Gung-ho cops side with the rapist, rape victim commits suicide

[Seranthor]

The legal system did its job so well that the girl is DEAD.

How horrible, should we have just convicted and executed the man she accused without a trial? Is that what you are after?

[Doctor Funkenstein]

The legal system seems to be surrounded by a lot of death in your country. It never seems to be the fault of any one in a position of power.

Strangely this does not seem to happen in most other advanced industrialized nations.

Oh really? Are you sure about that? Because those two articles took exactly 5 seconds to find on Google.

[Elim Garak]

The legal system did its job so well that the girl is DEAD.

No woman no cry

[Wilfire]

no woman no cry

No man, no problem - Joseph Stalin

[SherriMayim]

You come across like a guy who is trying to sound edgy in a horribly tragic case (whatever happened).

I'm not inclined to place much faith in your assessment of how a rape victim may behave under extreme stress. You come across as having all the empathetic sensibilities of someone with aspergers syndrome.

Asperger's*

Horribly Tragic Case? Meh.

I would say horribly tragic would be where this one girl in India was raped and disemboweled by six guys.


Megan's case was Nightly Local News at 4.

Maybe you should look at the context of the thread before reading lengthy passages from "Bluffer's guide to the legal system".

I stated my case as to why OJ was not found Guilty Beyond a Reasonable Doubt. You provided no repudiation of it and instead made an attack on my character.

That is called Ad Hominem.

I don't recall making any "cops are evil" statement in this thread. As a non-american I do not use the word "cop". If you are going to misattribute quotes at least make it sound vaguely plausible.

Fair point, allow me to elaborate.

The implication of the article is that they were either unwilling to perform the exam, buried or otherwise subverted the evidence because they feared the consequences of offending a powerful and wealthy man.

When a person is in a position of authority or power and chooses to act against a victim of a crime due to external powers or influence, that sounds cowardly at best, evil at worst.

Given the history of miscarriages of justice in the US and the relative power of affluence to subvert the legal system it would hardly be that surprising frankly.

Your statement here shows a lack of shock for people acting in cowardly/villainous ways and believe it to be a common occurrence for Police to abuse their authority. And abusing authority is generally seen as a 'not nice' thing to do.

Much as the same as a religous official being cleared of rape in a theocracy or a ruling party member in a dictatorship.

Comparing results to a dictatorship can definitely be backed up, our banking officials were definitely let off the hook after causing hundreds of millions of dollars in damages. I think if you wanted to make a better case for your corruption claim you should have started with this.


Anyways from the first two statements, I believe your sentiment to local authorities could be that they are, in general, 'Not Nice.'



So we've cleared up the Ad Hominem attacks, the Police being 'Not Nice', do you have any other baseless claims you want me to correct you on or are we good here?

[THE Bigzoman]

You will notice that the usual suspects imagine that if someone says that it's illegal to have sex with someone who is passed out, THEY ARE FEMINAZIS.

The definition of ''feminazi' sems to be ''any filthy wumin who refuse to sleep with me''

- - - Updated - - -



As opposed as alt right science, AKA, if the accused is not white, call for his lynching, if he is white, send death threats to the victim.

Oh, and let's not forget the charming illusion that if the victim does not look like a Victoria Secret model, she is ''lying'' ''jealous'' or ''TO UGLZ TUH RAPE KEK''. Because I'm sure all the ''alpha'' who post on those threats are desirable...

- - - Updated - - -



Except if a Youtuber with a fedora snap his fingers and give orders to call a completely random women ''a slut''. Then, you have to send her death threats on Twitter, or you are going to lose your manhood.

Answer me

10char.

[Doctor Amadeus]

http://countercurrentnews.com/2017/0...ealthy-rapist/

I predict as this stupid mentality and hate for women finally gets put in check, from the "Let's throw women in prison" for false rape charges, when while it can't be proven she was raped, it isn't proven that the victim was lying.

- - - Updated - - -

You have no proof you aren't Hitler, either.

See how these things go?

If you accuse someone you need a solid argument for it.

Yes you can just as you can refute a one by the same measure.

- - - Updated - - -

So women do not in fact get drunk and claim it was XYZ after that fact? Ever?

Eh, irrelevant, the vast majority do not no! And the reason they don't is because despite the representation of how easy it is to accuse someone of false accusations, it isn't. And some random woman throwing threats towards uber drivers don't count as a fact either.

- - - Updated - - -

How horrible, should we have just convicted and executed the man she accused without a trial? Is that what you are after?

