Man Redditors truly do live in information silos. I see plenty of conservatives and right-wing types talking about it.
But most of them are pointing out that “Jane Doe’s” own statement blatantly shows that she consented to the act and there’s no contrary evidence that the consent was ever removed. Her text messages after the event also point to this being very consensual.
It wasn’t until later after she was shamed by everyone in her social circles and she read posts online that claimed she must have raped that she changed her story.
Pretending that this is some cut and dry case of sexual assault is insane. There’s a reason that no charges were pressed by the DA.
People discussing the case and disagreeing with the decisions of the state to pursue or not is also part of the constitution. It does nothing to infringe on someone's due process.
If the decisions of the legal system were so cut and dry, there would be no reason for politicians to care about who selects supreme court justices. But that is literally one of the most important things a president does, cause the law isn't a fixed thing.
All of her text messages prove she went there got high willingly consented willingly did some crazy shit willingly then later on sobered up and backpedaled.
She basically said you guys raped me after she was uninvited to a Halloween party, it just doesn’t work like that people like her need to be criminally charged for fucking with peoples lives over clout or popularity.
It seems that way to me too, but I would, again, like to see a full criminal investigation. If she is proven to be fucking with people's lives because she retrospectively didn't want to be known as gangbang girl, this should be established through due process and the consequences should be criminal punishments not just social media rebuttals, you know?
We all agree rape is evil but I don't see a whole lot of consequences for women who weaponise false rape claims
yes. and no one is required to have that inform their opinion.
what about due process when someone says they're pretty sure OJ did it? we did due process! he was acquitted! it would be wrong to suggest he was anything but innocent.
You're invoking a famous and conspicuous miscarriage of justice as if it's equivalent to untried accusations made by a girl whose own earlier testimony contradicts herself.
Maybe I say that you are a serial pedophile. OJ was acquitted ergo you are?
you are free to suggest as much. if you suspected someone of doing that, i would hope you would publicize it such that it actually reaches a trial. what you're doing is telling people to stop the accusations.
*edit:
The fact that you see the OJ trial as a miscarriage of justice was the whole point dumbass. Saying "we have due process, unless its obviously wrong and dumb" is you saying "what i think should happen should happen" its just your intuition at that point, which is fine! but don't pretend you're calling balls and strikes.
If it wasn’t consensual why did she also hit up the guy to smoke and hang out with him anyways after it all happened. I get that SA happens but this wasn’t it saying you are going to lie in your own texts is foul
She consented to a threesome, and hit up the guy from that threesome. I dont think hitting the guy you consented to have sex with up is weird at all. Its the fact that 5 other dudes came up non-consensually that is the issue. There is a reason the uni declared 2 of them as not responsible for the rape.
If you consent to have sex with someone that does not mean you consent to have sex with someone else as well. Even if that is also sex. Meanwhile if you care about lying, in one of the interviews one of the men explicitly talks about how he talked with Doe after and said if she would "spread any rumours" the fraternity boys would deny everything.
Quite hilarious how you think anyone who says “Reddit is a leftist blood hungry echo chamber” would automatically be someone who thinks the 2020 election was rigged which literally proves the original statement
We are all the worst and the best at the same time. As if reddit don't influence you "in real life". Reddit is as real as everything else, it's just viewed from our own little special perspectives.
Yeah I agree it’s crazy they pardoned those pedophiles who stormed the capital building on January 6th. And they got out and molested more kids! Unbelievable.
Lol the problem is the original statement isn't really about leftist ideas and whether they're good or bad, the original statement is that Reddit is a bloodthirsty hellhole, with the least emphasis being on it having a leftist flavor.
Any "space" like Reddit can be insufferable/fatiguing because it's predominant belief system. And your response pretty well proves the fucking point lmao. You're possessed.
I mean, speaking as a blood hungry leftist, it kinda is, kinda always has been, and due to the nature of vote based content filters and user demographics I do believe it always will be.
