The Hofstra false rape case is the highest profile false rape since Duke Lacrosse. It made the cover page of the New York Post and has become a campaign issue in the race for District Attorney in Nassau County. Finally. If you haven't done it yet, please watch this "news" report that was prepared after the falsely accused were arrested but before the recantation -- but make sure you are sitting down and that there are no sharp objects nearby when you watch it: See here
Watson: I would prosecute Hofstra rape accuser
The former Nassau County prosecutor hoping to unseat District Attorney Kathleen Rice in the November election said Saturday that Rice "avoided the judicial process" in deciding not to prosecute the woman who falsely reported she was gang-raped at Hofstra University two weeks ago.
In an agreement with the district attorney's office signed Friday, the accuser, Danmell Ndonye, 18, of Washington Heights, again admitted she made up a story about being tied up and raped in a dorm bathroom in the early morning hours of Sept. 13 - a story that resulted in the arrests of four men.
Ndonye agreed to undergo counseling and perform 250 hours of community service. In return, she was not charged with making a false written statement, a misdemeanor.
The candidate, Joy Watson, who headed sex-crime prosecutions under former District Attorney Denis Dillon, said the seriousness of the accusation and the impact on the accused men warranted a criminal prosecution.
"I certainly would have held her to the charge," Watson said while campaigning in Westbury. "I would have charged her and let the probation department and the court make a determination as to the appropriate sentence."
Ndonye, a Hofstra freshman, told Nassau police Sept. 13 that she was lured to a dormitory bathroom, where she was tied in a stall with a rope and raped by five men. A 21-year-old Hofstra student and three others were arrested and charged with first-degree rape; the fifth man was never arrested.
Ndonye recanted her story Sept. 16 in an interview with Nassau prosecutors after they told her there might be a cell-phone video of the incident.
Charges against the men were dismissed that day and they were released from jail; their lawyers said the video showed consensual sex. Hofstra suspended Ndonye and reinstated Rondell Bedward, of the Bronx, the only Hofstra student among those arrested.
"If the system is going to say, 'You're troubled, so you're not going to get charged,' what kind of reverberations does that send through the entire judicial system?" asked Watson, who is running on the Republican and Conservative lines. Rice is a Democrat.
Rice spokesman Eric Phillips said the district attorney "got to the truth quickly, got four innocent guys out of jail and held their accuser accountable." He called Watson "a candidate . . . whose political pandering has given us all an insight into her 'Shoot first and ask questions later' philosophy of justice."
Shamecka Bedward, 24, the sister of Rondell Bedward - the only one of the men with whom Ndonye said she did not have sexual contact - spoke briefly Saturday at the family's apartment in the Bronx. She said only that he was back at school and that the family was speaking with lawyers.
The staff at the nearby Mi Bodega said they were happy Bedward's name had been cleared.
"That's good people. That lady, she was talking too much and look now, nothing happened," said owner Eugenio Brito, 45.
"I'm happy he's back. Everybody in the neighborhood is surprised he went through all that, because he is a good man, trust me," said store employee Pablo Amanzar, 35.
Attorneys for two of the other men charged said that they had discussed the possibility of civil suits but that such action by their clients was unlikely.
"I brought in a civil attorney I trust who reviewed it and found, unfortunately, there really is no case," said Victor Daly-Rivera, who represents the family of Kevin Taveras, 20, of Brentwood.
Attorney Jon Silveri said he had advised the family of Stalin Felipe, 19, of the Bronx, to consult with a civil expert.
With Daniel Edward Rosen
Link: http://www.newsday.com/long-island/nassau/watson-i-would-prosecute-hofstra-rape-accuser-1.1479396
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
55 comments:
I also considered a civil suit against the pig that falsely accused me of a rape..that simply never happened.
But i just wanted the nightmare to go away.
The civil suit sounds to me like a great suit on liability but my suspicion is she's judgment-proof (too poor to make suit worthwhile).
For a lawyer to consider a suit, the suit must be "case worthy".
