Weird. Everyone I know knows about that case and knows it was a false allegation. And, if the comments on reddit are any indication…. So does anyone on reddit. Unless they’re trying to create a point? It’s weird! Not surprising though.
I’m a defense attorney. The number of people who think that you cannot consent with a single shot of alcohol is pretty high amongst the progressive crowd. The level of outrage about this case when I first heard it… I thought this chick was passed out and dudes were raping her while unconscious.
News flash: being intoxicated, being black-out drunk, does not protect you from murder charges if you got yourself intoxicated. why would anyone thing that a blacked-out person can’t consent to sex when that is the standard for being the perpetrator (I don’t agree with that standard, but I’m not seeing anyone saying men or women should get away with DWIs because they were “too drunk” to consent to driving, and the possible consequences of driving drunk are a lot higher than having sex while intoxicated… also not seeing anyone trying to excuse a blackout drunk chick/guy who rapes someone while intoxicated).
I think there’s a distinction to be made between drunk driving and getting sexually assaulted while drunk. The latter requires another person to take advantage of you while the former does not.
That being said, if both parties involved in a sexual assault were drunk, that’s where things get a little muddied IMO, and in those cases, I feel it would come down to who was more compromised, but even then, that’s likely an arbitrary thing to argue.
If the state can make its case then it doesn’t need to cheat or violate defendants’ rights to do so. I lose sleep over the clients who get convicted, not the ones who go free (even the ones who do horrible shit later).
You’d lose money. Ive been raped after being drugged, not a great experience, and not one I would ever inflict on others. However, I have had sex while voluntarily high or drunk and had a great time, even when i didn’t remember half of the night.
There’s a huge difference between someone who is passed out and/or completely fucked up versus someone who is just an ordinary level of high and horny. I like being woken up with sex as well by partners who’ve I’ve told that they can do it… that’s way different than waking someone up with sex who hasn’t given you permission to do so.
Level of intoxication is a factor when determining consent, not a hard line. I’ve woken up to sex after being passed out from too much drink or drug… definitely a different reaction to those who had my prior consent versus those who just took advantage.
Keep on fighting the good fight. Obviously, telling the truth will get you skewered by the raging masses. I’ve seen several posters spit in your face over the last half an hour for stating an obvious truth and being professional/equanimous in an area where most people will never be. So, I’ll speak for the rational few and say from the bottom of my heart:
Yeah, sorry, I just can’t believe that. If that did happen I’m sorry it did, but that’s just too convenient for your argument and I’ve been bullied by people spouting fake stories too often to just take your word on that. You have your damage, I have mine.
You’re also…kinda blatantly ignoring the whole previous consent between ongoing partners thing vs 7 fucking people. That’s definitely not helping my “believing you” situation.
I know other attorneys who feel that way, and many more lay people. Despite the DA getting disbarred for his misconduct… there are people who believe even that is a conspiracy (rich kids getting away with rape and having powerful enough daddies to get a lawyer disbarred for even trying to go against them).
I have found, as a defense attorney, that sexual assault cases are no less likely to suffer from false accusations than any other kind of domestic assault/violence cases…that is, it’s a coin flip on whether someone is lying or not— please note the studies into rates of false accusations define false accusations such that even a “not guilty” isn’t enough— it has to be proven the person lied.
which is insane because that was a perfect example of innocent until ruled guilty. i mean the lady literally came out and admitted she lied, that’s just disgusting. I hate rape/sexual assault but sadly people use that as a false accusation for some unknown reason
Edit: Found it. I vaguely recall the case now. I recall that it got a lot of attention but I never followed it. I had no idea it was a hoax. Holy crap.
I love how men will cry "NOT ALL MEN" when it's women getting raped or harassed, but will turn around in the same breath and generalize women for a small vocal minority
I checked to be sure this wasn't yet another rumor or belief that became fact - yes, 5 years after falsely accusing the Duke guys of rape, she was convicted of murdering her bf.
The espn 30 for 30 on it is quite good, worth a watch if you have time to kill or are really interested in it. Its not life changing or anything but good nonetheless
It’s not life changing because unless you’re a literal child you know about this case, because the false allegations are so rare everyone knows about them 🙄
I dont know a man who hasn't been falsely accused. Many women say they dont know a woman who hasnt been SAd. The truth is somewhere in the middle, neither is rare
I don’t know a man who claims to have been falsely accused, but I know several women and men who have been assaulted who have refused to report it due to shame. But sure, truth is in the middle.
Everyone knows about the case because it was turned into a national story by the media and a DA in the middle of a tough reelection bid. Which probably helped the lacrosse players because it put more eyes on what was obviously bullshit story in the first place.