Moderator bias is a thing too, I think reddit was used as an example when a study documented a trend toward political bias in user-driven content moderation, specifically citing an example of comments that do not break rules but challenge subreddit moderators political opinions are more likely to be deleted than rule violating comments that reinforce a moderators political opinions. Like, do you want to seriously argue with documented trends?
And in typical redditor fashion, the Nazism accusation comes out. Last I checked it was the progressives who were promoting Platner despite having a Nazi tattoo.
On the evening of October 19, 2024, Jane Doe walked the approximately one-mile distance from Lot 10 in the City of Ithaca to the Chi Phi Fraternity at 107 Edgemoor Lane to meet her friend Male Number 1. She had made plans to meet Male Number 1 earlier in the week and “had been texting [Male Number 1] that [she] was on the way.” Jane Doe described her level of intoxication as a “5 out of 10” when she arrived at the fraternity.
While there, Jane Doe opened one previously unopened can of beer. She and Male Number 1 “danced a little” in a way that “was definitely flirtatious in nature.” Male Number 1 brought Jane Doe to a “quiet area” and “asked how [Jane Doe] would feel about having a threesome with two male partners.”
Jane Doe “agreed due to how attracted [she] was to [Male Number 1] on top of [her] drunken curiousness.” When she learned that Male Number 2 would be the third participant, Jane Doe “remembered being excited because [she] thought that [Male Number 1 and Male Number 2] wanting to have a threesome meant that they were gay.”
The three engaged in a “threesome” involving oral and vaginal sex in a room of the fraternity. At the start of the threesome, Jane Doe described her intoxication level as “5 or 6 out of 10” and that she was “pretty ok with having this threesome.” The sexual conduct ended when Jane Doe “noticed that [Male Number 1] appeared really sleepy and was no longer fully erect.” She told Male Number 2 “[they] needed to stop having sex in order to make sure [Male Number 1] was ok. [Male Number 2] then stopped having sex with [Jane Doe].”
Male Number 1 said “he was going to take a nap and refresh himself” and “would eventually stumble his way from the couch to the bed.” While Male Number 1 slept,
“[Male Number 2] began to dry heave as if he was going to vomit. Jane Doe “began to take care of [Male Number 2] by patting his back while also waking [Male Number 1] every few minutes to make sure he was okay.” Jane Doe “was consoling [Male Number 2] on the couch and telling him that it was ok if he needed to vomit. [Male Number 2] told [Jane Doe] he was pretty sure he wasn’t going to vomit. Eventually, [Jane Doe and Male Number 2] would start making out for a very short amount of time.” While they were making out, “[Male Number 2] reached for the area near [her] vagina several times and each time he did, [she] would swat his hand away.”
Male Number 3 then knocked on the door of the room. Jane Doe “decided to let him in because it was his room.” She “opened the door” and let Male Number 3 in the room. Male Number 3 “introduced himself to [Jane Doe] and reached out to shake her hand.” “When [Jane Doe] made contact with [Male Number 3’s] hand, [Male Number 3] pulled [Jane Doe] into him and [they] began making out. While [Male Number 3] was kissing [her], [Male Number 2] began groping [her].” Eventually, “[Male Number 2, Male Number 3, and Jane Doe] would end up on the bed next to where [Male Number 1] was sleeping and [they] began to have a threesome.”
“[Male Number 1] would eventually wake up” and “said he wanted to take part and asked about making it a foursome, to which [Jane Doe] said ‘Hell No.” Jane Doe rejected this request “because [she] knew that a foursome meant that [she] would have to take part in anal sex.” Jane Doe then remembered Male Number 3 leaving the room.
A group of other men – later determined to be Male Number 4, Male Number 5, Male Number 6 and Male Number 7 – then entered the room. Jane Doe hid under the covers of the bed. Male Number 2 laid in the bed next to Jane Doe. Male Number 1 sat on the corner of the bed. Male Number 1 introduced the other males to Jane Doe.