Not charging women and girls when they falsely accuse someone of rape is a modern perversion of our legal system.
Now that girls have been liberated into the Gender / Raunch culture..there will be more Raunch girls banging the whole team.
Guys will have to learn that if these new Raunch girls want to get "HOG WILD" with the team, their gonna have to get it on film.
"I certainly would have held her to the charge," Watson said while campaigning in Westbury. "I would have charged her and let the probation department and the court make a determination as to the appropriate sentence."
It's good to see Rice feeling the heat, but Watson's comments don't mean much either. So she would have charged Ndonye and let her off with a few months probation. Big deal.
The real change has got to come from both further up, and lower down. Legislators have got to table new law with seriously stiff penalties for these fraudsters, and ordinary men and women have got to make it plain they won't endure a legal system that doesn't know right from wrong.
That might happen if Rice gets kicked out - and hard.
"Legislators have got to table new law with seriously stiff penalties for these fraudsters, and ordinary men and women have got to make it plain they won't endure a legal system that doesn't know right from wrong."
Exactly.
Anon at 10:07: Well put.
Anon at 10:15: I think secret videotaping is going to become more common. Heaven knows, as Duke and Hofstra show, it doesn't help to have a bunch of witnesses if they have penises, they are not deemed reliable witnesses.
In response to Atom at 10:02: not worth responding to.
Well, the fact that the issue has gained enough political traction to become a campaign issue is very good news for our side. Judging from the comments I've seen following all the news articles, sentiment is running about 80% negative. The natives are getting restless, and PISSED OFF.
A more subtle effect is that Rice may have just Nifonged herself. It would be sweet if falling for a false accusation starting costing people their political careers. That would make a rape accusation sort of a third rail, and I'll bet that both prosecutors and DAs will start to hate having one walk through the door. If they get it wrong, someone will start demanding their head.
In the past, it used to always be safe to go forward with it. After all, it was only a "man" getting hurt, so no one cared. Duke seems to have changed that a lot. Going ahead with a bad case makes everyone look like idiots, so any prosecutor who does not have a political death wish will make damn certain the case is a good one before stepping off square one with it.
I regard this as progress.
@ anon 10:59, oh yes I agree with that ... the MRAs have gotten a lot of mileage out of Duke and Hofstra. But tell me, since you're still on the Hofstra incident, did Watson (or anyone) explain how the girl wound up down in the men's basement? I mean besides being in hot pursuit of her cell phone.
Anon at 10:59: I agree. One of the things we don't mention as much as we should is this: making a false report to police generally doesn't warrant a significant jail sentence for this reason: it is assumed that the police are going to do their job and get to the bottom of the allegation before an innocent person's life is destroyed. Our system was never intended to have police act as lapdogs to hurt private citizens for the whims of other private citizens. Unfortunately, rape has become so politicized that it's deemed politically incorrect not to believe every allegation, no matter how wild. We need to start focusing a lot more on the law enforcement muscle when it comes to false rape claims.
Atom at 11:06: Doesn't matter what the hell she was doing since she swears it wasn't rape. That's conclusive.
P.S. I need to do a post on this. We will always have criminals making false rape claims, but the police and the D.A. are supposed to weed them out.
"A more subtle effect is that Rice may have just Nifonged herself. It would be sweet if falling for a false accusation starting costing people their political careers. That would make a rape accusation sort of a third rail, and I'll bet that both prosecutors and DAs will start to hate having one walk through the door. If they get it wrong, someone will start demanding their head."
Excellent point (I might not have read it so closely if atom hadn't felt the need to deflect from it).
Pierce Harlan said...
P.S. I need to do a post on this. We will always have criminals making false rape claims, but the police and the D.A. are supposed to weed them out.
Really give that some thought, Pierce. And, while you are at it, you really need to read "Rules for Radicals" and "Reveille for Radicals" by Saul Alinsky. (if you haven't already) Political change is often facilitated by grandiose political theatre which has nothing to do with how it appears, but rather the reaction it stirs up in people.
