Post: #26

(09-20-2018 01:48 AM)MrLemon Wrote:  I would like to humbly suggest that the title of this thread be changed to "Another example of how the United States is already a de-facto police state".

Because guys, these kind of stings happen every day, a hundred times a day, across the USA. There is absolutely nothing new or special about this guy getting entrapped, except it happened to be interesting enough that the press reported it.

This happens all the time. You just don't know it's happening because it's not being reported, because the people reporting don't want anybody to know about it. And anyway, the average American citizen is now a bloodthirsty Feminist hater who wants to see their fellow citizens (especially men) do jail time.

The United States is 100% in the grips of prosecutors and judges and hateful lesbian cops who are out of control. Nobody is limiting or controlling their power in any way. The can do anything they want to white males.

They can steal your cash and never give it back, using it to pay themselves bonuses. It's called civil forfeiture and it's unstoppable.

They can set up stings to arrest otherwise honest men by having 16 year old girls pretend to be 18. There is no defense. No judge will save you...the judges are lesbians who want to destroy men, or they are getting payoffs from the other lawyers.

You will not get a trial. Nobody gets trials any more. Your friends and family won't mourn you. They don't care.

It's not just a blip or a trend. It is full-on police state and it's accelerating. The Unites States system of laws has been corrupted and it's not going to get better.

Trump can't stop it, even if he wants to. Pence wants to make it worse.

The usa has 1% of it's population in jail. Amazing when you think about it. The highest rate in the world and probably the highest rate of any society ever.

Post: #27

These statutory rape laws have been around for a long time and they are heavily enforced against men. They are no joke and they vary from state to state but they are definitive and they are clear.

Cernovich had some twitter threads about it. He is 100% liable. She said she was 18? Doesn’t matter. The website I met her on requires that she be 18 to whore on it? Doesn’t matter. She showed me her ID and it looked real and it said the was 18? Nope. The feds set me up because of my 1st and 2nd Amendment activism? True but still doesn’t matter.

He apparently went to Taiwan which to my knowledge doesn’t have an extradition treaty. If he’s a valuable target, which he could be they may send him back.

If he did go to trial, his best bet would be to have someone pull a jury nullification. I would.

If in any doubt, walk out.

Post: #28

(09-19-2018 10:11 PM)Bill Brasky Wrote:  Sexual assault is extremely hard to disprove but can destroy in an instant. The next thing will be planting CP on comps of deep state enemies via backdoors built into the operating systems. And having that kind of physical evidence will not be he said she said. And don’t think for a second they wouldn’t go that low. Look how the 17 year old is already being referred to as a child. I’m the eyes of the law, she is a child. Scary shit.

They would absolutely go that low....if they could.

Planning and executing something like this without leaving any trace is complex and difficult, and most deep state operatives aren't going to risk it unless they have an ultra high value target (Trump, Julian Assange, 3D gun guy, etc). A lot of moving pieces have to operate like clockwork to convincingly frame someone for a crime. Think about how Russian collusion is falling apart as a sham setup, or how the false rape allegations against Kavanaugh are imploding right now. Anything less than perfection, and the scrutiny of the internet means a large chunk of people will deduce what actually happened.

Where do you get the girl? How do you ensure that neither she or her handlers screw up? How do you lure the target into it?

Which brings me to another point, the Deep State has to take care of "loose ends" once everything is wrapped up. The girl prostitute in this case should really watch her back, since she is officially a "loose end" at this point.

As far as computer crimes go, while it would be easy to upload material to someone's computer, what if the accused is willing to spend >$100K to prove they did not download it? What if their ISP gets subpoenaed and the records show they never ever visited a site where it was available? I am not an expert at all, but I suspect it's more difficult than you'd think to plant something, and make it look exactly like that individual downloaded it purposely (I could also be completely, totally wrong). That's the other thing, you would really need to establish a pattern of behavior to nail someone, meaning that a couple files aren't going to do it. This is why when true pervs get arrested for this, they have thousands of images. It's a slam dunk for the police, who have an undeniable pattern of behavior, even if the perv was relatively sophisticated using VPNs or Tor.

