My guess is that you haven't heard of it. News that a famous athlete has committed rape is big news. News that there's evidence the claim was false, not so much. And isn't it nice of AP writer Colleen Long to call the accuswer "the victim"? I left a comment under the story about that. Here is the story:
Woman says Taylor did not have sex with teen
NEW YORK -- A woman has come forward as a defense witness in the sexual assault case against Lawrence Taylor, saying the 16-year-old girl who accused the NFL legend of rape never had sex with him, according to a statement from the woman confirmed Friday by Taylor's attorney.
The 23-year-old woman said in a sworn statement that she accompanied an alleged pimp and the 16-year-old girl to a hotel outside New York City where Taylor was staying. She said the teenager returned to the car with $300 in cash and said: "It was weird ... we didn't even have sex."
"He's innocent. She's lying. She wasn't raped," she said in the statement.
The statement was given to investigators working for the defense team and seen by The Associated Press. Defense attorney Arthur Aidala said he was planning to use the woman's testimony in the case.
The 16-year-old girl has never been identified publicly by police. The probe is being handled by the Ramapo police department, and Detective Lt. Brad Weidel said Friday the department had no comment. The Rockland County district attorney's office did not immediately return messages seeking comment.
The woman is a stripper who lived in a Bronx apartment with the alleged pimp, Rasheed Davis, and the girl. She said in the statement that she was with the two when New York City police arrested Davis and took the girl to a hospital.
The woman's account differs from those of police and of a federal criminal complaint in the case. Neither official account mentioned her.
The woman said in the statement that she waited with Davis for about 45 minutes while the girl was inside Taylor's hotel room, and that the girl knew she was there to meet the famous NFL star. Inside the room, Taylor rubbed himself on the girl, but they did not have sex, according to the woman's account.
"She wasn't sad, mad or anything like that," the woman said of the 16-year-old when she returned to the vehicle after being in Taylor's hotel room.
In the statement, the woman gave specific details of the teen's trip to the hotel and back. For example, she said that she got to the Holiday Inn in Suffern, N.Y., via the Tappan Zee Bridge from the Bronx, and described what the teen was wearing.
The AP saw the woman's statement on the condition that she not be identified. The defense said she feared possible retribution after she provided the statement on Monday.
Her account was first reported in the Daily News of New York and The New York Post. She said she has known Rasheed Davis for a while, but had only recently met the 16-year-old.
Taylor, 51, was charged May 6 with third-degree rape and patronizing a prostitute. Aidala has denied the charges. Davis was charged in Manhattan federal court last Thursday with sex trafficking and was being held without bail. His attorney did not comment on the charges.
Mark Lepselter, Taylor's business manager, said Friday he was glad the witness came forward.
"We are pleased that this witness chose to come forward to support Lawrence Taylor's version of the events of that evening," said Lepselter, president of Maxx Sports and Entertainment.
A federal criminal complaint filed against Davis recounts the victim's version of events and makes no mention of a third person in the vehicle at the time of his arrest in the Bronx. Authorities said the teen did not know who she was meeting at the hotel room.
According to the federal complaint, Davis beat up the 16-year-old, drove her to the hotel against her will late on May 5, and waited outside for an hour while she had sex with Taylor. The witness said Davis did not beat her.
The girl sent text messages to her uncle saying she was in trouble, police said. The uncle called the NYPD, who arrested Davis once he returned to the Bronx with the teenager. The girl provided information about the hotel where Taylor was staying and was taken to a hospital where physical evidence was collected, police said.
The woman said in her statement that she did not come forward initially because she worried she would get in trouble because she knew the girl was underage. But she said she came forward because she felt bad.
Rasheed Davis was sentenced in April 1994 to eight to 25 years in prison for first-degree manslaughter, a charge stemming from a fatal shooting. He was paroled in March 2008.
Taylor anchored the Giants' defense and led them to Super Bowl titles in 1987 and 1991. He was selected to the NFL's 75th Anniversary All-time Team.