A trivial example is a woman swimmer (I think it might have been Esther Williams, but I'm not sure) who would swim in what is now considered to be a traditional one-piece bathing suit. In her time, it was considered indecent by the standards of old-time bathing costumes, and every time she appeared in it her PR agent arranged to have her arrested by the local police. The point was obviously not to get her in trouble with the law, but to create publicity (no such thing as bad publicity) and stir up public sentiment.
The feminists have stirred up so much public sentiment and outrage that the police are afraid to do their jobs, and so they just toe the party line. No amount of rational argument will hold a candle to female histrionics, so logical arguments on the male side are a waste of time.
This is why the DA's refusal to press charges is good news for our cause. If she had pressed charges, there would have been the appearance that the system was working and people would have calmed down. Her refusal to press charges (even though she is right, the rape-liar is probably getting worse consequences from her confession and deal than she would have gotten from a successful prosecution) gives the impression that the system isn't working, and brings attention to how weak the laws are.
If Rice's challenger successfully rides this outrage into office, prosecutors will be on the hot seat of public opinion and have to choose which form of political suicide they wish to commit. No one likes to be made to look like a fool, so they will put heat on the cops to make damn sure the cases are good before they start shooting off their mouths.
Like I said, I see this case as big progress for our cause.
It sounds like Atom is engaged in 'rear-guard' action, trying to salvage something out of this for feminists.
Rice spokesman Eric Phillips said the district attorney "got to the truth quickly, got four innocent guys out of jail and held their accuser accountable."
* * * * *
This is an incredibly cynical manipulation on the part of Kathleen Rice. She "got four innocent guys out of jail" AFTER SHE FUCKING PUT THEM THERE and then LET THE FALSE ACCUSER OFF THE HOOK.
Kathleen Rice is a liar and that's all she is.
Oh, and you know how she "got to the truth quickly?" When victim #5produced a video recording.
But then Rice did the victims a huge favor -- not only do we now have a recording of the liar not being raped, we also have her sworn statement that she wasn't raped! Yeah, that really makes up for ruining the lives of five boys!
No matter how badly she fucked this up, Kathleen Rice is the hero! The prosecutor always is!
Joy Watson speaking last Sunday...
A crime was committed, and there's no question who committed the crime. . . . I prosecuted cases in the past where we had false allegations made, and arrests were made immediately.
Watson wishes to make political mileage out of this so it would be worth knowing if her claim that she has prosecuted false allegers previously is actually true.
A brief google threw up Nassau G.O.P. Figure Is Charged With Faking Tale of Kidnapping from 2001 which was at least a false report - though not of rape.
Rice spokesman Eric Phillips said the district attorney "got to the truth quickly, got four innocent guys out of jail and held their accuser accountable." He called Watson "a candidate . . . whose political pandering has given us all an insight into her 'Shoot first and ask questions later' philosophy of justice."
This, of course, is entirely different to "arrest first and ask questions later".
==========================
Civil suits...
The appropriate, in this instance meaning the most viable, target for civil suits is not the accuser. It is, rather, the individuals and the city which imprisoned these young men without cause and possibly media outlets that presented them by name as definitely guilty.
Atom said...
But tell me, since you're still on the Hofstra incident, did Watson (or anyone) explain how the girl wound up down in the men's basement? I mean besides being in hot pursuit of her cell phone.
Not sure about basements.
From the boyfriend's account...
The boyfriend said he called her repeatedly, but she didn't answer her cellphone, so he went to her seventh-floor dorm room at Estabrook Hall. Moments later she appeared.
"As I was about to leave, she comes up and she has no shoes on, she is holding them in her hands. She looked like she just finished hot sex," he said. "I said, 'Where were you? What were you doing?' She told me, 'Nothing.' I said, 'What do you mean, nothing?' "
Ndonye then dropped a bombshell.
"I said, 'Don't lie to me, what's going on?' And she said, 'Oh, I just got raped,' " he said.