Final comment: in a nation that understood freedom and valued privacy, it would be absolutely illegal for the government to monitor your web traffic, phone calls, etc, without extremely good cause to do so. As a result, bullshit setups and hoaxes would be impossible. Sadly, we are absolutely in a Diet Coke type police state, ready soon to graduate to the full calorie, more flavorful version.

Post: #29

(09-19-2018 02:49 PM)Cr33pin Wrote:  What a crock of shit... this girl is signed up on a website that is supposed to be for 18+ only. In a fair and just world there should be no charges brought up here unless they have text evidence where she told him she was under 18 and he still went through with the transaction. In a fair and just world there would be some kind of charge brought up against the girl for impersonating a adult on a prostitution website.

In a fair and just world..

Dare to dream my friend.

Post: #30

Jesus, this is a setup if ever there was one.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018...pper-legs/

The guys in Taiwan, if he's extradited it's an even bigger setup.

This part makes me sick:

Quote:The girl's parents also allowed the police to search the girl's iPhone.

That's a nice way of saying the parents consented to allow their daughter to be used in this manner. Too bad her name will never be released so somebody can pull the parents criminal history.

Also, notice the affidavit doesn't say who reached out to who.

I didn't know who this guy was until I read this. I googled, and after what this dude's been through he'd be way to smart to knowingly hook it knowing the girls underage.

None the less, no hooker you drop off at Whataburger is worth 500.

Aloha!

Post: #31

A 17 year old is a child...until they commit a bad enough offence. Then nobody has a problem walking them to the gas chamber.

If she never admitted to being “under 17” then I don’t see how he can be prosecuted.

If he knew, then he’s a dumb ass and a creep but if he thought she was 18, she presented herself as 18 and was on a site that you need to be 18 to be on... he didn’t knowingly do anything wrong.

That should matter, though it won’t.

Post: #32

(09-20-2018 05:20 AM)SeaFM Wrote:  A 17 year old is a child...until they commit a bad enough offence. Then nobody has a problem walking them to the gas chamber.

If she never admitted to being “under 17” then I don’t see how he can be prosecuted.

If he knew, then he’s a dumb ass and a creep but if he thought she was 18, she presented herself as 18 and was on a site that you need to be 18 to be on... he didn’t knowingly do anything wrong.

That should matter, though it won’t.

You're right, it won't matter. He might be able to persuade a jury that he didn't know what was going on, but he won't get a jury. Nobody gets a jury. He'll get just a judge, who will probably be a female judge, who will throw the book at him. Felony, 5+ years in jail, and he'll never work, rent an apartment, or get a passport. He can't travel elsewhere and start over. He can't get married. He can't have children. Ever.

When you say "she appeared to be 18" you miss the point. The police know this. THEY ARRANGED IT or allowed it to happen on purpose. They intentionally get 17 year olds to pretend to be 18 year olds. It's entrapment, and it's 100% intentional. They know the guy isn't intentionally a child rapist. Their intent is to destroy him, not to do justice.

It's the same with civil forfeiture. When they steal 20,000 cash from some guy who'd driving through town, they are fully aware that he's not a criminal or a drug dealer. They believe him when he says "I'm taking the cash to buy a car from (whatever) Ford". They steal the money anyway because they are corrupt cops.

Every single cop, prosecutor, and judge in the USA is effectively corrupt. They are all dirty, all the time. The entire system is dirty.

Amazing that 99.9% of US citizens are utterly unwilling to believe all this, even when it's been staring them in the face for years.

Police state.

Are they watching your posts here on Rooshvforum? Oh yeah.

Post: #33

While I'm not a fan of prostitution period, if this girl lied about her age, why is he in trouble? Since when should a defendant have to defend himself against age of consent B.S. unless the girl in question looked massively underage, as in she doesn't even resemble an adult woman? It just amazes me that a man has to defend himself against a lie that someone else started. How much you want to bet that this "counselor" for the girl is a rabid anti-2nd Amendment type who jumped on the opportunity to take down a political opponent? Cody should have been a hell of a lot smarter than this, but it isn't the first time a man got taken down by thinking with his small head instead of his big one.