A 10-time Pro Bowler, he was the NFL Most Valuable Player in 1986 and the NFL Defensive Player of the Year in 1981, 1982 and 1986.
The weight-loss company NutriSystem Inc. dropped Taylor as a spokesman because of his arrest.
Taylor is due in court again on June 10.
Link: http://www.mercedsunstar.com/2010/05/14/1422860/woman-says-taylor-did-not-have.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
41 comments:
The feminist "Rape Culture" lie is a major contributor to false rape accusations.
Which 'lying whore' is telling the truth?
Seriously...
Why are there so many gender feminist deviants who dominate our news coverage??
Eventually these main stream media outlets will have to pay for their biased and perverted coverage.
I wander what the neswpapers looked like when the Klu-Klux-Klan were "Empowered" by Rape hysteria. Were they cool and objective with their reporting...Or were they Faulty and inflamatory with their reporting??
It would be an excellent academic paper to research the medias role at the time in feeding "Rape hysteria" "Agitation propaganda" and the rise of the Klu-Klux-Klan. And obviously link it to todays perverted, faulty and inflamatory missinformation from main stream media outlets.
Have American news outlets regressed to a form of "irresponsible entertainment."
Are most of these "entertainment industries" now dominated by the Gender/Raunch culture??
He does still have to explain why he paid a whore $300 if he didn't have sex with her. But the possibility exists that this is a shakedown.
Still, it's sad to see a man like Lawrence Taylor reduced to associating with street whores and pimps. I'm sure he can get it for free if he tries.
Taylor needs to straighten his life out if he's seeking sex in this manner. Still, I hope this doesn't become another Roethlisberger discussion where the issue becomes the accused's character instead of whether he was falsely accused.
That comment, however, did make ESPN:
http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/nfl/news/story?id=5190040
The million dollar question: why was LT charged before the medical results came back?
Taylor needs to straighten his life out if he's seeking sex in this manner. Still, I hope this doesn't become another Roethlisberger discussion where the issue becomes the accused's character instead of whether he was falsely accused.
****
Excellent point.
Veteran Denied Job After Company Makes Background Check Mistake
5-15-2010 Kansas:
KANSAS CITY, KAN - A metro veteran needed a job to help pay some bills and get back on his feet, but he says the opportunity to work at the Schlitterbahn water park in Kansas City, Kansas, was taken away from him after he was falsely accused of being a sex offender.
Christopher Michael Reynolds says that he was supposed to start at the water park on May 4th, but when he showed up, officials told him to leave after he was informed that he was a registered sex offender.
"My jaw just dropped, I mean, no way," said Reynolds. "I was like, this is so untrue."
According to ADP, the company that conducts background checks for Schlitterbahn, Christopher Reynolds was convicted of sexual battery in Bexar, Indiana, on March 11, 2007.
But there is a big problem with the company's background check.
"When this happened, I was in Iraq, serving in the Army National Guard," said Reynolds.
Reynolds has a solid alibi with his military records, and the more he investigated, the more Reynolds learned about ADP's investigation.
"His eye color, his height, the weight, the fact that I've never been to Indiana," said Reynolds, who says that he even found a picture of the other Christopher Reynolds, the sex offender, who also has a different middle name.
It was a silly mistake, but one that Reynolds says has some serious implications.
"I was really relying on this job to get some stuff paid off, to get back on my feet," said Reynolds, who has been out of work for months and is now living at a homeless shelter. "I came home for medical issues for PTSD and depression and have been seeing a doctor for that. When I found out I had this job, I was excited, and when I found out I lost it, I was kind of down again."
Schlitterbahn spokesperson Jeffrey Siebert says that this wasn't the first time that ADP has gotten a background investigation wrong.
"If there is, for whatever reason, uncertainty, we just want to make sure that that is cleared up," said Siebert, who says that Reynolds will be allowed to continue the application process.