"It didn't seem real to me. She was calm," he continued. "Then she started crying and saying, 'I was raped.' She lied to me. I think she was embarrassed. I said to her, 'You have to call public safety.' She hesitated. It seemed like she didn't want to."
She then tried to backpedal.
"Oh, you know, no, it's OK," she told him, but he was incredulous.
"How could it be OK that you just got raped?" the boyfriend said.
By the way I think she had her phone back already.
But on the subject of phones...
After having lost contact with his girlfriend because of a fracas boyfriend is trying to phone her. He's probably frantic with worry.
Meanwhile back at the orgy...
...her phone rang repeatedly as her boyfriend tried to find her.
"Her phone went off seven to eight times. They asked her, 'Why don't you answer that?' She said, 'It's OK, I don't need to answer,' "
I urge you to remember these words Atom...
"Bring them along. It'll be hot."
This constant insistence of yours that "something" must have happened is approaching the point of insanity. Something did happen Atom. It appears that sex happened. Consensual sex. Several times. It even appears - given the condom count - that it was mostly "safe sex" although a couple of young men might demur on that.
It was after the sex that the crime occurred. In fact it was after she had returned to her dorm and her other victim - her boyfriend.
==========================
re Rice and the video...
I believe Rice had not seen the video when she asked the accuser about it.
If that was the case she couldn't really know who it would actually incriminate if anyone at all when she put it's existence to the accuser.
Pierce, it seems to me Atom wants you to just drop the Hofstra case, just like Atom wishes society would just forget about the Duke case.
The sooner we forget, the quicker we can get on with the business of doing it again, and again, and again, and again.
Moral of the story for college guys..If you meet a Gender / Raunch girl..that wants to get freeky deeky hog wild with you and you're buddies..MAKE SURE YOU GET VID ON THE CELLY!!
That is exactly what a member of the seduction community says here -
http://roissy.wordpress.com/2009/09/26/film-your-bangs/
Atom just wants to be as disruptive as it/she can be. The femnitwits know that we are on to their scam, and are making progress, so they have agents fighting a rear guard action.
*sigh* ... Without a trial, I guess we'll never know why she made the decision to have group sex on her back on a cold yucky tile floor. Do you think she selected her victims in a advance and devised trickery to coax them into the bathroom? Man, this girl is GOOD ... she even got them to take her phone away. It's almost as if they chased her until "she caught them", used them, and exploited them. Did any of them report bodily harm and consult a doctor?
Gwallan, how can you suggest that my insistence has reached the point of insanity, when this is the first thread where I've voiced questions?
Atom at 9:48: Did the rape liar supposedly suffer physical injuries on top of everything else she initially claimed? Wow! I am chuckling and shaking my head reading your comment because it's clear to me -- you do more to hurt the cause of rape victims than anything even the angriest MRA is capable of doing. Every time you twist and pound and stretch and spin the facts regading a false accusation, you lose credibility for the very people you supposedly support.
As for our never knowing what happened, that is another of your prevarications, isn't it? I mean, seriously. We know exactly what happened because we have her carefully drafted sworn statement that conclusively admits she lied. End of question, as a matter of law.
I've been looking over your recent comments and have decided there's no way in hell I'm going to ban you. You do more to instill doubt into rape allegations than anything I could ever do, and in this false rape culture, that is a good thing. As Dr. Bruce Gross explained: "Although it may not be 'politically correct' to question the veracity of a women's complaint of rape, failing to consider the accuser may be intentionally lying effectively eradicates the presumption of innocence."
I've been looking over your recent comments and have decided there's no way in hell I'm going to ban you. You do more to instill doubt into rape allegations than anything I could ever do, and in this false rape culture, that is a good thing
Astute observation, Pierce. The climate which allows such pervasive false accusations was manipulated into existence. It is essential to study the tactics used in order to learn how to counter them. In the atmosphere of generalized ignorance and chivalry in which this legal climate came about, confusing the issue, personal attacks, constant repetition of lies, and appealing to emotional responses were used to manipulate lawmakers into creating an atmosphere which they thought was protective toward the "weaker sex" who needed that protection.