Post: #34

Cody Wilson is also the founder of the very poorly named Hatreon, the alternative to Patreon, Kickstarter, and GoFundMe.

Post: #35

He should have got a $400 economy ticket on copa airlines and had fun with the remaining $100.

Also, we need to ban sexual assault rifles.

Post: #36

(09-20-2018 12:37 PM)John Michael Kane Wrote:  While I'm not a fan of prostitution period, if this girl lied about her age, why is he in trouble? Since when should a defendant have to defend himself against age of consent B.S. unless the girl in question looked massively underage, as in she doesn't even resemble an adult woman? It just amazes me that a man has to defend himself against a lie that someone else started. How much you want to bet that this "counselor" for the girl is a rabid anti-2nd Amendment type who jumped on the opportunity to take down a political opponent? Cody should have been a hell of a lot smarter than this, but it isn't the first time a man got taken down by thinking with his small head instead of his big one.

Right, especially when it's documented. I get the gray area with who to believe. But this is easy... he thought she was of age, and it's documented.

That said...learn a lesson here guys. Honeypot or not, women don't want to know you're a "big deal".

This shit reminds me of The Gulag Archipelago.

Post: #37

The reason why he is fucked is due to "strict liability ". Strict liability means that if he did in fact fuck a 16 year old where the law says 18 is the cutoff , you are liable. Even if she steals her older sister birth certificate and social security card and gets a genuine state issued Id that says 18 -you are still liable for statutory rape and soliciting a minor.

Post: #38

^^ I'd never heard of "strict liability ".

This literally means any legal hetero male in the US has a noose around his neck. Bone-chilling.

+1 from me

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_liability

Post: #39

(09-20-2018 01:02 PM)Atlanta Man Wrote:  The reason why he is fucked is due to "strict liability ". Strict liability means that if he did in fact fuck a 16 year old where the law says 18 is the cutoff , you are liable. Even if she steals her older sister birth certificate and social security card and gets a genuine state issued Id that says 18 -you are still liable for statutory rape and soliciting a minor.

So many guys are such lambs being led to the slaughter with these canny teen babes anyway. I remember a MySpace shakedown a while back where this sixteen year old chick managed to get a hold of perfect I.D.s, and looked older, and when it came to manipulating people was a Jedi master.

She seduced and blackmailed guy after guy, and the dummies kept getting exposed, and it was obvious they were dealing with a little sociopath, but the judge's hands were tied, and he just kept sentencing the guys.

I can even say, as a former stepdad of a teen girl, that these kids had manipulative chops that would spin my head, and I am not even talking about sexual stuff necessarily.

My stepdaughter would have these packs of friends over and I can tell you this, they were always pushing boundaries in one way or another. Can they talk us into buying alcohol, can they get away with being topless in the backyard, can they talk about subjects with adults that they shouldn't be?

At least one of them, but sometimes a few, and sometimes all of them, and we could have up to 12 teen girls in our house, were always watching you, throwing out some scandalous thing or another, seeing how you react. Could they embarrass you? Could they make you run away? Could they turn you on? Could they make you self conscious? And if they could, how could they use it to their advantage. You could be minding your own business in the kitchen, and some girl wanders in, saying "What you making?" but really seeing what happens if she presses her full body hard up against yours.

Think about it. You want to be polite, so telling them to back off might seem to be rude. But if you don't say anything, than the two of you have had a secret moment, and she can look knowingly at you from now on.

On minute you are minding your own business in your own house, and the next you are calculating furiously, what the hell do I do here? What is my strategy?

(Run away! was my strategy, it turns out.)

Pushing boundaries of any sort they can think of. Playing on your politeness and willingness to smooth things over, on your basic decency. Always watching you, sizing you up, assessing you.

A sleepover for teens at our house was an emotional bootcamp, with all sorts of hidden social landmines. I usually just hid in the garage.