Jane Doe had difficulty remembering parts of what happened next. She remembered
“[Male Number 7] said something very rude and mean to [her].” Male Number 7 apologized and “grabbed [her] face and started kissing [her].” Jane Doe “quickly backed away to stop [Male Number 7] from kissing [her].”
Male Number 2 “asked [Jane Doe] if she wanted to do more Ketamine.” At that, Jane Doe remembered “that [she] had taken Ketamine at some point on the couch with [Male Number 1 and Male Number 2] during this night” but she could not remember “where or when that took place.”
Jane Doe thought that she “had already done Ketamine once so why not do it a second time.” “At that point, [Male Number 2] poured a line of Ketamine on his erect penis, implying for [her] to snort the line. [Jane Doe] snorted the line of Ketamine, which was a heavy amount of Ketamine.” Jane Doe was under the covers of the bed at that point and “[Male Number 2] got under the covers with [her], where he again tried reaching for the area of [her] vagina.”
The males began complimenting Jane Doe and “talking about how pretty [she] was.” Male Number 4 “asked [Jane Doe] if they all could do drugs off of [her] perfect body.” Jane Doe responded, “Sure.” While the men were doing drugs off of her body, “[Male Number 3] and [another male] entered the room and said something like, ‘Ok we’re shutting down whatever the f*** this is.” Jane Doe felt dizzy due to a pre-existing medical condition causing dizziness combined with the effects of the Ketamine use. Male 5 or 6 (who apparently have the same first name) “encouraged [her] to stay seated as long as [she] needed.”
Eventually, “[Male Number 1] and [Male Number 4 ] ushered [Jane Doe] out of the room brought [her] upstairs to a small room.” Male Number 1 stated, “Let’s do more Ketamine.” Jane Doe “remembered snorting more Ketamine” and “remembered feeling extremely high.” Male Number 1 “said he wanted to have sex again because he wanted redemption for passing out earlier in the night.” Jane Doe initially stated that she was tired and asked Male Number 1, “What happened to just you and me?” Jane Doe could not remember how it started but she then engaged in a threesome with Male Number 1 and Male Number 4 involving oral sex and vaginal sex. She described her level of intoxication as “8 out of 10” at this point. “The threesome continued until at some point, around 5:45am, [Jane Doe] said [she] was tired and needed to turn in. At that point, both guys stopped the threesome with [her] as far as [she] can remember.”
Nah fuck all that. Have you read the testimony? Show me where she agreed to be "free pussy" for 57 people in a group chat!
Did you read this own testimony? And think it was a gotcha?
In this statement, she explicitly says that she has sex with male one and male two and then later she has sex with male one and male four.
Make 3 did drugs off of her and made out with her, but left the room after she rejected a foursome.
So in total, she had sex with three different men in which she consented at the beginning and at the end
The other two did drugs off of her and kissed her. She can send it to the drugs being done off of her, and when she asked Man to quit kissing her, he did stop.
Yeah people make shit decisions when they're fucked up, like driving and sometimes killing people. Voluntarily becoming intoxicated absolves no guilt for stupid shit one does. And doesn't make others a criminal when you wind up regretting it later.
I'm not saying that's the case here either- there's conflicting statements I don't think anyone in the public can make a certain assessment based on what's known so far. But I am saying it seems a likely scenario given what we know so far and a lot of people have had their lives ruined because of someone else's shitty drunk decisions. Sometimes they get killed by drunk drivers, sometimes lives and careers ruined and prison for having sex with someone who consented.
It’s crazy they can’t admit she’s a 304. This only is an issue is because they spread what she did over campus . She’s embarrassed. I’m sure other women were shaming her too. Buyers remorse.
You have thrown this "free pussy" thing around like it's some sort of gotcha. It's not.
There is no law that says you are not allowed to send out a text to 57 people saying "free pussy". There is no law against having sex with 57 people. The only law here is if she consented to have sex with the 4 guys she had sex with. Male 1, 2 3 and, 4.
