial choice. Elected judges, in my mind, can't do that.

You could just as easily ask how can an electorate protect themselves from a judge who decides not to be impartial and starts promoting a wild agenda. Especially when impeachment is rare and a local population has little control over the process.

Post: #258

KC Joyner and Cathy Young have been covering this case from a skeptical POV as well. They aren't specifically casting doubts on the case itself per se, but the way it's being hyped and leveraged to gain ground on other related issues. Namely, Title IX, affirmative consent, due process, the definition of rape, etc.

Post: #259

Drinking till you pass out is a terrible incivility. Fine them both and expel them from their institutions of higher learning.

Post: #260

Expelling college kids who fuck and drink would leave those colleges as ghost towns with no money.

Post: #261

(06-17-2016 02:48 PM)Captainstabbin Wrote:  You could just as easily ask how can an electorate protect themselves from a judge who decides not to be impartial and starts promoting a wild agenda.

Short answer: that's why there's this thing called a court of appeal, and why the highest courts of appeal are traditionally made up of seven judges.

Indeed England, even now, still retains a final court of appeal for some countries that were its former colonies -- the Privy Council, essentially about as independent as you can get. Not getting justice in your local tinpot dictatorship's biased or cowed judicial system? You have a right of appeal to the Privy Council in England, whose word is respected as the custodian of English law and whose word counts in determining an appeal.

That said, I suspect there's a simple choice in bias at play. US electorates at least notionally leave it to the will of the people when a judicial issue is in doubt (thus, local judge elections). English-based electorates notionally leave it to the will of the appeal courts first and then the will of Parliament.

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #262

I looked at the records, evidence, etc. I was going to write a legal blog post about how maybe it's not as bad as it looks, and maybe college rape statistics are overblown, but it's as bad as it looks.

This kid is disturbed, and guilty as hell.

What happened is this - she got blackout drink before going to a frat party. We're talking loaded. She continued to drink at the party. He was like "come back to my dorm" and lead her out of the party. As they're walking, she passes out, and he pulls her behind a dumpster. He then starts fingering her while she is completely passed out and gets on top of her and starts fondling her breasts.

Two bikers saw the thing happening and were like "What the fuck?" so one approached him and the little prick started to run away. The biker beat his ass and then held him until the cops arrived. When the cops got to the scene, they found the girl completely unresponsive.

She woke up in the hospital and had no idea what happened.

His version of events is that they're walking home, she trips, and pulls him into a kiss. They start getting it on behind the dumpster, then the bikers pull up and he runs away because he's scared of getting beat up. His version of events is contradicted by the two bikers, the police officer, her testimony, and plain common sense.

This was real, actual rape, not some fat feminist complaining about construction workers catcalling women who are not fat or a woman regretting cheating on her boyfriend. Any player with even a modicum of game knows you don't molest unconscious women. That's disgusting.

Post: #263

(06-18-2016 10:40 AM)HankMoody Wrote:  What happened is this - she got blackout drink before going to a frat party. We're talking loaded. She continued to drink at the party. He was like "come back to my dorm" and lead her out of the party. As they're walking, she passes out, and he pulls her behind a dumpster. He then starts fingering her while she is completely passed out and gets on top of her and starts fondling her breasts.

How do you know that this is what happened? What, specifically, is the evidence that shows it, given that she doesn't remember what happened and that no other witnesses were present during their walk?

(06-18-2016 10:40 AM)HankMoody Wrote:  His version of events is that they're walking home, she trips, and pulls him into a kiss. They start getting it on behind the dumpster, then the bikers pull up and he runs away because he's scared of getting beat up. His version of events is contradicted by the two bikers, the police officer, her testimony, and plain common sense.

Setting "plain common sense" aside, how could his version possibly be "contradicted" by the two bikers, the police officers, and her testimony, given that she has no recollection of the events and the two bikers and the police officer came on the scene later? How can they know the exact moment at which she passed out?

(06-18-2016 10:40 AM)HankMoody Wrote:  This was real, actual rape, not some fat feminist complaining about construction workers catcalling women who are not fat or a woman regretting cheating on her boyfriend. Any player with even a modicum of game knows you don't molest unconscious women. That's disgusting.

It's interesting that this was "real, actual rape" given that all rape charges were dropped as soon as the trial got underway. Turner was not charged with rape, let alone convicted of it.