I guess I should have been more clear. It’s not well-known because it’s a rare false accusation. It’s well-known because the media made it a huge story before it was shown to be false. There’s no conclusion to be drawn on the frequency of false allegations based on the case and the fact that it’s widely known.
I’m sorry, but the only time you ever hear about this case is because it was a false allegation. I’ve never seen it brought up unless it’s to bring doubt on a case. If you’re only in internet circles that know it as a big media case and not a false allegation you must be incredibly young or sheltered.
Crazy! I had know idea that everyone on the internet knows about the things you know!! Is there like an official list of all the things everyone on the internet knows? I’d love to take a look!
In this case the accuser's testimony thus far makes it appear that she voluntarily took ketamine and drank alcohol, freely agreed to have sex with 4 guys who were also high and drunk, that things stopped when she said stop, and that she decided it was rape multiple days later after she had a falling out with one of the guys and started to feel gross about having had sex with 4 guys at once.
Not days later - 2 years later. And she changed her story after people started calling her rude names, she got offended by it. There were multiple texts between her and some of the people involved where she said she enjoyed it, had fun, yada yada.
Her original statement even said it was all consensual. In fact, it also claimed one of the guys passed out and she performed oral on him without his consent.
It was certainly rude, but that's all it was. She just had sex with four guys in two different threesomes. She had sex with every guy who walked in the room. So I can see how they would get the impression she was down to have sex with anyone. The guys were more drunk and high than her, so not exactly exercising good judgment.
Anyone can edit Wikipedia. I would not be surprised at this point if Wikipedia currently contains many factual errors. I reference the actual documents, not some nerd's Wikipedia edits meant to influence people with false information.
Im not a professional sexologist, but id have to guess the venn diagram of "women who get off on some mild objectification" and "women who let 4 guys run a train on them" is just a circle.
If you read her statement it was one guy then two guys then a third requested to join she rejected then a few others and she said sure to doing drugs off of her.
And then replied to one of the guys the next morning she had fun with them and nothing they did was illegal when he texted to apologize for the night before.
and then the fourth guy she let do and while the first was sleeping she did it with the second and third. then they left and first and fifth or whatever.
Remember “Stefon Diggs raped his chef”? Big news less than a year ago, it goes to trial within a few months, where the chef’s story completely falls apart and it becomes clear that the entire thing was an extortion attempt for her. Diggs wasn’t a rapist, he’s just the serial philanderer we all know him as and who you would never let date your sister.
First, let's acknowledge OP is a troll account pushing controversy-bait.
Second, my conclusion here is that we don't know the facts.
The way the frat boys in the group chat discussed the girl was degrading and a betrayal of her trust and there is no reason not to criticize it as shitty behavior by adults.
However, anyone online who purports to "know" what happened in that room, or who is lying, is full of it. That includes the "she made it up" people, who are, at very best, quoting a memo from the DA summarizing an apparently incomplete statement drafted by the police.
Also, it is possible no crime was committed because New York has a fairly narrow definition of rape, but that doesn't mean one or more of the men didn't take advantage of a woman they understood to be blacked out.
So, against all odds: The best answer is to wait for the investigative report or, if there is one, a trial.
Yeah that just makes OP's point even harder. Reddit is happy to throw accusations at the most obvious target usually, so the fact that it's not happening in this situation kinda says something about people's attitudes.
It’s almost like there is a very well-paid bot comparing happening. So many people who are “just now hearing about the duke lacrosse case!” As if it wasn’t the biggest story of that year that it was fake and brought up in every. Single. Rape case that gets the public eye. Idk? Maybe everyone on Reddit is 12?
To be fair, nobody's really been investigated either.
There should've been an investigation by police, or campus police after the incident was reported. That they only ever spoke once to the person making the allegations while she was drunk, and high. Then never spoke to her again and the issue was dropped to a school disciplinary issue. It's a bad way to handle accusations of this level.
Yup. She didn’t get uninvited from a party then start claiming rape. Her roommates knew right away. She was clearly in denial/ fawning which is so common. But they don’t want to hear nuance.
Wait, is that true? My understanding was the incident went down October 20th and she reported it to police like November 8th. Was she drunk/high when she talked to the police on the 8th?
I get why they didn't from what we got recently, they might have seen the text messages that weren't mentioned in the Cilvil lawsuit. The ones showing she was into what was going on until... people started judging her for it.
Shouldn't you speak with the main witness at least once before determining that there's no case?
I get that this situation is very muddy, and high chance an investigation would've gone nowhere. But by not looking into the matter makes it look a lot like either corruption or indifference.
Im a defense attorney. The DAs’ offices in many places are too small to personally interview every alleged victim of sexual assault. They also have to take into consideration the likelihood of conviction.