But Reynolds says no thanks, saying that he doesn't want the job because he's afraid that potential coworkers would have heard only the wrong half of the story. ..Source.. Stephanie Hockridge
Anon at 9:54: That's the sort of mistake that could only hurt a male. If the mistake had concerned a female, everyone would have figured something was wrong and cleared it -- and had a good laugh over it.
One interesting thought about women on sex offender reigstries - and there certainly ARE women on sex offender registries, even teenagers.
It is not uncommon for the sex offender registry to used used to track down and harass, attack, and even murder the men listed there. Men with very minor crimes have been murdered for having been 'listed'. Hit Listed, you could say.
Those crimes are kept on the down low, since sex offender registries are highly popular with the blockwaerts.
I have never EVER heard of a woman harmed after being tracked down on the registry.
In our 'rape culture' you might think a woman who commits a sex crime would be a prime target for a rapist or nefarious evil doer. It's like having your name scrawled on the men's room wall x1,000,000,000, is it not?
Never heard of it...
OT (or even more ON topic): I hope that False Rape Society will do an entire entry about this:
http://www.heraldsun.com/view/full_story/7396058/article-Crystal-Mangum-s-co-writer-claims-suspect-is-being-mistreated-because-of-lacrosse-case?instance=most_commented
This is about Crystal Mangum herself, who apparently is still languishing in jail, in spite of having her bond reduced twice, first from $1,000,000 to $250,000 to $100,000. The group Justice for Nifong (which consists of Michael Nifong and a handful of warped minds who continue to support him) is holding a candlelight vigil for the lying trash, and so far has been unable to raise even the $10,000 that would necessary to spring her.
The individual in this article claims that Crystal Mangum is being treated unfairly by the system -- even though she was given a total free pass on her false rape fraud!
Wonder what they consider 'fair' treatment to be?
Declaring the Duke guys guilty, sending them to prison, and exonerating Nifong?
That is, after all, what happens in most cases.
Who says children never lie?
"District Attorney Tracey Cline said discussing the fairness of Mangum's bail situation would go against the policy in her office of not making public comments about pending cases."
pffffftt!!
*wipes coffee off monitor*
http://www.fanhouse.com/2010/05/14/a-cross-lacrosse-shouldnt-bear/
Off-topic, but very relevant to FRS.
http://gizmodo.com/5530178/top-ten-reasons-you-should-quit-facebook
http://petewarden.typepad.com/searchbrowser/2010/04/how-i-got-sued-by-facebook.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/15/delete-facebook-account-q_n_576956.html
Child Sex: The New Crack?
5-16-2010 National:
From: Norm Pattis at "Defending Sex Crimes"
Those of us who earn our living on the front lines of the criminal justice system are often too shell-shocked to recognize larger trends. But when things go beyond a mere trend, and take the form and shape of a tsunami, everyone notices. So I write today about allegations of sexual misconduct with minors, the latest tidal wave to inundate the courts. It is the new crack cocaine of the criminal justice system.
There was a time when it seemed as if every other call for representation was from some soul caught within the web of a federal indictment for conspiring to sell crack cocaine. Here's how the game was played: The feds would target a suspected dealer. They'd watch him, record his phone conversations, and then, after several weeks, sweep in and arrest every person who as much as touched a rock of crack. Those at the periphery of the action were expected to plead guilty and get favorable terms in exchange for fingering those at the center of the conspiracy.
These cases became an art form, with predictable acts, plots and characters. (Client: "We never talked about the coke on the phone." Lawyer: "Yes, I know you talked about shrimp. But tell me, what have you to corroborate that you were really in the business of selling seafood?") Once you've seen a couple dozen of these, you've pretty well seen them all.
Today new melodramas are unfolding. They all involve child sex claims. It seems that two of every three calls we get now comes from someone accused of either looking at child pornography on line, enticing a purported minor on line to have sex, or groping a niece or daughter of a friend. Law enforcement has got its game down pretty well now, so expect more and more of these cases to be brought until, for reasons as yet unforeseen, some new fashions sweeps lawmen off their feet.