Post: #264

(06-18-2016 10:40 AM)HankMoody Wrote:  Any player with even a modicum of game knows you don't molest unconscious women. That's disgusting.

Here are some things that are truly disgusting, if you ask me:

1. The fact that a 20 year old kid's life is permanently ruined because he drunkenly fingered a drunk girl who may or may not have passed out by that time.

He will be a registered sex offender for life, and that means that his life is effectively over. People who talk about a "light sentence" are ignoring the enormity of this fact. Almost no one understands the unspeakable pariah status of registered sex offenders in the US, especially if they come from a middle or upper class background.

It used to be that you would be convicted of a crime (rightly or wrongly), you did the time, and that was that. Certainly there were difficulties involved in having a felony conviction on your record but your past was the past and had an expiration date. Sex offender registration is a way to administer lifelong punishment, and often to men whose "crimes" were nonviolent, victimless or consensual (a 20 year old guy who fucks some 17 year old slut who looks 25) and who present no danger whatsoever to society.

Now here is a good subject for a legal blog.

2. The fact that the unspeakably "light" sentence given to Turner (which in fact amounts to a life sentence) is being used to instigate an unprecedented hysteria and to promote misandrist "believe the survivor" legislation which will further erode the presumption of innocence in sexual assault cases and ruin the lives of many innocent men, particularly young dudes on college campuses. The campus rape hysteria had a slight setback when the UVa rape hoax was exposed but it is coming back with unprecedented savagery and vengeance in the aftermath of the Turner case. Like I said, it's payback for the loss they took on lyin' Jackie Coakley.

3. The fact that the histrionic "victim statement" in this case -- almost certainly not written by the "victim" herself -- has become a new sacred document. It was read live in the US Congress earlier this week, and will no doubt become a mandatory part of many college and high school curricula. Young men in particular will be forced to read and re-read this mendacious literary propaganda piece as if it were some revelation of peerless worth and an ineffable expression of all truth and human pathos. Their minds and hearts will be poisoned by this garbage.

4. The fact that a good and competent judge, Judge Aaron Persky, is having his career destroyed because he issued a reasonable sentence in line with the recommendations of the probation commission. In a virtually unprecedented move, he has been removed from adjudicating another sexual assault case. It doesn't take much to imagine the chilling effect this will have on other judges who might want to decide sexual assault cases equitably and fairly. That chilling effect is precisely the intention, of course.

All of these things -- and more -- truly deserve to be called "disgusting", a very understated word as it applies to them. They are infinitely more so than whatever might have happened between a drunk dude and a drunk gal in the aftermath of a frat party.

Post: #265

(06-18-2016 10:55 AM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  

(06-18-2016 10:40 AM)HankMoody Wrote:  What happened is this - she got blackout drink before going to a frat party. We're talking loaded. She continued to drink at the party. He was like "come back to my dorm" and lead her out of the party. As they're walking, she passes out, and he pulls her behind a dumpster. He then starts fingering her while she is completely passed out and gets on top of her and starts fondling her breasts.

How do you know that this is what happened? What, specifically, is the evidence that shows it, given that she doesn't remember what happened and that no other witnesses were present during their walk?

Plus, if she was blackout drunk before even going to the party, why wasn't her sister concerned for her? Or her friends? They left her to fend for herself at the party - one where she later claimed BT assaulted her (the sister) too - assuming she wasn't too drunk. That was at around 12:20am. The assault occurred at around 12:45 and the bikers roll up before 1am.

In around 25 minutes, she went from being well enough to leave alone at a hostile party to unconscious and apparently without agency this whole time. I don't buy that at all.

Post: #266

(06-18-2016 11:40 AM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  3. The fact that the histrionic "victim statement" in this case -- almost certainly not written by the "victim" herself -- has become a new sacred document. It was read live in the US Congress earlier this week, and will no doubt become a mandatory part of many college and high school curricula. Young men in particular will be forced to read and re-read this mendacious literary propaganda piece as if it were some revelation of peerless worth and an ineffable expression of all truth and human pathos. Their minds and hearts will be poisoned by this garbage.

I find it interesting that the accuser is opting to remain anonymous. Maybe it's because she doesn't want people digging into her past too much? I would be interested to know about her psychiatric history (if any), whether she has a history of accusing other guys, etc. It's common that chicks with a long history of problems will claim that one event such as this "destroyed" them, when in reality their impulsive and self-destructive tendencies stemming from pre-existing mental health problems are what led them to put themselves in a dangerous situation to begin with.

