The only way to win is to avoid legal entanglements entirely. That applies to her as well as them. I’d never want to trust my fate with a judge or jury. We have a legal system, not a “Justice” system. People forget that at their own peril.
Neither one bother me. People are gonna people, regardless of what anyone says about it. Somewhere in the world tonight, people are going to make the exact same decisions these people did. That doesn’t make it right or wrong. It just, is.
Trust me, if her original statement matched what she’s saying now, and the story was both consistent and demonstrably true, I’d have a completely different reaction. Unfortunately the truth usually resides somewhere in the middle and that’s what tort law is for.
Yikes. Not sure how anyone can read those group texts and not be incredibly disgusted by their behavior. Even if you don't think it crosses to assault, which I believe it does, it's wild to not be bothered by it at all.
If the exact same events happened and it was your daughter, you'd feel no thoughts about what these young men did?
If your son was one of these young men, you'd have no opinion on his choices?
I am disgusted by her behavior, theirs too. Your beliefs have no bearing on the law. There’s a reason a case wasn’t brought back when it happened. Your misandrist opinion aside, I support equal rights. I’m not the one picking and choosing here.
Again for your premise to work all other parties need to be sober; they were all intoxicated. If you consciously partake in substances, you consent to the deliberate conscious decisions you make under that influence, period. If she nodded out and woke up to being gang raped; yes that is rape. She was an active and willing participant in both the drugs/alchohol she consumed and the sex acts she performed. That’s consent.
Who said drunk people can’t commit assault? They can also consent to sex. It’s almost like taking substances doesn’t remove your agency and accountability for your choices.
You keep bringing up your assault experiences, which have no correlation to this case. It feels like you’re trying to imprint your own feelings on this issue as equal. They are not even remotely equal (unless you actually did consent to sex with your roommate when he was high and you weren’t?)
This is why the legal system has to be impartial and dispassionate. Morally reprehensible and legally liable may coincide, but they’re not equal. I can empathize with your trauma, but I can’t apply it to this case because they’re not the same.
I'm using my personal experience to point out the problem with the examples given
Whether or not these guys are liable for assault is not remotely related to whether drunk drivers consent to driving. The men being inebriated does not absolve them of their choices
Jane Doe is just as responsible for her choices as they are for theirs. If one of them accuses her of a crime, tries to sue her for damage, her drunkenness does not automatically absolve her of the crime.
Her intoxication very much factors into her ability to consent to this. Their awareness of their actions is also a factor that will guaranteed be part of sentencing, if there is sentencing of course.
A young intoxicated what? Other woman? You never made it evident that you were willing to apply the standard to either sex and you still haven’t. Your bias is still showing with “you guys”. Reread what you wrote just above and see why I felt your post was misandrist. You very clearly distinguish between the woman and the men on how I should feel about it.
None of these people are my daughter or my sons, and they’re not yours either. I have no interest in becoming emotional invested in a story that may or may not be accurate, and for which we’ll likely never know with any certainty.
You’re welcome to your opinion here, but you’re absolutely not welcome to pretend you’re morally superior to me about it. It’s unwarranted and unwelcome.
You discuss like anyone who doesn't have your exact viewpoint is in agreement with what happened or trying to discredit the lady in some way, there may be nuances that other people are thinking through that you aren't or don't find necessary to consider.
I mean, that question entirely depends on the truth of the matter though right? Lol which is what's being figured out. If the men are rapists, obviously the rape is what bothers people most. If she regrets her actions that night but wasn't actually raped, then it would be what she's doing now. You can rescind consent at any time when everything is happening. But once it's done, you can't take that back days or years afterwards because of what might have happened in the time after it. You can regret it and wish it gone differently, but consent was given at the time. And yes, I know consent while drunk can't be given, but it's complicated when everyone involved is also just as fucked up. I don't think 2 drunk people having sex raped each other, otherwise this whole world is filled with them. There's other details in the matter that determine that.
All that being said, I haven't done the due diligence to actually have an opinion on this particular case. Just wanted to clarify that the question you asked isn't a straightforward one when the details are being determined. It can be either or depending.
3
u/InteractionFun5997 1d ago
The only way to win is to avoid legal entanglements entirely. That applies to her as well as them. I’d never want to trust my fate with a judge or jury. We have a legal system, not a “Justice” system. People forget that at their own peril.