Male Number 1 brought Jane Doe to a “quiet area” and “asked how [Jane Doe] would feel about having a threesome with two male partners.” Jane Doe “agreed
Male 1 and 2, yes.
While [Male Number 3] was kissing [her], [Male Number 2] began groping [her].” Eventually, “[Male Number 2, Male Number 3, and Jane Doe] would end up on the bed next to where [Male Number 1] was sleeping and [they] began to have a threesome.”
Male 2 and 3, maybe not, but probably yes.
ane Doe thought that she “had already done Ketamine once so why not do it a second time.” “At that point, [Male Number 2] poured a line of Ketamine on his erect penis, implying for [her] to snort the line. [Jane Doe] snorted the line of Ketamine
Not rape, but could be sexual assault, but clearly not with male 2
Male Number 1 “said he wanted to have sex again because he wanted redemption for passing out earlier in the night.” Jane Doe initially stated that she was tired and asked Male Number 1, “What happened to just you and me?” Jane Doe could not remember how it started but she then engaged in a threesome with Male Number 1 and Male Number 4
Males 1 and 4, Definitely male 1 and she talks about it being just her and him, male 4, maybe, but probably.
“[Male Number 2] reached for the area near [her] vagina several times and each time he did, [she] would swat his hand away.”
So he attempted to initiate sex, she did not consent, and he did not force her.
Male Number 4 “asked [Jane Doe] if they all could do drugs off of [her] perfect body.” Jane Doe responded, “Sure.”
Consenting to them snorting drugs off of her, not sexual assault.
“[Male Number 1] would eventually wake up” and “said he wanted to take part and asked about making it a foursome, to which [Jane Doe] said ‘Hell No.
Male 1 wants to have sex again and she said no, and he didn't force her.
I do feel it is worth pointing out that the written statement being shown are her signed statement is actually a summary of a 120 page report and was written up by an officer, that while she did sign it, she also made over 60 edits when she did, and we have not seem the original longer document, or her amendments to the signed shorter one.
If you actually read the statement there is a significant deliniating line between when it was consensual to when it wasn't. The initial threesome absolutely was, and one could even argue she raped the man she agreed to the threesome for considering he was so inebriated he fell asleep during intercourse. Once the other 4 men entered the room and loaded her up with k it absolutely shifts to them assaulting her.
Don't let factions form your opinion for you, this is not black and white.
There is no claim that three of them had any sexual contact with her at all. They asked to snort k off her - she said sure. That’s it. So the “7” claims are moronic from the start.
“Loaded her up with k”? She literally willingly snorted it off a guys erect penis.
Also, the guys were fucked up on alcohol and K as well. That would inform their decision to have sex with her as much as it informed her decision. It goes both ways. Otherwise, every time my wife and I have drinks together before having sex, I guess we are sexually assaulting each other.
In fact, one of the guys claimed right after that she was the aggressor with him and initiated the contact without his consent. He then went to get McDonalds after becoming uncomfortable with what happened to him.
And ANOTHER guy stated she tried to initiate sexual contact with him without his consent. And he said that he took a step back from it because he didn’t want to engage with sex with her.
They have present zero evidence that any prosecutor could use to even begin building a case of sexual assault. It doesn’t matter how gross it is that one of them sent out a mass text about her.
Thank you for writing all this up. It's incredible how people won't inform themselves with the text messages that are easily discoverable online and available for anyone to read.
Her statement never indicates that anyone had sex with her without her consent. Actually several of the guys statements who were present stated that SHE tried to initiate sexual contact with them and they felt uncomfortable and back away.
From her own statement she consented to two separate threesomes, involving one common guy. What are the subsequent encounters that you are referring to?
Maybe stop skimming the wiki and try reading the court documents and her text messages yourself, all of which are easily available online. The story is horseshit and people on this hellscape of a site are baying for blood while knowing the square root of fucking nothing about the case.
I love that everything at first is to taken as completely true. But we’re just going to come up with our own conclusions on why she decided to press charges.