These women already weren't capable of taking care of themselves, much less making a useful contribution to society, and the alleged assault provides the perfect excuse for them to continue being weak rather than face the truth. They can claim to be suffering from long-lasting trauma that incapacitates them from being productive. I wonder what this chick's work and relationship history look like; does she have a history of irresponsible behavior throughout her life? There could be any number of red flags waiting to be uncovered.

Who knows, maybe a couple years from now, she'll be anonymously writing another victim impact statement about yet another guy, and telling the court that this new guy's abuse is the cause of all her psychological problems. Without knowing her true identity, it's hard to connect the dots from one case to the next and attack her credibility based on her earlier statements, which might conflict with statements she's making now or shed light on how reliable her testimony is.

When I got accused of rape, I happened to know the accuser's real name (including aliases) and was able to go through her court history and find that she had accused at least two other guys before me. In the previous cases, she had admitted under cross-examination that she was on antipsychotic medications and suffered from hallucinations, borderline personality disorder, etc. The court's attitude, though, was that it's possible (1) for the same woman to be assaulted by many different guys over a period of time, and (2) for a crazy woman to nonetheless be telling the truth. I didn't get convicted of anything, but the court made some findings against me (just like it had made findings against the two guys before me) based on a preponderance of the evidence.

My accuser did what many other false accusers do, which is write a Tumblr post about the alleged "rape" before filing a rape report with the cops weeks later. (She took her Tumblr post down after it went viral and people on 4chan started making fun of her, and saying that the events she was describing never happened.) Later, though, she wrote long victim impact statements that readers found convincing and emotionally moving. She published an "open letter to my rapist." She immersed herself in the online community of rape victim support and solidarity, and claimed to have the same trauma symptoms that she read about. I have other writings of hers from way back before any of this happened, though, where she's talking about her multiple suicide attempts, and the trauma she suffered from her father's abuse, and so on, and so on. It became clear that she was the type of person who blames other people for everything bad that happens in her life.

Anyway, my point is that knowing more about Brock's accuser could go a long way toward figuring out whether Brock is truly the reason for the emotional hell she describes in her statement, or whether perhaps she already had a few screws loose.

Post: #267

(06-18-2016 10:55 AM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  

(06-18-2016 10:40 AM)HankMoody Wrote:  What happened is this - she got blackout drink before going to a frat party. We're talking loaded. She continued to drink at the party. He was like "come back to my dorm" and lead her out of the party. As they're walking, she passes out, and he pulls her behind a dumpster. He then starts fingering her while she is completely passed out and gets on top of her and starts fondling her breasts.

How do you know that this is what happened? What, specifically, is the evidence that shows it, given that she doesn't remember what happened and that no other witnesses were present during their walk?

(06-18-2016 10:40 AM)HankMoody Wrote:  His version of events is that they're walking home, she trips, and pulls him into a kiss. They start getting it on behind the dumpster, then the bikers pull up and he runs away because he's scared of getting beat up. His version of events is contradicted by the two bikers, the police officer, her testimony, and plain common sense.

Setting "plain common sense" aside, how could his version possibly be "contradicted" by the two bikers, the police officers, and her testimony, given that she has no recollection of the events and the two bikers and the police officer came on the scene later? How can they know the exact moment at which she passed out?

(06-18-2016 10:40 AM)HankMoody Wrote:  This was real, actual rape, not some fat feminist complaining about construction workers catcalling women who are not fat or a woman regretting cheating on her boyfriend. Any player with even a modicum of game knows you don't molest unconscious women. That's disgusting.

It's interesting that this was "real, actual rape" given that all rape charges were dropped as soon as the trial got underway. Turner was not charged with rape, let alone convicted of it.

I can't link to my own blog post, but here is all the evidence:

http://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2016/...-documents

That was his argument at trial - that all the evidence was circumstantial, and the prosecution couldn't meet its burden of proof.

However, he admitted to having sexual relations with her. He probably would have won if he said nothing happened. Short a DNA kit, even if there were evidence of sexual penetration, there would have been no way to prove it wasn't by someone else earlier in the night.

At that point, you're looking at 3 people who said she was completely unconscious, and only him saying she wasn't, plus an admission of sexual contact. A jury is going to convict with that kind of evidence.

You're correct - he was convicted of sexual assault since there were no allegations of actual sex. He said he fingered her, which is therefore the most the prosecution could prove.