I'm not the only lawyer to observe this trend. I live in a tiny jurisdiction, and cover courthouses throughout my state. Lawyers gossip about what they are doing. Many lawyers are stunned by the sudden volume in these cases. Sex, I say, is the new crack.
I doubt seriously that some new wave of lechery has overtaken our society. In terms of the actual contact between adults and minors, I suspect things are pretty much the way they have always been. Sometimes the wrong things go bump in the night. We no longer overlook these transgressions: Today we seek long periods of incarceration in the effort to banish untoward desire.
But what has changed in the ubiquity of images on the Internet. I represent plenty of young men who took their libido for a walk on line. Some of them got curious about things they might never try. They looked at pictures of forbidden acts. Now the state and federal government want them to go to prison. It seems like a waste of life and human potential.
Other young men dabble at sex on line. The forms this lust takes is sadly common. If I hear about another guy in his twenties promising an undercover cop posing as a 14-year-old girl that he will teach her to give oral sex like a porn star, I'll sigh a deep groan of despair. I fear that Dante's vision of Hell is far more interesting that the warp and woof of our contemporary sins. Lust is ugly; we bend in only so many grotesque ways.
We're in the grip of a strange moral panic. The end does not seem yet to be in sight.
Read More of Article...
cont....
But here is what I worry about: As law enforcement perfects the craft of prosecuting these cases the standard for when to prosecute will get lower and lower. I now represent a young man accused of possessing four images of child pornography on his computer. This calls for prison. If there were only three images, he'd go free. So we fight now about whether he actually looked at all four images, and whether that matters. Were lawmakers thinking when they passed laws calling for mandatory prison time?
Or consider a new statute in Connecticut, aggravated sexual assault in the first degree. Touch two or more children under the age of 13 in an improper manner, and you look a twenty-five year mandatory sentence dead in the eye. That's the same penalty as required for manslaughter with a firearm. The real import of a statute like this is to frighten defendants into a plea: anything to avoid the risk of trial, whether they are guilty or not.
We're in the grip of a strange moral panic. The end does not seem yet to be in sight.
It is far too easy for lawmakers to pass legislation requiring draconian sentences from within the antiseptic chambers of a legislative assembly. Who, after all, wants to appear to go easy on those who abuse children? But not all forms of abuse are identical, and neither are all defendants. Sometimes a mistake is just a mistake and the harm than comes of making it a crime dwarfs all justice. I wish that lawmakers were required to go to court to see their handiwork.
I wish that lawmakers could see that making child sex allegations the new crack cocaine of the criminal code is a manifest tragedy. I wish, finally, that each lawmaker were required to spend a few months behind bars to get a sense of what it is to live isolated and afraid. Is it to much to ask those who make the product to test drive what they are producing? ..Source..
Read More of Article...
How great is the danger that men will encounter child pornography online through no fault of their own? For example, if they're browsing legal pornography, how likely is it that they would stumble across illegal images?
Anonymous said...
How great is the danger that men will encounter child pornography online through no fault of their own? For example, if they're browsing legal pornography, how likely is it that they would stumble across illegal images?
May 16, 2010 10:08:00 PM
I think it is very likely. It is also possible for a malicious " black hat hacker {cracker} to hack/crack into someone's computer and upload illegal porn without the person's knowlege.
Scary.
"We're in the grip of a strange moral panic. The end does not seem yet to be in sight."
We have ALWAYS been in the grip of a strange moral panic when it comes to men and sex. It's just been expanded from the "rape" of white women by black men, to all manner of sex acts committed by any male. By any logical measure, it is an overreaction.
This isn't a moral panic we are going through...Its just that the Gender/Raunch lesbian community wants a "Cut" of every sex related dollar that gets spent in the U.S.
In fact the Gender/Raunch community is fostering a hyper-sexualised society, and even adulturateing children as soon as society lets them.
The Gender/Raunch are like pimps who are puting their girls on the streets, and in our schools...they just demand a piece of the pork afterward.