No, but we could have shown as much consideration for the accuser as the accused, despite however much evidence might meet one burden but not another. Casey Anthony is not guilty of first degree murder.

She still killed her kid.


Just as a woman might have been raped, there might not be enough evidence for many reasons to even take it to trial.

[THE Bigzoman]

Didn't some drunk girl actually call the cops on a taxi driver and had to clear his name via tape?

[Doctor Amadeus]

Didn't some drunk girl actually call the cops on a taxi driver and had to clear his name via tape?

Yes, she did, which my point was that she is no more an over all representation of most rape claims, than a woman that woman who claims rape because of regret sex.

There are very different reasons a person might regret sex, doesn't mean it was raped, doesn't mean it wasn't.

I also seen no convincing evidence that is the majority or many rape accusations.

[THE Bigzoman]

Yes, she did, which my point was that she is no more an over all representation of most rape claims, than a woman that woman who claims rape because of regret sex.

There are very different reasons a person might regret sex, doesn't mean it was raped, doesn't mean it wasn't.

I also seen no convincing evidence that is the majority or many rape accusations.

Oh no, it was a side bar thing.

I'm not taking a position here. I don't think false accusations are more prevalent than any other.

Even if we take the best differing stance (that society condemns and stigmatizes the accused regardless of truth), I don't think it's a big enough incentive to tip the scales.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Oh no, it was a side bar thing.

I'm not taking a position here. I don't think false accusations are more prevalent than any other.

Even if we take the best differing stance (that society condemns and stigmatizes the accused regardless of truth), I don't think it's a big enough incentive to tip the scales.

Oh ok gotcha.

Yeah, and that is just as much part of the problem, because I do not like nor agree with accused being guilty until proven innocent either. But that being the what it is, if it was a woman that was accused, I would feel the same about the safety of the man who made the accusation. as well.

[Deleted]

Eh, irrelevant, the vast majority do not no! And the reason they don't is because despite the representation of how easy it is to accuse someone of false accusations, it isn't. And some random woman throwing threats towards uber drivers don't count as a fact either.

Euh no, what is irrelevant is that the vast majority doesn't do it. What is relevant is the fact that they can and do this.
And "some random woman throwing threats towards uber drivers" is a fact as well, its just not a fact that you care to deal with.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Euh no, what is irrelevant is that the vast majority doesn't do it. What is relevant is the fact that they can and do this.
And "some random woman throwing threats towards uber drivers" is a fact as well, its just not a fact that you care to deal with.

Relevant to you and the narrative you project, but it is in the well minority not the majority. We don't craft law exclusively around rarer instances, but instances with the greater impact of harm.

So you are wrong and I am right, even according to the quote right here from you in this post.

The woman made a threat, camera or no camera rape accusations still require evidence and her saying it happened isn't enough. period.

[Deleted]

Relevant to you and the narrative you project, but it is in the well minority not the majority. We don't craft law exclusively around rarer instances, but instances with the greater impact of harm.

So you are wrong and I am right, even according to the quote right here from you in this post.

The woman made a threat, camera or no camera rape accusations still require evidence and her saying it happened isn't enough. period.

That not everyone does it means exactly nothing, what does mean something is that this behavior happens. And yes, we do craft law around rarer instances, that is why the law is so freaking complicated to begin with.

So, that means that you are wrong and im right.

The woman made a threat, the fact that she is able to do this is the problem. The fact that all she needs to do in order to completely ruin some guys life is to cry rape. If it can be shown that someone does this in order to get their way then this needs to be punished severely.

[Doctor Amadeus]

That not everyone does it means exactly nothing

Yes it does, it exactly does, because I am talk about proportion and the law and reality as it relates to the best we as people can do

what does mean something is that this behavior happens. And yes, we do craft law around rarer instances, that is why the law is so freaking complicated to begin with.

Yes rarer that present the greatest harm and honestly even then it's very circumstantial, or does none go fucking missing besides beautiful blue haired blondes?

So, that means that you are wrong and im right.

No it just means you can't make an effective counter argument, and your personal advocacy for women like the woman from the Uber Cab driver representing a significant threat.

The woman made a threat, the fact that she is able to do this is the problem. The fact that all she needs to do in order to completely ruin some guys life is to cry rape. If it can be shown that someone does this in order to get their way then this needs to be punished severely.

Well you conflate one thing for another, no, her threat by itself is in no way actionable in terms of anything to the person she is accusing without evidence period. The fact she might ruin some dudes because she is believed due to a failed process is not proven, not by itself.