I will note this - she did admit to having a long term boyfriend who she called immediately after waking up in the hospital. Why she went to a frat party and got blackout drunk there is beyond my comprehension. In my opinion, defense should have argued that this was a case of regret, rather than relying on the technical defense of "you can't prove she was unconscious at the time the interaction occurred."

Post: #268

(06-18-2016 12:50 PM)HankMoody Wrote:  I will note this - she did admit to having a long term boyfriend who she called immediately after waking up in the hospital. Why she went to a frat party and got blackout drunk there is beyond my comprehension. In my opinion, defense should have argued that this was a case of regret, rather than relying on the technical defense of "you can't prove she was unconscious at the time the interaction occurred."

That kid needs to wake up.

Post: #269

(06-18-2016 12:50 PM)HankMoody Wrote:  At that point, you're looking at 3 people who said she was completely unconscious, and only him saying she wasn't, plus an admission of sexual contact.

The crux of the matter is WHEN she became unconscious / passed out.

At 12:40 am she is still clearly conscious -- enough to be leaving messages on her boyfriend's voicemail and to be leaving the frat party with BT walking on her own.

At 1am or so the bikers come on the scene and she is seemingly passed out or in drunken sleep -- but Turner is not fingering her at that point.

The three people you are referring to can only testify about her state from the point when they come on the scene. Since she must have passed out at some logically prior point, and since the whole time interval is just 20 minutes in total -- between 12:40am when she is still clearly conscious, talking and walking, and 1am when the witnesses arrive -- I don't see how their testimony can elucidate what state she was in when the digital penetration actually happened. This is the key.

Turner claims that he fingered her BEFORE she passed out. I've examined all the available evidence in the case and I've seen nothing that can contradict his claim. He could be telling the truth or he could be lying, but I don't see how the threshold of reasonable doubt is exceeded here.

Post: #270

(06-18-2016 01:03 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  

(06-18-2016 12:50 PM)HankMoody Wrote:  At that point, you're looking at 3 people who said she was completely unconscious, and only him saying she wasn't, plus an admission of sexual contact.

The crux of the matter is WHEN she became unconscious / passed out.

At 12:40 am she is still clearly conscious -- enough to be leaving messages on her boyfriend's voicemail and to be leaving the frat party with BT walking on her own.

Imagine a chick calling her boyfriend just before leaving a party with another man. Really shows the class we're dealing with.

Post: #271

This whole case is bullshit.

-Cheating slut passed out after consenting to finger bang
-Guy is expected while drunk to be aware enough to stop THE VERY MOMENT she is unconscious and/or too intoxicated whereas he should be a lawyer and human breathalyzer and know that consent is automatically withdrawn
-And what disapproves the theory to say she DID consent the ENTIRE time at the very moment (therefore, the guy thinks he is in the clear) and this slut simply forgot after the fact; intentionally (to save to face) or unintentionally (cause she was very drunk)?

This whole case: Give me a fucking break. Total shitshow and evidence that tyranny of the mob is in full force.

Lifetime sex register listing is also real bullshit.

That is for violent rapist and people who screw with kids; NOT for drunk guys who neglected to carry a breathalyzer and check by the second, every second, if a chick is conscious/aware or not after she asked initially to get finger-banged. Otherwise, suffer the wrath of being technically guilty of "sexual assault.

I wouldn't be surprise is this guy kills himself within a year or two. Since he is a rich kid, he might be able to get a gig via nepotism. But in this day and age, a DV or rape CHARGE is enough to DQ you from a lot of jobs. Conviction? Game over.

The lawyers are saying he is guilty and I suppose based on the letter of the law, that is true from what I can tell. But the laws regarding this case are fundamentally broken and absurd. The absurd laws are a product of a militant feminist culture that hates men and wants to criminalize the most begin actions against men. You best believe that if we get a President Hillary Clinton later this year (may God have mercy on us all), it's going to be OPEN SEASON on men like us. Emotional abuse is already a crime in the UK. You bet your ass that Clinton will try to get an updated Violence Against Women Act passed that makes "emotional abuse" a legit crime.

Real props to Lizard of Oz for calling out this stupid shit.

Everyone should record all sexual encounters with women, get a voice recorder for the cell, after-bang confirmation texts, get a dashboard camera, and basically always keep a hard evidence inventory of all encounters with women in the US. It only takes one bullshit accusation to ruin your life and one piece of hard evidence might save your professional and personal life. Seriously you all, start practice Defensive Dating.