In reality it simply created a smokescreen environment in which lies could thrive. When caught in their lies, they simply start screaming them louder and more aggressively, hoping that men's natural reactions to this sort of behavior from women will cause them to back off.
Atom is our very own little captive feminazi. Realizing how transparently false and futile her tactics are, and learning to ignore them and stay on point, is essential to making headway in the political arena where the same tactics are being used.
The first step is realize that she/it is completely devoid of good faith and everything she says is calculated for effect and driven by malicious intent. Giving her the chance to show that for everyone to see will help them learn how not to get taken in by it in the future.
Anon at 10:31: I agree. It is for this reason we keep reminding people about Catherine Comins' Time Magazine quotation -- the best way to make out your case is by using the enemy's own words.
Atom - "did Watson (or anyone) explain how the girl wound up down in the men's basement? I mean besides being in hot pursuit of her cell phone."
If you go back and read through some of the details that are leaking out, you will find that you have made several assertion (going back over several posts) not supported by the new information:
A) The consequential sex occurred at a residence hall - NOT a frat house.
B) Her original story was that she followed them to retrieve her phone. But, that was her quickly concocted rational for why she went to the men's restroom. There IS NO indication that her cell phone was actually taken from her at all. It seams that SHE had the "hots" for one of the men, and invited HIM for a restroom hook-up, and suggested he bring friends. Neither account has been verified, but it is no more likely that her phone was taken than is is that she did the inviting.
C) What leads you to believe she ever went to a basement - all accounts place the incident in a restroom?
D) There is no evidence that the consensual sex took place with her lying on the floor.
Now, you can keep demanding answers to things which probably did not occur, but there is no reason that anyone needs to answer your bogus questions. The things you question, even supposing that they may have actually happened, still fail to excuse her lying and her false rape reporting. Thus, they are trivial non-issues.
That you continue to try to bring them up clearly demonstrates that you are unwilling/unable to engage others regarding either the know facts, nor the "larger-picture" issue.
An example of debating YOU on your preferred terms would be to demand to know why she would have a multiple partner hook-up in a restroom unless she'd done it frequently before. Like your questions, it goes not to substantive matters, but only to speculation.
Okay, keep spinning your wheels and avoid the questions. At the risk of going blind, I read the sworn statement, which of course in no way details how the girl managed to manipulate several innocent men to engage in an orgy.
At any rate, these men were not "forced" into having sex; hence, no charges filed.
"At any rate, these men were not "forced" into having sex; hence, no charges filed."
And: ". . . the sworn statement, which of course in no way details how the girl managed to manipulate several innocent men to engage in an orgy."
HA HA HA!
Oh, my. Must have been rape then, eh, guys?
HA HA HA!
Just a quick comment.
Anon,
Why do you call them "Raunch Girls"? As if guys can't be just as raunchy. As if being a "raunch girl" is an anamoly and goes against the status quo for females. I just hate it how females are categorized based on their sexual habits. It's very old fashioned and archaic.
Just wondering. Anon's use of that term really stood out to me.
sigh* ... Without a trial, I guess we'll never know why she made the decision to have group sex on her back on a cold yucky tile floor.
********
She did it so she could FRAME FIVE INNOCENT MEN, fucking moron!
Without a trial, I guess we'll never know why she made the decision to have group sex on her back on a cold yucky tile floor.
Without chemical analysis, some people will "never know" what peanut butter is made from.
The answer to "why"is simple - " 'gina tingle."
Just because you are paranoid, that doesn't mean that they aren't really out to get you.
A Google search on the false accuser's (rape-liar's) name came up with this reference among the results.
9:26 pm da's Hofstra rape hoax handling leaves questions
Newsday - Joye Brown - 13 hours ago
Photo credit: Mahala Gaylord | Nassau District Attorney Kathleen Rice announces that a Hofstra student made up allegations that she was tied up and gang ...
