Post: #1

This is a fascinating case legally. How can a woman who asks to be taken against her will later claim she was raped, because you took her against her will?


http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/2011/08/...z1VVB3lY9k

Post: #2

(08-19-2011 02:08 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  This is a fascinating case legally. How can a woman who asks to be taken against her will later claim she was raped, because you took her against her will?


http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/2011/08/...z1VVB3lY9k

Didn't read the article, but sounds like a classic case of borderline personality disorder. Most women with that disorder were sexually abused as children, they tend to be extremely wild sexual and enjoy dominant sex (rape fetish, choking, etc.).... However, they at their core, feel like victims, and are prone to extreme changes of their psychological/emotional state. In other words they can suddenly go bat shit crazy. Gmac's story of his date with the "bat shit crazy chick" is probably a perfect example.

Post: #3

Funny, I just saw this. Crime and Federalism?

Quote:Hanlon said two of the victims who came forward to cops had more than one encounter with Hoffman. One of the victims wrote an email to Hoffman stating, "I read your ad and sounds so hot," court documents show.

Emphasis added.

The girls *came back*. This isn't rape, this is regret. So you're left with one possible victim.

The hardcore fetishists won't stop unless a mutually agreed upon safeword is used. No matter what happens, they go on unless the safeword is said. The whole screaming and crying is part of the game. I'm guessing Hoffman didn't establish one. Put it this way: if you were a woman who does this regularly, how would you stop it? Behaving like a real rape victim would only goad him on.

Quote:Didn't read the article, but sounds like a classic case of borderline personality disorder. Most women with that disorder were sexually abused as children, they tend to be extremely wild sexual and enjoy dominant sex (rape fetish, choking, etc.).... However, they at their core, feel like victims, and are prone to extreme changes of their psychological/emotional state. In other words they can suddenly go bat shit crazy. Gmac's story of his date with the "bat shit crazy chick" is probably a perfect example.

Many, if not most, girls have rape fantasies. But almost always, they would only do it with a guy they're already sleeping with, and thus trust. You nailed it, the issue here is that the girls are crazy. Also, from reading Nancy Friday's books, it's clear that women may have a fantasy, yet have no desire to make it happen.

Post: #4

for feminists:

buyer's remorse = rape

Post: #5

Dude was a 51 year old lawyer pulling crazy shit on younger women. He got game.

Victim: 36-year-old East Bay woman
Date: March
Charges: Two counts of forcible oral copulation, one count of sexual battery

Victim: 19-year-old San Francisco woman
Date: June
Charges: One count of rape, one count of forcible oral copulation, one count of sexual battery

Victim: 25-year-old East Bay woman
Date: August
Charges: One count assault with intent to commit rape, one count of sexual battery, one count of false imprisonment


Read more at the San Francisco Examiner: http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/crime/20...z1VVKhMHka

Post: #6

Jezebel's got it covered. Commenter that goes by the name "Uncommon Whore" got mad Hoffman called her a slut.

Can't make this shit up.

Jezebel Wrote:There's always a measure of personal risk taken in making a sexual assault claim, but it's inarguably bigger given that the social judgment these women would face, even in San Francisco, for looking for "rough sex" online and going to a stranger's house for it.

Translation: This woman is a hero for accusing a man of rape, and for trawling for sex online, and going right up to a man's apartment door for an immediate bang. She deserves our respect.

Post: #7

This thread is a good argument for secretly video taping your escapades.

Post: #8

(08-19-2011 02:37 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  This thread is a good argument for secretly video taping your escapades.

It saved the guys in Hofstra:

http://federalism.typepad.com/crime_fede...lm-it.html

Post: #9

(08-19-2011 02:40 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

(08-19-2011 02:37 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  This thread is a good argument for secretly video taping your escapades.

It saved the guys in Hofstra:

http://federalism.typepad.com/crime_fede...lm-it.html

Check your state laws regarding recording. You can usually record video without audio without the other person's consent.

Post: #10

(08-19-2011 02:47 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  

(08-19-2011 02:40 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

(08-19-2011 02:37 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  This thread is a good argument for secretly video taping your escapades.