"This isn't a moral panic we are going through...Its just that the Gender/Raunch lesbian community wants a "Cut" of every sex related dollar that gets spent in the U.S."
If the second part of what you are saying is true, then it is precisely a moral panic that could achieve that outcome.
Also:
"putting" has two "t's"
"adulterating" has no "e"
@Archivist
We have ALWAYS been in the grip of a strange moral panic when it comes to men and sex. It's just been expanded from the "rape" of white women by black men, to all manner of sex acts committed by any male. By any logical measure, it is an overreaction.
Shouldn't that be "alleged" sex acts? In some instances, the man has never even met the woman as in the Tucker Carlson case.
Yes, yes, Anon, you are correct, of course. My focus in that comment was more on the expansion of prohibitted acts as opposed to false claims, per se. Thus, a boy who pees in the woods winds up with a conviction for indecent exposure and is then put on a sex registry list that forces him to live under a bridge and take a polygraph test every few months.
Wouldn't it be nice if someone like Mr. Carlson would lend his name and talents to our fight?
It would be nice if Mr. Carlson, the Duke LaCrosse players, the Hofstra accused, the DNA exonerated would lend a voice to this cause.
I can thibnk of several reasons they do not -
First being they are the free men. They are exonerated. They do not live in the shadows of shame or registries, and do not want to think of what might have been.
Secondly, here in the safety of FRS cocoon, this subject can be freely discussed. Out in 'the world' there are crazies, accusers, profiteers and hysterics willing to do ANYTHING to shut you up about this topic.
Anonymous said...
"This isn't a moral panic we are going through...Its just that the Gender/Raunch lesbian community wants a "Cut" of every sex related dollar that gets spent in the U.S."
If the second part of what you are saying is true, then it is precisely a moral panic that could achieve that outcome.
Also:
"putting" has two "t's"
"adulterating" has no "e"
May 17, 2010 8:23:00 AM
To Ms. Spelling Monitor: I know think is spelled think, not thibnk.
It's a flippin' typo.
Anon, I agree. Note, I never said it would be easy, just that it would be nice.
"To Ms. Spelling Monitor: I know think is spelled think, not thibnk.
It's a flippin' typo."
Fine. Then get your act together and stop typing nonsense on this blog. You are wasting my time and as well as everyone else's time with points that do not need to be made more than once. There are few here that need to see "gender/raunch" comments on nearly EVERY post. slwerner and others have debunked your claims repeatedly, and your lack of attention to detail hurts the quality and reputation of FRS. I know you feel strongly about this issue, but I feel just as strongly that disinterested others who happen upon FRS will write us off if we are inattentive to words, language, grammar, and diction. We must give our gender feminist adversaries absolutely zero ammunition to write us off and make us look stupid. It's not the occasional typo that we all make, but in nearly every post, there is something to be found in your writing. This is NOT a polemic, but an invitation to do better. What seems trivial to you may actually be very important to other people, and believe me it is important to those whom we need to persuade concerning our cause.
Also, it's Mister Spelling Monitor, not Ms.
Finally, it's nothing personal. I'd say the same above to anyone else who repeatedly made the same content/grammatical/spelling mistakes here, because as a falsely accused man I care more than you know about the mission of this blog, and I want it to be the best it can possibly be, comments included.
Enough said. I'm off my soapbox.
@Achivist
"Wouldn't it be nice if someone like Mr. Carlson would lend his name and talents to our fight?"
Archivist-- why don't you invite him to do that?
Tucker Carlson is the editor of "The Daily Caller"
http://dailycaller.com/author/tucker/
I'd ask him myself, but my case is not yet resolved. Maybe Mr. Carlson would do some guest writing here if we asked nicely, or would give us space on The Daily Caller for you or ESB to write a piece for publication there. Just a thought... :)
OK, MISSTER Spelling Monitor - I'm NOT the gender/raunch person.
I just happen to think it's the thought that counts, not the spelling.