Clicking the link gives this message -
"The page you requested cannot be found. The page you are looking for might have been removed, had its name changed, or is temporarily unavailable."
The cover-up and damage control are in full swing.
On the up side, the word "hoax" is now appearing in most headline's on the subject, and "fraud" is fairly common.
Fraud is the more appropriate term, in my opinion.
Without a trial, I guess we'll never know why she made the decision to have group sex on her back on a cold yucky tile floor.
Yes, we will never know a lot of "whys", and we will never know "what really happened." This is called the FUD strategy - Fear, Uncertainty, and Disinformation.
One way to effectively show what is known is to make the video public. The rape-lie apologists and Elmerette FUDs probably ought to give some thought to whether they are really prepared for the fallout if the video shows something like Ndonye on her hands and knees, back arched, twat in the air, screaming "do me, DO ME, DO ME!"
One of the lawyers said it looked like a "porn" video, and since porn virutally always shows willing and enthusiastic women, this video might show Ndonye as a far more active participant in the experience than any of them want people to know a woman is capable of being.
The video was enough to get the case tossed within hours, so it must be exactly what you described. No "gray rape" there!
Right, Anon at 1:46.
Feminists know for a fact the exact numbers of things that no reasonable person can say with certainty, including the exact number of women raped each year, the exact percentage for underreporting of rape, and the exact percentage of false rape claims. But when they are confronted with irrefutable proof that no rape occurred, they quickly, and solemnly, proclaim that "no one will ever know for sure what happened" in that particular case. This is intended to suggest that a rape very well might have occurred.
Archivist - "This is intended to suggest that a rape very well might have occurred."
But, what if the tables were turned?
Here's a story of a woman acquitted of having had sex with 5 under-aged boys.
The accusers made poor witnesses (one having recanted), and their testimony before the court contradicted their earlier statements. And, the fact that at least two of them had had subsequent legal troubles of their own certainly didn't help their credibility.
On the surface, it looks like a clear-cut case of false allegations of (statutorial) rape.
But, perhaps this is to hasty. Perhaps we might better conclude that she had indeed had sex with the boys, and that they were coerced into changing their testimony so as to clear her.
And, her having raped them could be what lead the young men into subsequent criminality.
We'll never know for sure, so rather than conclude that she is as innocent as her acquittal would suggest, let's do as feminists and chivalrous maginas do, and assume that she must be actually guilty of both rape and contributing to the delinquency of minors, and that she just "got away with it"
have a read, and decide for yourselves, should we consider this woman to have been exonerated, or should we take the feminist tact of proclaiming that since we cannot ever really know for sure, then we should assume the worst of her?
Delco woman acquitted of having sex with 5 teens
Renee, google: and read up on the modern Gender feminist Raunch culture..and you will see how it is permeating into the rest of society.
The Raunch culture is degrading and objectifying women now..more than at any point in American history when men were running things.
In laymens terms it is Raunchifyng them.
Renee, google: and read up on the modern Gender feminist Raunch culture..and you will see how it is permeating into the rest of society.
The Raunch culture is degrading and objectifying women now..more than at any point in American history when men were running things.
In laymens terms it is Raunchifyng them.
I'll look into it.
My thing is, you're basically saying that is not normal for a woman to lets say, have or want to/fantasize about having a threesome? That there weren't any raunchy men before feminism or "raunch culture"?
And what do you mean when you say when men were "running things"?
I don't want to divert the conversation so if you want to email me your response instead, then that's fine. Just ask for my email. It's up to you.
Renee, Gender Raunch culture is turning women into pigs. Sexually / morally / psychologically.
There is not much to debate here.
Feminism has turned women into self-pitying, man-hating pigs, not "raunch culture."
Read "Female chauvinist pigs" and the rise of sexual Raunch culture in our youth.
"My thing is, you're basically saying that is not normal for a woman to lets say, have or want to/fantasize about having a threesome? That there weren't any raunchy men before feminism or "raunch culture"?"