You can accuse me of anything you want, seriously anything, guess what, nothing is going to happen to ruin MY life, because you have to prove what you said, and nobody that matters or cares about me, and that I care about would believe you unless there was clear evidence either.

Because I am accountable and responsible for my behavior, and the law work most of the time.


The woman in the uber or anybody who does that should be punished, and it is probably the only thing I will agree with you on, even to the point where I think it is a harm and ignored.

But I am not about to pretend it's a greater harm, but then again I am sure that's my bias.

[Mistame]

Of course the usual suspects...
Okay, usual suspects

Seriously, stop using that phrase. You're using it wrong and it makes your already unintelligible blather sound even that much more stupid.

Yeah, it does because it's bullshit peddled as truth by misogynistic assholes.

Millions of people have sex while drunk monthly without reporting their sex partner for rape yet some misogynistic pieces of shit portrays it as being common that women would report their partner for rape if they had drunk sex.

That's not how that word works.

No indication of consent or non-consent, so there's not exactly a side to take. The police know it's not something that is going to get prosecuted. All the evidence they have is her friend's hearsay comment which isn't worth anything.

Pretty much. :/

It is explicitly misogynistic to say that it's common for women to report their sex partners for rape after having had drunk sex.

Um, no, it's not. Again, that's not how that works.

[Deleted]

Yes it does, it exactly does, because I am talk about proportion and the law and reality as it relates to the best we as people can do

No you are talking nonsense, either something happens or something does not happen. And something is either legal or illegal.

Yes rarer that present the greatest harm and honestly even then it's very circumstantial, or does none go fucking missing besides beautiful blue haired blondes?

What is this for nonsensical rambling?? Fact remains law is made around rare occurrences.

No it just means you can't make an effective counter argument, and your personal advocacy for women like the woman from the Uber Cab driver representing a significant threat.

There is no argument against

So you are wrong and I am right, even according to the quote right here from you in this post.

because it is random rambling, again. You do not point out why you supposedly are right about something, you just state that you are.

Well you conflate one thing for another, no, her threat by itself is in no way actionable in terms of anything to the person she is accusing without evidence period. The fact she might ruin some dudes because she is believed due to a failed process is not proven, not by itself.

You can accuse me of anything you want, seriously anything, guess what, nothing is going to happen to ruin MY life, because you have to prove what you said, and nobody that matters or cares about me, and that I care about would believe you unless there was clear evidence either.

Because I am accountable and responsible for my behavior, and the law work most of the time.


The woman in the uber or anybody who does that should be punished, and it is probably the only thing I will agree with you on, even to the point where I think it is a harm and ignored.

But I am not about to pretend it's a greater harm, but then again I am sure that's my bias.

The problem is that she doesn't need evidence in order to ruin this poor sobs life. All she needs to do is cry rape and the guy will be publicly ousted. There are countless examples of men being falsely accused of rape and had their lives ruined just by the accusation alone. Just look at matrass girl, even when it was proven that the guy didn't do any of it she didn't stop nor was reprimanded in any serious way. Yet he lost his place in that school, his job and is social life all just because she made a claim and was proven wrong about that claim and it was proven that she acted maliciously. Still nothing more then a slap on the wrist.

If i had tits and accused you of rape then you would not be so happy to tell me to accuse you of anything. As you will quickly learn that your employer doesn't give a flying fuck about it not being true, nor will the media or your family.

If you want rape victims to be taken seriously then you need to crack down on false rape accusations hard. If this is not done then you get the boy who cried wolf situation.

[Doctor Amadeus]

No you are talking nonsense, either something happens or something does not happen. And something is either legal or illegal.

No, I am talking about the law, you are talking about an issue you are convinced is a problem, I am not. There isn't a law for everything, because not all incidents in life uncomfortable or terrible as they might be, rise to the level of the most harm.

What is this for nonsensical rambling?? Fact remains law is made around rare occurrences.

Well the point outside of your tunnel vision is bad this happens all the time, thousands of women go missing probably millions and the law doesn't send fucking search parties and do news conferences for all of them, sure it's a problem yes, a Crime happened at least in the example I gave and guess what, fair or not even the most harm doesn't get the same amount of resources or any.

Meaning I don't care about the problem you seem to think is a problem, as compared to a lot of other actual problems.

There is no argument against because it is random rambling, again. You do not point out why you supposedly are right about something, you just state that you are.