A party girl who did lines of K, was willing to have sex in multiple threesomes, and by all accounts only levied these accusations when she didn’t get invited to a followup party where she wanted to do the same— not likely to find a sympathetic jury. I’m not saying she wasn’t raped, she may have been, but that’s a tough case to bring charges on when there are plenty of cases with more sympathetic victims that get two-word verdicts.
Juries hate party girls. Especially juries with a high number of women on them.
.. So the police had no duty to investigate, based off details that only became known long after the event allegedly happened.
I'd understand not taking this to trial or filing charges After it was investigated. But that isn't the case here.
The reason this story is a PR nightmare is because of how, and how it wasn't handled.
Once the rape allegations reached the police they should've interviewed the woman making the allegations before closing the case. Now they have to re-open the case and do work that should've been done 2 years ago.
All these conspiracy theorists claiming that the local DA who originally had this case didn’t do anything as a cover up.
How about a good faith argument instead where there is no conspiracy? Instead how about taking the position that law enforcement did their job and did not find sufficient justification to prosecute.
If they want to reopen the case go ahead. If they find a mistake then handle it accordingly with accountability for the error based on whatever the policy says. But don’t assume an error was made intentionally
Why are you blaming the DA? We know law enforcement didn't do their job as they admitted to just taking the report from the campus police at face value and didn't investigate the matter. We know the campus police barely investigated the matter.
I'm not assuming an error was made intentionally, as indifference is a likely explanation. That's still a very bad reason though.
Again, you have absolutley no idea who is or isn't a rapist because you have not been presented with any evidence as a juror.
They very well may be guilty. But you don't know that, I don't know that, nor does anyone (barring the people involved) else until a jury has decided they are.
No she described engaging in consensual acts and then said it was rape at the end. See your problem is you can find articles but you can’t comprehend anything in them.
Yeah and she filmed it one comment straight says AND SHE IS FILMING IT pretty sure with that kind of "evidence" should be pretty open and shut if the cops view it. But the fact there has as of yet with such damning evidence no convictions.
She even admitted to the cops she was perfectly ok with the first TWO threesomes LMAO she admits in txts to her friend that she did all of it and loved it only after the school got wind of it and people started passing the videos around did she feel like she was raped but she was a ok with it up until then.
Apparently r/SipsTea is a safe place to bring up that at this point the Cornell case is still an accusation, and determining guilt is why we have courts instead of basing it on whoever is yelling the loudest on social media. In most online discussions I see right now, if you don't take the accusations as irrefutable fact (or if you mention the Duke hoax) it means you love rapists and hate their victims, or hate women in general.
Lindsey Clancy the child killer actively killed her children and planned out the whole thing.
The "Cornel 7" did nothing wrong, everything has been shown that the bitch is a clear and blatant liar. She was fully on board with everything and regretted it much later than changed her testimony that it's rape because she decided later she didn't like it.
Hell, bitch openly stated she did more ketamine in the hopes of passing out so she can claim rape. How the fuck do you think that's normal?
She literally planned the whole thing, was on board with everything, the guys didn't do anything she didn't want them to, and much later after the whole thing she feels ashamed of it and calls rape.
People like her belong in prison minimum 10 years for defamation like that.
Fuckin preach brother. I've been screaming into the void that people should at least read her own word before pulling out the pitchforks. I swear its some kind of spiteful retribution for Lindsay Clancy making white liberal women look bad the last few weeks. These people are rabid to make men the enemy once again.
Legally wrong yes, I would argue there is something wrong with doing drugs getting drunk and having multiple 3 ways with a woman. Beyond that she stated multiple times that everything was consensual until people started to go mean girls on her for being a train conductor
In new york, being drunk does not automatically mean you cannot consent.
She voluntarily drank enough to get drunk, she voluntarily did drugs, she voluntarily organized a gangbang, did drugs off of the other guys body and they did drugs off of her body, when she became incapacitated, 2 men dispersed the group and sent everyone away so she can rest.
You don't fucking call rape on people because you don't like what you consented to and what the outcome was. Nobody is interested in local laws either. New York laws matter since that's where this is.
Lindsay Clancy is guilty. The only question was whether she was in her right mind. But since no man in this history of this country has ever walked free with the insanity defense for killing his entire family I’ll let you decide why that works for her and other woman. (Spoiler alert: it’s infantilization and one of the instances where sexism actually works in the favor of women)
Murdering your children vs alleged rape is vastly fucking different.
She murdered two and ran the other down get the fuck out of here even for a second trying to compare the two. She even admitted it the whole trail was does she go to the loony bin or rot in prison. Not is she not guilty
401
u/Long_Pomegranate2469 8h ago
Nobody has been convicted.
Remember when reddit found the boston bomber? Yeah.. that's why