It saved the guys in Hofstra:

http://federalism.typepad.com/crime_fede...lm-it.html

Check your state laws regarding recording. You can usually record video without audio with the other person's consent.

http://www.rcfp.org/taping/

In some cases, it's better to have an illegal audio to save your ass from a rape charge.

Post: #11

This thread is a good time to point out the under fucking stupidity of agreeing to this kind of game in America. One of the sadder facts in this country is that even the mere accusation of rape is enough to destroy a man's life. Guilt or innocence don't really come into play really.

I also don't have much sympathy for this guy, a grown man should know better.

Post: #12

Everybody carries a smartphone these days. They all have sound recording functions that can discreetly be turned on. You think a girl will have a problem convincing a jury you raped here after they hear her begging to be torn up in every hole?

Post: #13

(08-19-2011 03:10 PM)Vicious Wrote:  Everybody carries a smartphone these days. They all have sound recording functions that can discreetly be turned on. You think a girl will have a problem convincing a jury you raped here after they hear her begging to be torn up in every hole?

Your assuming that this kind of recording will be allowed into record, and won't be turned against a guy. A few token "no's" and then your all but convicted.

The best strategy is avoidance, there is no shortage of pussy out there.

Post: #14

(08-19-2011 03:59 PM)Wizard Wrote:  

(08-19-2011 03:10 PM)Vicious Wrote:  Everybody carries a smartphone these days. They all have sound recording functions that can discreetly be turned on. You think a girl will have a problem convincing a jury you raped here after they hear her begging to be torn up in every hole?

Your assuming that this kind of recording will be allowed into record, and won't be turned against a guy. A few token "no's" and then your all but convicted.

The best strategy is avoidance, there is no shortage of pussy out there.

Since you're sitting on the recording you have the advantage of reviewing it.

But anyhow, I'm saying this is something that can be used for EVERY encounter. Gmac blogged about your average pick-up heading south recently for example...

Post: #15

(08-19-2011 02:08 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  This is a fascinating case legally. How can a woman who asks to be taken against her will later claim she was raped, because you took her against her will?

I wonder what is behind this case? Think of it, there are probably very few chicks who'd be happy to testify in the court that she responds to such casual encounter Craigslist ads - and be cross-questioned about it by the defense attorney. In such case you can imagine what kind of valid questions the defense attorney might come up with, and it looks quite embarrassing experience.

Post: #16

alcohol is 'yer friend.

Post: #17

(08-19-2011 05:53 PM)oldnemesis Wrote:  

(08-19-2011 02:08 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  This is a fascinating case legally. How can a woman who asks to be taken against her will later claim she was raped, because you took her against her will?

I wonder what is behind this case? Think of it, there are probably very few chicks who'd be happy to testify in the court that she responds to such casual encounter Craigslist ads - and be cross-questioned about it by the defense attorney. In such case you can imagine what kind of valid questions the defense attorney might come up with, and it looks quite embarrassing experience.

The first thing we have to remember is that this is San Francisco, one of the biggest bastions of feminism in the country. The local populace isn't exactly keen to buy the whole "she really wanted it argument", and second you have to look at the guy in question. A lawyer doesn't exactly earn him many sympathy points with anybody.

Also I'm almost positive bringing up a woman's prior sexual history is illegal, and wouldn't be admitted into the trial. That is a guess, I could be wrong of course.

All in all let's just hope that there is one man on the jury who is capable of giving this guy a fair shake.

Post: #18

I put up an ad on craigslist like this just a minute ago to see if I get any responses. Will be interesting.

Post: #19

(08-19-2011 11:04 PM)Wizard Wrote:  The first thing we have to remember is that this is San Francisco, one of the biggest bastions of feminism in the country. The local populace isn't exactly keen to buy the whole "she really wanted it argument", and second you have to look at the guy in question. A lawyer doesn't exactly earn him many sympathy points with anybody.

It still doesn't answer my question: why? I mean, a chick read the Craigslist looking for such ads. She emailed the dude, probably went through a few exchanges. Then she went to the dude's house where he did what he described and what she apparently wanted. So I see a few possibilities there:

- It was really a rape, i.e. a chick at some point decided she had enough, but the dude didn't let her go. Maybe he forced her to eat shit, or had a small dick whatever.