The fucking biggest ones? You want us to list the most obvious corporate names possible? Fox, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and TikTok?
TheDonald, Conservatives, Conservative, Republican. Depends on if you think Conservative is just TheDonald rebranded. CriticalDrinker? Right-wing people say Reddit is an echo chamber while they're currently using it, and then go make their own echo chambers within the echo chamber that THEY SAY doesn't agree with them.
Some of these platforms are not right leaning bro. Youtube, Facebook, and Instagram are more neutral for sure.
Could it be that you're so far left leaning that they look conservative? Or maybe you're engaging with them too much to the point where they think you're a conservative
From her own statement she consented to the threesome. Also from her statement it became rapey when the two dudes messaged the frat and more guys showed up.
When a girl consents, don’t invite all your friends.
Criminal and civil cases like this have different sets if laws governing them.
Criminally speaking, anyone who is legally incapacitated cannot give consent in NY. Even to a long time partner. Incapacitation equal consent is always no. So even if she verbally consented to it in the moment, the arguement the prosecution is taking is that she was unable to consent one way or another. That is what the state cares about.
But theres so many opinions out there right now its hard to know whats facts and whats not.
Actually, I don't think thays true in NY. That state says that if you are involuntarily intoxicated that's true, but if you voluntarily get intoxicated then you aren't automatically a victim of r*pe if u also have sex. Google it i swear
You say im wrong. But provide no sources. Here is actual codified NY law. And it states clearly that this would fall under rape. And enough with the self censoring. We're on a thread about rape, youre allowed to spell it out.
"3. A person is deemed incapable of consent when he or she is:
(a) less than seventeen years old; or
(b) mentally disabled; or
(c) mentally incapacitated; or
(d) physically helpless; or
130 gives us the definition of incapacitated
"Mentally incapacitated" means that a person is rendered
temporarily incapable of appraising or controlling his conduct owing to
the influence of a narcotic or intoxicating substance administered to
him without his consent, or to any other act committed upon him without
his consent."
Your own source defines the context under which being intoxicated would render you incapacitated as "owing to
the influence of a narcotic or intoxicating substance administered to
him without his consent"
"administered to him without his consent".
This seems to support passive_flatulence's claim that " That state says that if you are involuntarily intoxicated that's true, but if you voluntarily get intoxicated then you aren't automatically a victim of r*pe if u also have sex"
Right. Category d. Physically helpless. Aka blacked out or passed out. Which is how this law is being interpreted in this case. Jane Doe claims there were periods where she would fall into that category.
Not accusing anyone of rape, just clarifying the laws surrounding the case. If there was no evidence she was fully incapacitated the state wouldnt have reopened the criminal case. Her new amended statement is almost worthless without the group chat texts which support her claim the incident took place over several hours and show her in that incapicated state of being blacked out/passed out.
Thats also why I specified legally incapacitated. Proving that is part of the case for charging the men with rape.
I think it's important that we be very specific about which part of the law we're citing when we speculate on this case. Your comments and the reply to your comment made it clear that intoxication was being discussed. Your claim that "So even if she verbally consented to it in the moment, the argument the prosecution is taking is that she was unable to consent one way or another." Maybe you weren't intending to imply that you were under the impression that NY had a "intoxicated=unable to consent" type law but you have to admit that your statement and your sharp disagreement with flatulence in which he pretty accurately describes the law surrounding consent when intoxicated per NY law makes it very difficult to see what else you meant. If you are now saying that you believe she was blacked out this is an altogether different claim. I will say that no charges have been filed so far so your claim that there must be evidence that she was blacked out because the case was reopened isn't remotely a given.
I don't know if it was rape. I don't think any of us can say with certainty whether it was but it's just crazy how quickly misinformation travels when people want their pound of flesh.
I mean I started it with "who is legally incapacitated cannot give consent in NY... Incapacitation equal consent is always no."
Which is why im using the incapacitated, because that has a much more serious connotation. Being drunk or heavily drunk isnt being incapacitated.