I look back on it and am amazed at how ill prepared I was for dealing with female bullshit, and thank my lucky stars I never got manipulated into anything, or even accused of something baseless by any one of them.

Playing dumb is good too. Misinterpreting everything you don't want to deal with. Using their own tools against them, basically.

It always makes me laugh when they talk about the power differential between a man in his thirties and a teen girl. Yeah, some guys know what's up, and how to manipulate people. But so many men are open books, naive travelers in the woods of social dynamics.

And these girls have already been sharpening their knives for years, practicing on daddy.

A lot of guys are sitting ducks emotionally already, having been trained by their mother and their sisters to be just the right kind of mug, but looking at this Wilson guy, throw some sexual attraction into the mix, and the results aren't pretty.

And getting the book thrown at you on top of it! It pays to be hyper-vigilant these days for sure.

Post: #40

There is a lot of discussion about whether the guy knew or should have known about her age, apart from the prostitution angle.

And most guys are right to have that as their first thought, because most crimes require an "intent" component, called mens rea.

This is a complicated subject, but trying to keep it as basic as possible:

mens rea is, the intention or knowledge of wrongdoing that constitutes part of a crime, as opposed to the action or conduct of the accused.

Criminal law generally recognizes 4 types of mens rea

1. Purpose: Acting with the intention of a desired outcome. (ex. a hitman lays in wait and shoots his known target in the head)
[/i]
2. Knowledge: Acting with the knowledge of an outcome (ex. hitman plants a bomb and takes out an entire office building to kill one target - he acted with intent to the target, and knowledge to the other people in the office buidling)

3. Recklessness: Acting without regard to likely consequences (ex. man tests out new gun in residential neighborhood and bullet flies through neighbors window and kills neighbor.)

4. Negligence: Acting where a person should have known of the risks (ex. man puts loaded gun on dash with safety off and goes driving around. He gets into a minor fender bender but gun goes off and kills pedestrian.)

Kate Steinle's killer got off because the jury believed his defense that the gun was wrapped and he didn't know what it was and it went off (or something like that)

"strict liability" crimes are those in which there is no requirement for mens rea[i], meaning the perpetrator can be found guilty even if he was not (1) Purposeful, (2) Knowing, (3) Reckless, or even (4) Negligent.*

Applied here, it doesn't matter if this guy didn't intend to have sex with an underage female, didn't think she "looked" young, should have asked if she was 18, or even if she had pulled out i.d. or even a fake passport.

If she can be proved to be even one day underage, he is guilty guilty guilty if they had sex (or any other act required for statutory rape). This of course can lead to absurd results, but our government says that putting a guy away for even a lying 17 year old girl with a fake i.d. is worth the "societal cost" of a 30 year old man sleeping with a 17 year old girl.

*There is at least one jurisdiction that has a "good faith" defense that they applied to some porn operators who were duped into filming underage.

Post: #41

^
^
So I guess "I just trusted her not to lie about something important" won't be good enough in this case.

Post: #42

(09-20-2018 01:32 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  My stepdaughter would have these packs of friends over and I can tell you this, they were always pushing boundaries in one way or another. Can they talk us into buying alcohol, can they get away with being topless in the backyard, can they talk about subjects with adults that they shouldn't be?

Wait, what?

I would be mildly terrified if I was a 30-40ish man and had those girls at my house. Maybe it was different back then? But these days, you would be basically sitting on a landmine.

Amazing how some teen girls are totally naive, while others are the most conniving and dangerous individuals known to man.

Post: #43

(09-20-2018 02:17 PM)eljeffster Wrote:  There is a lot of discussion about whether the guy knew or should have known about her age, apart from the prostitution angle.

And most guys are right to have that as their first thought, because most crimes require an "intent" component, called mens rea.

This is a complicated subject, but trying to keep it as basic as possible:

mens rea is, the intention or knowledge of wrongdoing that constitutes part of a crime, as opposed to the action or conduct of the accused.