I am pointing out you aren't logical or reasonable, you simply just come up with a cause, and your arguing with me reflects that, that is why you have no effective argument.

The problem is that she doesn't need evidence in order to ruin this poor sobs life. All she needs to do is cry rape and the guy will be publicly ousted. There are countless examples of men being falsely accused of rape and had their lives ruined just by the accusation alone. Just look at matrass girl, even when it was proven that the guy didn't do any of it she didn't stop nor was reprimanded in any serious way. Yet he lost his place in that school, his job and is social life all just because she made a claim and was proven wrong about that claim and it was proven that she acted maliciously. Still nothing more then a slap on the wrist.

I am sure this matters to a few people but this especially coming from you, for me does not. You are't being reasonable or logical, you are advocating for a cause.

If i had tits and accused you of rape then you would not be so happy to tell me to accuse you of anything. As you will quickly learn that your employer doesn't give a flying fuck about it not being true, nor will the media or your family.

If you want rape victims to be taken seriously then you need to crack down on false rape accusations hard. If this is not done then you get the boy who cried wolf situation.

This is the 21st century, and you don't need tits to make shit up with no evidence, just as you don't need to be brushed off or ignored because you have no evidence, but again be my guest, you can accuse me of anything you can think of, you have to prove it.

My friends, loved ones they know my character and history. My reputation isn't perfect but it's rock solid.

However I never gotten into a situation where I was accused of anything, like rape, and neither has anybody, I have known, especially for who's character I can say is reliable. I wouldn't turn on them unless there was evidence not an accusation.


And to those I have hired, I don't know of any criminal background check that includes charges only convictions.


This isn't about me, or you.

[Deleted]

No, I am talking about the law, you are talking about an issue you are convinced is a problem, I am not. There isn't a law for everything, because not all incidents in life uncomfortable or terrible as they might be, rise to the level of the most harm.

That is simply not true, pretty much everything is governed by a law, and there are laws that govern this as well. The problem here is that it is not enforced as it should be.

Well the point outside of your tunnel vision is bad this happens all the time, thousands of women go missing probably millions and the law doesn't send fucking search parties and do news conferences for all of them, sure it's a problem yes, a Crime happened at least in the example I gave and guess what, fair or not even the most harm doesn't get the same amount of resources or any.

Meaning I don't care about the problem you seem to think is a problem, as compared to a lot of other actual problems.

You keep on about this "most harm" but it doesn't seem to mean anything besides some new buzz word.
That you do not care about something doesn't mean that there isn't a problem. And if we only go and do something about the worst of the worst then i guess rape isn't very high on that list either.

I am pointing out you aren't logical or reasonable, you simply just come up with a cause, and your arguing with me reflects that, that is why you have no effective argument.

No, you didn't point out anything, that is the problem. I do not come up with anything, i just point out what is happening.

I am sure this matters to a few people but this especially coming from you, for me does not. You are't being reasonable or logical, you are advocating for a cause.

Im advocating for people that try to ruin other people lives to be punished, i had no idea that is not reasonable or logical. /s But im guessing the feminist inside of you doesn't allow for females to do wrong.

This is the 21st century, and you don't need tits to make shit up with no evidence, just as you don't need to be brushed off or ignored because you have no evidence, but again be my guest, you can accuse me of anything you can think of, you have to prove it.

My friends, loved ones they know my character and history. My reputation isn't perfect but it's rock solid.

If i want to be heard and ruin someones life then, yes i do need tits for that. And yes, if you do not have any evidence of something you do need to be brushed off. As you have no evidence of wrong doing you should not be able to ruin someones life, you need evidence for that, in the normal world we call this slander.

However I never gotten into a situation where I was accused of anything, like rape, and neither has anybody, I have known, especially for who's character I can say is reliable. I wouldn't turn on them unless there was evidence not an accusation.

You might, i seriously doubt that you would do what you say you would, but you might. But the rest of the world doesn't function like that.

And to those I have hired, I don't know of any criminal background check that includes charges only convictions.


This isn't about me, or you.

But you have heard of google right? Try and google the name of matrass girls victim and see what pops up, let me give you a hint, it was not that he was cleared of all charges.

[Doctor Amadeus]

That is simply not true, pretty much everything is governed by a law, and there are laws that govern this as well. The problem here is that it is not enforced as it should be.

It is true life isn't fair, and unless you can honestly say you give a fuck about it for anybody else except the cause you advocate for, then don't expect it from anyone or anything. The law is about governing what can be, not always what it should.