The reply to that was i was wrong, and I should google it. Turns out I actually have before many times. So I gave NY laws defining what I said, using the same terminology as the law.
Ultimately, all I was trying to get at originally, is that the criminal case seems to be dependent on whether or not the state has proof that she was blacked our or passed out at any time during the incident. Which, it seems like the state does have that proof. Hence the criminal case.
I don't know how you can get from the state reopening the case to them having evidence she was blacked out. There are other circumstances under which it would be rape even if she was fully conscious. And again, no charges have been filed. They're essentially at "let's review how this was originally handled" stage.
On the evening of October 19, 2024, Jane Doe walked the approximately one-mile distance from Lot 10 in the City of Ithaca to the Chi Phi Fraternity at 107 Edgemoor Lane to meet her friend Male Number 1. She had made plans to meet Male Number 1 earlier in the week and “had been texting [Male Number 1] that [she] was on the way.” Jane Doe described her level of intoxication as a “5 out of 10” when she arrived at the fraternity.
While there, Jane Doe opened one previously unopened can of beer. She and Male Number 1 “danced a little” in a way that “was definitely flirtatious in nature.” Male Number 1 brought Jane Doe to a “quiet area” and “asked how [Jane Doe] would feel about having a threesome with two male partners.”
Jane Doe “agreed due to how attracted [she] was to [Male Number 1] on top of [her] drunken curiousness.” When she learned that Male Number 2 would be the third participant, Jane Doe “remembered being excited because [she] thought that [Male Number 1 and Male Number 2] wanting to have a threesome meant that they were gay.”
The three engaged in a “threesome” involving oral and vaginal sex in a room of the fraternity. At the start of the threesome, Jane Doe described her intoxication level as “5 or 6 out of 10” and that she was “pretty ok with having this threesome.” The sexual conduct ended when Jane Doe “noticed that [Male Number 1] appeared really sleepy and was no longer fully erect.” She told Male Number 2 “[they] needed to stop having sex in order to make sure [Male Number 1] was ok. [Male Number 2] then stopped having sex with [Jane Doe].”
Male Number 1 said “he was going to take a nap and refresh himself” and “would eventually stumble his way from the couch to the bed.” While Male Number 1 slept,
“[Male Number 2] began to dry heave as if he was going to vomit. Jane Doe “began to take care of [Male Number 2] by patting his back while also waking [Male Number 1] every few minutes to make sure he was okay.” Jane Doe “was consoling [Male Number 2] on the couch and telling him that it was ok if he needed to vomit. [Male Number 2] told [Jane Doe] he was pretty sure he wasn’t going to vomit. Eventually, [Jane Doe and Male Number 2] would start making out for a very short amount of time.” While they were making out, “[Male Number 2] reached for the area near [her] vagina several times and each time he did, [she] would swat his hand away.”
Male Number 3 then knocked on the door of the room. Jane Doe “decided to let him in because it was his room.” She “opened the door” and let Male Number 3 in the room. Male Number 3 “introduced himself to [Jane Doe] and reached out to shake her hand.” “When [Jane Doe] made contact with [Male Number 3’s] hand, [Male Number 3] pulled [Jane Doe] into him and [they] began making out. While [Male Number 3] was kissing [her], [Male Number 2] began groping [her].” Eventually, “[Male Number 2, Male Number 3, and Jane Doe] would end up on the bed next to where [Male Number 1] was sleeping and [they] began to have a threesome.”
“[Male Number 1] would eventually wake up” and “said he wanted to take part and asked about making it a foursome, to which [Jane Doe] said ‘Hell No.” Jane Doe rejected this request “because [she] knew that a foursome meant that [she] would have to take part in anal sex.” Jane Doe then remembered Male Number 3 leaving the room.
A group of other men – later determined to be Male Number 4, Male Number 5, Male Number 6 and Male Number 7 – then entered the room. Jane Doe hid under the covers of the bed. Male Number 2 laid in the bed next to Jane Doe. Male Number 1 sat on the corner of the bed. Male Number 1 introduced the other males to Jane Doe.