Post: #272

(06-18-2016 10:40 AM)HankMoody Wrote:  I looked at the records, evidence, etc. I was going to write a legal blog post about how maybe it's not as bad as it looks, and maybe college rape statistics are overblown, but it's as bad as it looks.

This kid is disturbed, and guilty as hell.

What happened is this - she got blackout drink before going to a frat party. We're talking loaded. She continued to drink at the party. He was like "come back to my dorm" and lead her out of the party. As they're walking, she passes out, and he pulls her behind a dumpster. He then starts fingering her while she is completely passed out and gets on top of her and starts fondling her breasts.

Two bikers saw the thing happening and were like "What the fuck?" so one approached him and the little prick started to run away. The biker beat his ass and then held him until the cops arrived. When the cops got to the scene, they found the girl completely unresponsive.

She woke up in the hospital and had no idea what happened.

His version of events is that they're walking home, she trips, and pulls him into a kiss. They start getting it on behind the dumpster, then the bikers pull up and he runs away because he's scared of getting beat up. His version of events is contradicted by the two bikers, the police officer, her testimony, and plain common sense.

This was real, actual rape, not some fat feminist complaining about construction workers catcalling women who are not fat or a woman regretting cheating on her boyfriend. Any player with even a modicum of game knows you don't molest unconscious women. That's disgusting.

WE know that, but the responses in this thread seem to infer that much of the readership of this board thinks that it's fine, which I find highly disturbing. But hey I can only take this board in small doses lately because of the negativity and wack jobs that have permeated through the ranks.

Let's say this happened to a female family member or maybe your girlfriend/wife, the guy has this kids story, what would you think?

I've been to a lot of frat parties back in the day. Yes, girls go there to hook up, yes there is binge drinking, and the lines become blurred.

Even if the girl consented then passed out behind a dumpster and a guy decided to 'keep going' I consider him a pos with no morals or integrity whatsoever.

Post: #273

Wrote a piece about this; couldn't have done it without all the fact-finding that you guys did. Thanks.

In my view, what's most important isn't the case itself; whatever happened, it's an isolated incident. What's important is the fallout from this; the shibboleths; I wouldn't be surprised if they start using this against Trump.

Concluding portion from my article follows:

Qui Bono?

Dauber might be the one taking charge of promoting this story, but she’s not without allies, even if they’ve never met. Her advocacy aligns with the interests of many powerful people.

Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook have a vested interest in seeing this story promoted. Whistle blowers have recently exposed what many have suspected for a while, that companies such as Facebook, Google, Youtube, and Twitter have been massaging the news feeds, injecting stories that promote the Left, while censoring and no-platforming people on the Right. They’ve been working hand-in-hand with the European Union, to promote its unaccountable state bureaucracy, at the expense of self-determination for its constituent states. “Empowering” women by making them dependent upon a state apparatus is a major part of their goals, and this story feeds into that.

Then you have the upcoming Presidential election.

As absurd as it sounds, this story might just be the piece of rhetoric that undermines Trump. Hillary Clinton has climbed on board with the “Believe All Women” crowd (which is ironic, given her history of threatening and blackmailing those who accused her husband of raping them), and she is networking with those who are promoting the media hysterics. Simultaneously, she’s promoting the image of Trump as a Nazi, because of his German heritage, which is then used by the mob to justify further acts of violence against his supporters.

Nazis and Rapists are groups that we’re all allowed to hate, after all.

Is Donald Trump a Crypto-Nazi rape-advocate?

When did you stop beating your wife?

The constant promotion of this story across all news channels, the viral boost being offered by Facebook and Twitter, and the universal condemnation by those on both the Left and the Right, has set up a dialogue where there is only one right answer: Listen and Believe. Anything short of that will be interpreted as supporting rape, victim blaming, and White male nepotism.

Consider for a moment some recent stories which aren’t being looped on repeat by the mainstream media:

19 girls burned to death by ISIS for refusing to become sex slaves
German women afraid of reporting rapists due to political correctness
Muslim refugee “rape spree” on New Years Eve in Germany
Rotherham child sexual abuse ignored by police

Each of these stories is downright horrific, far worse than what Emily Doe suffered, and yet they’ve received nowhere near the same sort of air-time; in many cases the media seems to have intentionally buried them. That’s because they all suggest a narrative that the mainstream doesn’t want to endorse; facts and statistics be damned, the biggest threat to Peace in Our Time is dastardly White men!