I know for a fact that some women fantasize about threesomes - a former gf wanted me to set one up for her. Some people like being spanked. Others are into leather.
But suppose Ndonye were motivated by a primal desire to be serviced by several men, in the same way we see is common across the animal world amongst herd species.
It doesn't follow that she managed to find 5 men who were all willing to serve her desire. A lot of men are pretty modest about being seen having sex. A lot just don't want to have sex with a female who has just had it - that too is very common in the natural world.
While speculations about more primal sexual urges might be interesting, it doesn't really bear on the question of free-will. We also have urges to take whatever appeals to us, but we have laws and socialization that prevent us from stealing. We might want to lash out physically at someone who annoys us, but we're expected to refrain from assault.
And we might want to make up stories that endanger the lives of others, ruin their reputations and create all this division between the sexes, but we're expected to refrain from doing it. We're expected to show some respect for the well-being of others.
So it's not unreasonable to demand that this lying be curbed, no matter what it might spring from. It needs to be shamed, criminally punished and stamped out.
Malice and fraudulent self-service is the principal area of concern here. Ndonye chose to lie, and she concocted a large story that implicated a lot of people - so that she could deceive another. She's not only a false rape accuser, but a cheater as well.
I can't think of a more fitting example of exactly the kind of behavior that needs to be publicly show-cased as the kind of thing none of us will tolerate.
By the way, if you have desires for multiple partners at the same time, I expect you would find a way to do it without lying to the police. It's not illegal.
I like how Renee says she will check on some informatin provided to her, but before doing so, she continues the argument being ignorant of what that information would tell her. For example, I'm sure 'raunch culture' has something to say about whether women want threesomes.
That's somewhat analogous to a (female) TV news reporter telling us about an alleged rape, then while she is speaking someone comes into view and hands her a note and whispers, 'the guys were found innocent' - if the reporter was Renee, she would say, "wait, let me finish my story first, damn it!!"
She (Danmell Ndonye) should have the pants sued off her and then some. And locked away into solitary for good to rot.
That'll teach black bitch bastards like her to think before she opens that smelly yap-trap of hers.
From Watsons website...
In my view, the current DA is out of line. Rape is an extremely serious allegation and a false claim ishighly damaging to those accused--as we have seen in this highly controversial case. Even though she has prosecutorial discretion to let someone walk, in this case the facts are that the accuser lied in a sworn statement and only recanted after a video was produced about the incident. This is not a simple false
allegation over a petty theft. Short of accusing someone of murder, there is no more serious charge than rape. The accuser should be charged and the DA should allow our criminal justice system to decide her fate.
Sounds like a new troll is on-board.
Getting Rice fired as DA would be the ideal outcome for change in attitude toward False Rape Accusation. It doesn't matter how ineffective Watson would be, or how toothless existing law is in dealing with offenders - the important thing is that an elected official loses her job over being soft on accusers.
That's a message that won't be wasted on other officials.
But suppose Ndonye were motivated by a primal desire to be serviced by several men, in the same way we see is common across the animal world amongst herd species.
Would you say the same thing about a guy who is serviced by several women?
It doesn't follow that she managed to find 5 men who were all willing to serve her desire. A lot of men are pretty modest about being seen having sex. A lot just don't want to have sex with a female who has just had it - that too is very common in the natural world.
So what are you saying exactly? That this doesn't happen in cases of a guy in a threesome (or more) with only women? Women don't feel the same way of the guys in question in the quote above?
Norm, Norm, Norm lol,
I like how Renee says she will check on some informatin provided to her, but before doing so, she continues the argument being ignorant of what that information would tell her. For example, I'm sure 'raunch culture' has something to say about whether women want threesomes.
What you don't understand is that, the questions I asked was about Anon's personal mindset and belief about women and sex and what's normal. I also asked about men and the possibility of them being just as raunchy before and after feminism. I also pointed out that "raunchy" women are seen as a problem and didn't exist before feminism, but "raunch boys" aren't even mentioned period, as if that's normal.