Criminal law generally recognizes 4 types of mens rea

1. Purpose: Acting with the intention of a desired outcome. (ex. a hitman lays in wait and shoots his known target in the head)
[/i]
2. Knowledge: Acting with the knowledge of an outcome (ex. hitman plants a bomb and takes out an entire office building to kill one target - he acted with intent to the target, and knowledge to the other people in the office buidling)

3. Recklessness: Acting without regard to likely consequences (ex. man tests out new gun in residential neighborhood and bullet flies through neighbors window and kills neighbor.)

4. Negligence: Acting where a person should have known of the risks (ex. man puts loaded gun on dash with safety off and goes driving around. He gets into a minor fender bender but gun goes off and kills pedestrian.)

Kate Steinle's killer got off because the jury believed his defense that the gun was wrapped and he didn't know what it was and it went off (or something like that)

"strict liability" crimes are those in which there is no requirement for mens rea[i], meaning the perpetrator can be found guilty even if he was not (1) Purposeful, (2) Knowing, (3) Reckless, or even (4) Negligent.*

Applied here, it doesn't matter if this guy didn't intend to have sex with an underage female, didn't think she "looked" young, should have asked if she was 18, or even if she had pulled out i.d. or even a fake passport.

If she can be proved to be even one day underage, he is guilty guilty guilty if they had sex (or any other act required for statutory rape). This of course can lead to absurd results, but our government says that putting a guy away for even a lying 17 year old girl with a fake i.d. is worth the "societal cost" of a 30 year old man sleeping with a 17 year old girl.

*There is at least one jurisdiction that has a "good faith" defense that they applied to some porn operators who were duped into filming underage.

Thank you, this is an awesome overview.

But I'd like to point out, that even for crimes that are *not* strict liability, you are still screwed, because to defend yourself, you need to get a jury trial. And almost nobody, certainly not shrubs like us, gets jury trials these days.

Also you need a judge that is competent and honest. Bzzzzzt! Wrong.

Also you need cops that *don't* invent evidence. Bzzzzt! You'e screwed.

The system is fundamentally corrupt, so all the constitutional "rights" and legal "rights" you think you have do not actually exist except in your mind.

This is what is so hard to convey to people in today's world. They have a tv-narrative view of how things happen. Then they find out that their tv-narrative is utterly wrong.

"oh, I'm innocent, somebody will realize it and I'll be released at the last moment". -- Bzzzzt!

"I have a rare deadly disease. I'll go the hospital and some dedicated brilliant-yet-cranky doctor will work overtime to discover what's wrong with me" --- Bzzzzt!

Post: #44

(09-20-2018 03:54 PM)jeffreyjerpp Wrote:  

(09-20-2018 01:32 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  My stepdaughter would have these packs of friends over and I can tell you this, they were always pushing boundaries in one way or another. Can they talk us into buying alcohol, can they get away with being topless in the backyard, can they talk about subjects with adults that they shouldn't be?

Wait, what?

I would be mildly terrified if I was a 30-40ish man and had those girls at my house. Maybe it was different back then? But these days, you would be basically sitting on a landmine.

Amazing how some teen girls are totally naive, while others are the most conniving and dangerous individuals known to man.

Wasn't that long ago. Yeah, it was terrifying, but I was pre-red pill, and I just pushed all realthoughts down, and gave people the benefit of the doubt. I assumed everything that made me uncomfortable was unintended, unconscious, or just me being paranoid.

It wasn't till later that I figured out what was going on.

I walked to the backdoor, saw a flash of skin, and turned and bolted inside to tell my partner to tell them to put clothes on. Terrifying.

I look back now and think that I was tiptoeing through life at the time, trying to keep everyone happy. Something weird comes up, you deal with it, go straight into denial, and carry on as if it didn't happen.

Now, in retrospect, I also see that I was scared of my stepdaughter, and disciplined her less than my stepson, because in the back of my brain was the fear of a false accusation. It wasn't conscious though. It was like you'd think something like, man, if she got mad at me, she could make something up, and I would be in big trouble.

But then, being programmed by the 20th century, I would berate myself for having such terrible thoughts about my poor stepdaughter. How can you think such a thing, you horrible man?