This is not an accident; this is not a result of ideological bias; this is not a case of “Man Bites Dog” making a better headline; what we are seeing is intentional, organized, and very well funded.

Brock Turner could be as guilty as the day is long; he could be a serial predator who gets off on abusing drunk women; his friends and family could all be naive fools who bought into his fake persona, and the Judge could be a misogynistic Good Old Boy who thinks a woman should be forced to marry her rapist. Even if all of that were true, it doesn’t explain, nor does it justify, the prominence this story has achieved. Even if you believe the worst about everyone involved, this is still nothing more than an isolated event; one creepy college kid, and one crooked judge, neither of which demonstrates systemic misogyny or oppression.

In fact, the reaction of the two Swedes who intervened proves that their isn’t a campus rape culture.

The only systemic oppression is that coming from the Left; the silencing of conservative voices, the elimination of tenure, the promotion of mob violence over the rule of law: there is an organized, totalitarian movement here in the West, and it’s not the peaceful attendees of Trump rallies who are aping the tactics of the Brown Shirts.

The story is the story. Only Turner will ever truly know whether he is guilty or innocent; for the rest of us, their drunken fumbling is ultimately irrelevant – except that it isn’t. Because it’s a story, it’s a story. Suggest he might be innocent, and you support rape. Suggest that affirmative consent is problematic, and you support rape. Remain silent – and you support rape! There is only one acceptable shibboleth, and that is to condemn him as a vile rapist, even if he was never even accused of committing rape in the first place.

This is the conversation you are allowed to have. Try and talk about anything else, and, well…

When did you stop beating your wife???

Post: #274

(06-18-2016 05:24 PM)Neo Wrote:  WE know that, but the responses in this thread seem to infer that much of the readership of this board thinks that it's fine, which I find highly disturbing. But hey I can only take this board in small doses lately because of the negativity and wack jobs that have permeated through the ranks.

Let's say this happened to a female family member or maybe your girlfriend/wife, the guy has this kids story, what would you think?

I've been to a lot of frat parties back in the day. Yes, girls go there to hook up, yes there is binge drinking, and the lines become blurred.

Even if the girl consented then passed out behind a dumpster and a guy decided to 'keep going' I consider him a pos with no morals or integrity whatsoever.

Yeah, we must've read different threads. What I've seen is one side where people assume the story--which is pretty fucking shaky given the fact that it's a narrative constructed after the fact from a pile of circumstantial and extrapolated evidence--is true and judging the kid on that, and one side expressing skepticism because we can see that it is shaky.

As LOZ keeps asking, where's the evidence? You know, real evidence, not interpretations of circumstance colored by whether or not you think the kid is a douchebag.

Post: #275

(06-18-2016 05:24 PM)Neo Wrote:  Let's say this happened to a female family member or maybe your girlfriend/wife, the guy has this kids story, what would you think?

"Your wife"/"your sister"/"your daughter" appeals are the worst kind of white-knighting demagoguery. They are also exceptionally effective and the reason that men make terrible jurors in sex crime cases. All you need to do is tell your average white-knighting dolt: "just think, what if this was your wife/sister/daughter..." and he has but one thought in his mind: hang the bastard from the nearest tree. Incidentally, that is precisely how actual lynch mobs would come about in the old South.

That kind of rhetoric is befitting of a sleazebag white-knighting politician like Joe Biden who wrote a crocodile tear soaked "open letter" to the "courageous" female in this case, prattling about his "righteous anger" and encouraging more plans to fuck with the lives of normal men. I don't like seeing it on this forum.

For what it's worth, if my apocryphal female relative went to a frat party, got black-out drunk, left the party with some dude, and was fingered by him behind a dumpster either before or after passing out from drunkenness, I would have nothing whatsoever to say to her, or about the matter. Sluts will be sluts and that is fine with me and none of my business. I would certainly not be shedding any tears about that perfect little angel or calling for the guy's head.

Today's society is completely out of control with its worship and sacralization of women, and said women are even more out of control in their enjoyment of absolute and untrammeled power and privilege. The 'sphere in general, and this forum in particular, may be wrong about some things; but that is one thing it's dead right about -- and if anything, it understates the reality. For my part, I see no reason not to call it for what it is. It is only likely to get worse and more extreme in the foreseeable future, so everyone might as well understand this and make of it what they will.