I just questioned whether having a threesome with two guys makes a woman raunchy but the some doesn't apply towards a guy with 2 women.
I typed this pretty quick since I'm on my way out, so this may not be as clear as I would like it to be.
Anon 8:13,
Well, it happened to Nifong, and yet it still happened again in the Hofstra case, so I would say that they AREN'T learning a thing from people losing thier jobs over this.
I hope she does lose in the next election, and there should certainly be an investigation by the bar association to see if disbarrment is warranted. She chose a case to try to champion, due to the upcoming election, that backfired on her.
And that is exaclty what Pierce and I have been saying here. Rape has become to politicized to be effectivly pursued, as the overzealous nature of law enforcement is sweeping up innocent men (and women) into the net. Everything and everyone involved should be anonymous until such time as a conviction is obtained. Period.
Everything and everyone involved should be anonymous until such time as a conviction is obtained.
That one simple change in the law would solve so many problems. If the damage of having their names splashed everywhere through print media and the internet were prevented, a false accusation would still be traumatic but not nearly as devastating as it is now. To me it seems like both sides of the issue are getting caught up in vengeance. Once the story blows public, someone is going to get hurt and if the party with more guilt in the situation is not the one hurt then a lot of people are going to become angry out of sense of injustice.
There is reason that the administration of justice is handed to juries and not lynch mobs. As anyone who has any experience with crowd control knows, once a mob is fired up it doesn't much matter who their target is as long as they have a scapegoat to go after.
It would be far better to force the justice system to do its job and then report the results than the current climate of trial by accusation and innuendo.
"but the some doesn't apply towards a guy with 2 women."
That's supposed to be, "but the same..."
Renee,
you said you would check on some info that was pertinent to the argument, then you continued to argue without checking the info. What is hard to understand about that?
Me:"It doesn't follow that she managed to find 5 men who were all willing to serve her desire. A lot of men are pretty modest about being seen having sex. A lot just don't want to have sex with a female who has just had it - that too is very common in the natural world."
Renee"So what are you saying exactly? That this doesn't happen in cases of a guy in a threesome (or more) with only women? Women don't feel the same way of the guys in question in the quote above?"
My point was that I don't think it's possible to categorize what is 'normal' sexual appetite based on gender. The examples I gave are counter-examples to commonly circulated notions of men being sex fiends, and women constantly having to suffer men's appetites. So many counter examples exist that the current bias of the law against men in matters sexual is uninformed, and is structured in a way that guarantees a fresh harvest of innocent men every year. The Hofstra case is a classic example, where although the accuser has recanted and it has been legally established that no rape occurred, a lingering suspicion will remain in the mind of a large number of people that all 5 men engaged in some kind of orgy - and that perception will count against them in future. I would suggest that it was the very thought of it that had the police rush them into cells so quickly, rather than the suspicion that a crime may have been committed.
In the absence of any evidence supporting it, the casual observer is better served by appealing to what he or she thinks the most likely course of events, and that exonerates both the men and Ndonye in terms of their 'sexual deviance from the norm' (the only thing that makes what was probably a very ordinary sexual liaison is the false report that followed it).
If we were all of the same mind that what other people get up to in their sexual habits is their affair and no-one else's, then I wouldn't have felt the need to point this out. I certainly have no objection to Ndonye's sexual behavior, anymore than I object to 5 men lining up for a quick poke - but by the same token, I wouldn't join in and it's my guess that neither would most men. Why so many are ready to rush to the judgment that I would concerns me, because it means I'm liable to be prosecuted with a moral ferocity that has no basis in truth.
Is it 'fair' that such perceptions exist about our sexual appetites, and that we are persecuted for them? Certainly not. I see the fight against false rape accusation as part of the effort of dismantling this mass cultural presumption. It's very likely that pre-existing notions of feminine sexual behavior will also be casualties in this battle, and I would have thought that many Feminists would have welcomed that (but they so often surprise me).
Post a Comment