Entitled people feel otherwise. Maybe they are right, but you aren't

You keep on about this "most harm" but it doesn't seem to mean anything besides some new buzz word.
That you do not care about something doesn't mean that there isn't a problem. And if we only go and do something about the worst of the worst then i guess rape isn't very high on that list either.

It doesn't mean anything unless you don't know what the fuck MOST and HARM mean or verbs and nouns. As far as you feeling rape isn't very high on your list of harm that actually explains a lot of why you seem to not actually give a fuck and that your advocacy is silly. The majority of harm is to women when it comes to rape NOT MEN.

No, you didn't point out anything, that is the problem. I do not come up with anything, i just point out what is happening.

You not following with a process in a sequence of fucking events, or one subject being predicated on another or following a single thing ever said to you, isn't an issue of you pointing out what is happening. It's you not actually knowing what is happening, paying attention and not even trying to fucking read or understand anything but what you think is important about what is happening.

If you didn't and you actually could follow sentence structure in logic, you would recognize if you thought beyond yourself, that you DON'T KNOW and probably never will.

Im advocating for people that try to ruin other people lives to be punished, i had no idea that is not reasonable or logical. /s But im guessing the feminist inside of you doesn't allow for females to do wrong.

No you are advocating that something is more of a problem than is being appreciated right now, I get that, I don't agree, and if there were any possibility of me ever agreeing it would only be if you had clarity or were honest about the problem. Which is why I don't care about what YOU specifically are advocating because you aren't logical or reasonable.

Hell maybe I am not either, I have my moments, but so far right now it's just you.

If i want to be heard and ruin someones life then, yes i do need tits for that. And yes, if you do not have any evidence of something you do need to be brushed off. As you have no evidence of wrong doing you should not be able to ruin someones life, you need evidence for that, in the normal world we call this slander.

OK let me try just try to meet you some of the way, yes I agree some people cry wolf, that sucks it's really shitty, and sometimes the things people do like gossip and jump to conclusions and spout baseless opinions hurt, they are harmful, and I really wish I could as a human being think of a sure fire way to make that stop.

However the solution is what? Ignore rape accusers, do nothing when something very fucking serious is reported? EH NO Do you want that if accusers don't have enough evidence to lock them up or charge them? I say no FUCK NO

Should women when found out to deliberately be lying and that can be proven, should they be charged? Sure I agree, but she has the presumption of innocenct before being guilty too.

See it is a real trick its a problem because Rape no matter how often we can agree it happens is a problem. False Accusations on the other hand CAN BE, but what we can do about it is another matter!

However in regards to the harm being called to the accused whenever is it false should we protect them? YES, I would agree with that, and I think that could be a real starting point. People do have freedom of speech but not freedom from making false or spreading malicious rumors.

Granted NOW there are very limited means to deal with that, but that is ANOTHER problem all together. I guess it goes along with trying to legislate whether you can say things about me, and as you notice people don't like language police.


So, the only thing I can figure is to maybe strengthen laws such as libel, and defamation, and maybe give VICTIMS of false accusations tools to protect their reputations.

But I am sure someone is going to be objecting to that due to reasonable concerns, just as you COULD be on some level, all I am fundamentally saying is that false accusations aren't as frequent as rape them selves or even close, but, none the less false accusations are not something I support by default.

You might, i seriously doubt that you would do what you say you would, but you might. But the rest of the world doesn't function like that.

Well guess that is why the topic is about two cops who did that and the girl who killed herself, but I suspect you don't actually give a flying fuck about that, so be it that is your prerogative.

My reason and logic colored yes by my bias, cares about the girl who killed herself over this shit.

But you have heard of google right? Try and google the name of matrass girls victim and see what pops up, let me give you a hint, it was not that he was cleared of all charges.

Yes I don't need google, I seen mattress* girl and I didn't come down much on the side of either, I am not condemning the woman, or the fact she in fact seems credible to me, despite those that painted her the way they have.

Would I go so far as to say if I could I would put the guy in prison anyway or kill him or not protect him if I was at the collect? Nope

I believe in her right to expression, but I also agree he should have been protected, and despite my feeling, while criminally I don't thing she should be charged.

I do believe she OR ANYBODY should be open to libel or defamation. Because as much as I feel she may have been harmed the LAW is the LAW and should be fixed, but my reason and logic WITHOUT my bias, says the LAW is the LAW.


She should have been free to express within the law but him being harmed he should have options.