In retrospect, she would have been perfectly capable if mad enough. It was just that if I had admitted that to myself I would have had to break up with my partner and leave, so it was pretty much an unthinkable thought.

And besides, I am just focusing on the nightmare aspects of the situation for the sake of this post. Most of the time the girls were okay, and they were quieter than a house of teenage boys, and didn't break anything, and cleaned up after themselves. That was part of what was scary. They could just be a houseful of normal kids, and then out of the blue, one of them would do something that would freak you out.

I would say only one or two of them were evil, and the rest were just testing boundaries, but they did it with such a disregard for the consequences, not to them, but to us, that their very casual attitude was in itself scary.

I came home one time and my partner was heading out to buy some beer for a house of fifteen year olds, and I took her aside and asked her what she was doing, and she said that the way they asked her made her feel all right about it. (She was European, so drinking age wasn't an issue to her personally.)

Trying to keep my temper, I said, look, it is more of an issue of the law than of how you feel about it. I tried to paint a picture for her to wake her up. I said, all it takes is one of the kids to tell their parents, and that parent gets upset and goes to the police, and then you are the creepy mom in the mugshot in the paper, who invites kids over to her house and plies them with alcohol. You are that person.

She was in the social services and when I put it that way she got it.

So they worked on men and women equally.

Also a bunch of false adjudication, like one of my stepdaughter's friends would accuse my stepson of stealing something from her, and expecting me to make reparations for it. There was later evidence, I found, that the two girls had been basically torturing the poor kid all day and he did it in retaliation. What do you know. She left that part out.

Just seeing what they could get.

The only positive is that even though I was blue pilled at the time, it was like deep inside I had a red pilled alpha dude who would come out and deal with things if they went too far off the rails. I felt bad about being so authoritarian at the time, but still I acted on what I actually saw, and did what I had to do.

That's part of why I have hope for men, even the blue pilled ones. I think there is a red pilled shit kicker deep inside them that will come out when they fight back against their programming.

If I had to do it again, I would have lectured them with ground rules from the start, and had a no tolerance policy (go home immediately) for breaking any rules, and wouldn't have worried at all about being a nice guy. I used to make jokes and stuff when picking them up and dropping them off. No more. No interesting conversation.I would have been the guy they didn't want to piss off, who they left alone. The stern man of the house. Shut anything inappropriate down immediately.

I dodged that bullet though.

Post: #45

(09-19-2018 02:35 PM)Baphomet Wrote:  Could have been entirely avoided had he spent $13.00 on a book called "Game." This is what happens without it.

Yeah because prostitutes are the only ones who lie about their age. A 17 year old girl would NEVER lie when a high-status guy invites her out.

Post: #46

The affidavit:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/...t-Ars.html

I believe the unnamed "counselor" is the lynch-pin.

Post: #47

Here's a stream where a lawyer talks about the whole situation and Cody's options, his only real defense is claiming he never had sex with her.





(1:46:46) ^

Post: #48

I'm sure the just and fair american court system would sentence him to no less than 30 years of imprisonment with hardened gang bangers of a different ethnicity.

Amerika Fukk Yeah!

In a similar case in France, two famous footballers (Ribery and Benzema) were found not guilty of paying teen prostitute Zahia Dehar repeatedly when she was 17, cause it was found they couldn't have known she wasn't 18.



She went on to have a very successful modelling and business career.

The girl in question:





The US has possibly the most anti-male laws in existence and should check itself before it makes fun of Sweden.

Post: #49

(09-21-2018 07:52 AM)Max RNR Wrote:  The affidavit:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/...t-Ars.html

I believe the unnamed "counselor" is the lynch-pin.

Also:

https://www.facebook.com/AustinPolice/vi...258411966/

Post: #50

"The US has possibly the most anti-male laws in existence and should check itself before it makes fun of Sweden."

In Texas, stat rape is strict liability with IIRC, a two year minimum. In Canada it is a hybrid offense (basically misdemeanor or felony) with a minimum 90 days or one year. However, mistake of age is a defense if you took "all reasonable steps" to ascertain their age. Plus, the age of consent is 16.