Gender/Raunch person has been called on the carpet time and again, but continues to bleat out the same statement over and over.
I like to think it's a robo-call instead of a real person.
"OK, MISSTER Spelling Monitor - I'm NOT the gender/raunch person. "
Good. Then don't act like him. And watch your language. Spelling. Etc.
Some of the best commenters here make atrocious spelling blunders and typos.
I can't tell you how many times I have quelled the urge to correct a certain person who repeatedly spells "lose" as "loose".
But I respect his thoughts and what he has to say far too much- and recognize his intelligence far outweighs my own - to have the temerity to correct his typos or spelling.
I work with extremely intelligent and gifted men have find many, if not most, are poor spellers - particularly those mathematically inclined, such as engineers.
I don't for one moment think I'm smarter or what I have to say is somehow more important because of spelling abilities.
Neither should you.
It's why I presumed you were a woman.
I too care deeply about the mission of this blog. I know it's the sincerity of it's supporters that makes it the best it can be - not nit picking others on typos or spelling.
Gender/rauch robo guy gets called out on his inane comments, which is cool. He is still given a forum to vent, his voice is heard, which is also cool.
Leave the spelling corrections to the petty. Dummies that can't spell are falsely accused. Their voices deserve to be heard as much as anyone else's.
One of the problems is that blogger doesn't have spell-check in comments. Pretty much everywhere else we write has spell-check. I care more about the content of the comment than whether every word is spelled correctly.
"I work with extremely intelligent and gifted men have find many, if not most, are poor spellers - particularly those mathematically inclined, such as engineers."
I agree that the world could be divided between English majors and Math majors. However, in this medium, where most will or must remain anonymous, appearance matters as much as substance. In fact, I would go so far as to say that more then a few who have been falsely accused and are in prison are there, in part, because of their lack of erudition, eloquence, or overall intelligence -- not their fault to be sure, but it is their responsibility. While blogger may not have spell-check capabilities, Firefox and IE both have tools and add-ons that will help with spelling, grammar, etc. There are also plenty of open source and commercial products to help:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13880_3-9992321-68.html
http://www.ultralingua.com/products/english-grammar-checker-grammatica.html
http://www.wintertree-software.com/app/gramxp/index.html
http://www.favbrowser.com/firefox-safari-grammar-style-and-spell-checker/
http://www.afterthedeadline.com/
"Leave the spelling corrections to the petty. Dummies that can't spell are falsely accused. Their voices deserve to be heard as much as anyone else."
I disagree. I won't overlook laziness when remedies are within easy reach. Petty or not, I think it would be a shame to see such lack of attention to detail lead to a dire outcome. It reminds me of the NASA engineers that cratered the Mars Climate Orbiter on 23 September 1999 because one group was making calculations in feet rather than meters -- a $125 million dollar mistake. Again, it's not a condemnation, but an invitation to everyone to think, write, and communicate better. We are ambassadors, representatives and advocates for what may be literally thousands of men, boys, and women who are falsely accused each year. We owe it to them to make sure every letter and word we type is the best it can possibly be and that the positions we take here are correct, accurate, precise, factual and complete.
Think what you will. I won't mention this issue again.
I've said my piece.
Gender/rauch robo guy gets called out on his inane comments, which is cool. He is still given a forum to vent, his voice is heard, which is also cool.
****
Gender/Raunch Robo Guy? Lol!
Anon: We owe it to them to make sure every letter and word we type is the best it can possibly be and that the positions we take here are correct, accurate, precise, factual and complete.
I don't believe it is laziness that is the culprit, but rather passion.
Dear God, I misspelled raunch.
Please, negate everything I just said, it does not matter a whit, since I was too lazy to spell check.
I find it more disturbing for some self appointed person to correct spelling in the middle of a passionate conversation, than any misspelled word.
Anyone posting non factual information gets rightly smacked down. Immediately. Don't you worry about that.
Now, I'm going to lose my train of thought and check, check, check my spelling so as not to degrade the quality of this forum.
Post a Comment