- It was a blackmail attempt, and the dude didn't want to pay.

Quote:Also I'm almost positive bringing up a woman's prior sexual history is illegal, and wouldn't be admitted into the trial. That is a guess, I could be wrong of course.

I see quite a few questions which would be hard to dismiss as irrelevant, and tough to answer. If she met him in a bar and he asked her to go to his place to see a movie and they ended up having sex, I could easily see how this would qualify as rape. But it is not what happened:

1. She was checking Craigslist "casual encounters" section looking for casual sex, and she filtered out a very specific ad. There may be a lot of questions related to what she was actually looking for, and what she was actually expecting. Those were consensual acts from her side, and I'm pretty sure the court would be interested to hear what she was expecting to actually get from someone posting such a sex ad. There may be other possibilities, for example asking if she ever responded to similar ads in past.

2. I'm sure there were a few back-and-forth - the dude would probably clarify in further details the planned activities, to ensure there is no misunderstanding. I see no reason for him not to do it, after all he's a lawyer. This is also something to ask questions about, since it may reveal whether the consent was given. If it was, this dude was actually in a much better position than you or me fucking a bar whore - he had her consent in writing. Since it cannot be rape if there was consent, it would raise a lot of question at which point this consent was removed, which would lead to further explanation of what actually happened.

Would be an interesting case to follow up.

Post: #20

(08-21-2011 12:59 AM)oldnemesis Wrote:  

(08-19-2011 11:04 PM)Wizard Wrote:  The first thing we have to remember is that this is San Francisco, one of the biggest bastions of feminism in the country. The local populace isn't exactly keen to buy the whole "she really wanted it argument", and second you have to look at the guy in question. A lawyer doesn't exactly earn him many sympathy points with anybody.

It still doesn't answer my question: why? I mean, a chick read the Craigslist looking for such ads. She emailed the dude, probably went through a few exchanges. Then she went to the dude's house where he did what he described and what she apparently wanted. So I see a few possibilities there:

- It was really a rape, i.e. a chick at some point decided she had enough, but the dude didn't let her go. Maybe he forced her to eat shit, or had a small dick whatever.

- It was a blackmail attempt, and the dude didn't want to pay.

Quote:Also I'm almost positive bringing up a woman's prior sexual history is illegal, and wouldn't be admitted into the trial. That is a guess, I could be wrong of course.

I see quite a few questions which would be hard to dismiss as irrelevant, and tough to answer. If she met him in a bar and he asked her to go to his place to see a movie and they ended up having sex, I could easily see how this would qualify as rape. But it is not what happened:

1. She was checking Craigslist "casual encounters" section looking for casual sex, and she filtered out a very specific ad. There may be a lot of questions related to what she was actually looking for, and what she was actually expecting. Those were consensual acts from her side, and I'm pretty sure the court would be interested to hear what she was expecting to actually get from someone posting such a sex ad. There may be other possibilities, for example asking if she ever responded to similar ads in past.

2. I'm sure there were a few back-and-forth - the dude would probably clarify in further details the planned activities, to ensure there is no misunderstanding. I see no reason for him not to do it, after all he's a lawyer. This is also something to ask questions about, since it may reveal whether the consent was given. If it was, this dude was actually in a much better position than you or me fucking a bar whore - he had her consent in writing. Since it cannot be rape if there was consent, it would raise a lot of question at which point this consent was removed, which would lead to further explanation of what actually happened.

Would be an interesting case to follow up.

I think you're attriubting a lot more credence to the criminal justice system then you should. Consent isn't something that can be given prior to the act, and then not revoked. In the eyes of the law, consent can be revoked at any time.

Also a court won't allow the victim to be placed on trial, and a lot of what you're asking could be seen as hear say, being reasonable has nothing to do with it. The problem with rape cases, is a lot of the time they degenerate down to he said, she said.

I still think this guy was an idiot for answering such an ad, but I just don't know how it will end.