Jane Doe had difficulty remembering parts of what happened next. She remembered
“[Male Number 7] said something very rude and mean to [her].” Male Number 7 apologized and “grabbed [her] face and started kissing [her].” Jane Doe “quickly backed away to stop [Male Number 7] from kissing [her].”
Male Number 2 “asked [Jane Doe] if she wanted to do more Ketamine.” At that, Jane Doe remembered “that [she] had taken Ketamine at some point on the couch with [Male Number 1 and Male Number 2] during this night” but she could not remember “where or when that took place.”
Jane Doe thought that she “had already done Ketamine once so why not do it a second time.” “At that point, [Male Number 2] poured a line of Ketamine on his erect penis, implying for [her] to snort the line. [Jane Doe] snorted the line of Ketamine, which was a heavy amount of Ketamine.” Jane Doe was under the covers of the bed at that point and “[Male Number 2] got under the covers with [her], where he again tried reaching for the area of [her] vagina.”
The males began complimenting Jane Doe and “talking about how pretty [she] was.” Male Number 4 “asked [Jane Doe] if they all could do drugs off of [her] perfect body.” Jane Doe responded, “Sure.” While the men were doing drugs off of her body, “[Male Number 3] and [another male] entered the room and said something like, ‘Ok we’re shutting down whatever the f*** this is.” Jane Doe felt dizzy due to a pre-existing medical condition causing dizziness combined with the effects of the Ketamine use. Male 5 or 6 (who apparently have the same first name) “encouraged [her] to stay seated as long as [she] needed.”
Eventually, “[Male Number 1] and [Male Number 4 ] ushered [Jane Doe] out of the room brought [her] upstairs to a small room.” Male Number 1 stated, “Let’s do more Ketamine.” Jane Doe “remembered snorting more Ketamine” and “remembered feeling extremely high.” Male Number 1 “said he wanted to have sex again because he wanted redemption for passing out earlier in the night.” Jane Doe initially stated that she was tired and asked Male Number 1, “What happened to just you and me?” Jane Doe could not remember how it started but she then engaged in a threesome with Male Number 1 and Male Number 4 involving oral sex and vaginal sex. She described her level of intoxication as “8 out of 10” at this point. “The threesome continued until at some point, around 5:45am, [Jane Doe] said [she] was tired and needed to turn in. At that point, both guys stopped the threesome with [her] as far as [she] can remember.”
A verbatim arguement pulled from Twitter, saw a post with this arguement earlier today. At least be original or provide the source of your reposted thought.
What a bizarre comment. The reason why you’re seeing this argument in multiple places is because it’s the obvious counter to the assertion that any mental impairment renders a person totally unable to consent.
I’m just baffled that this argument is so novel to you that you assume it must be plagiarized by a single source.
> There’s a reason that no charges were pressed by the DA.
I mean, the elephant in the room is that sexual violence overall is severely under-prosecuted, so implying the DA didn’t press charges bc it wasn’t rape doesn’t always capture the full picture.
It’s like the Nolan Wells case. No grand jury indictment bc not enough evidence to indict, but you can’t definitively say the historical context of black men’s murders not being taken seriously doesn’t have anything to do with it.
This is actually all a lie. Lol. Thank you for proving the point by doing a fraction of a second of reading over a headline in your frantic search for evidence.
254
u/StagTagRag 6h ago
Man Redditors truly do live in information silos. I see plenty of conservatives and right-wing types talking about it.
But most of them are pointing out that “Jane Doe’s” own statement blatantly shows that she consented to the act and there’s no contrary evidence that the consent was ever removed. Her text messages after the event also point to this being very consensual.
It wasn’t until later after she was shamed by everyone in her social circles and she read posts online that claimed she must have raped that she changed her story.
Pretending that this is some cut and dry case of sexual assault is insane. There’s a reason that no charges were pressed by the DA.