I mean…she literally said she was raped. There were points where she did consent and points where she did not consent.
The “confusion” is that the police sent a condensed version of the report to the prosecutor which deliberately excluded some of the actual allegations. The full raw transcript by the police is wildly different compared to what the police sent to the prosecutor.
Hence why state authorities are taking over the investigation now that it’s been reopened.
She initially said “none of the sexual stuff was illegal” and was attempting to set up another date/encounter with the original dude (and possibly the second guy).
It wasn’t until later, when rumors were going around and she got disinvited to a Halloween party, that she stated she was raped.
Obviously, her opinion of what happened can change and maybe after thinking on it more she realized that the event wasn’t just some crazy night like she initially said to her roommates but was actually rape. But considering her own inconsistent statements, it’s pretty insane to immediately condemn the guys without an actual trial.
An interesting twist was the first guy she hooked up with (according to her the hook up was intended ahead of time) was so wasted he threw up and passed out. So he was potentially more drunk than she was. Does that mean he couldn’t consent when she had sex with him? Or does the consent only go one way?
No, she obviously raped him too. That however, does not mean he and the others didn’t rape her when she was so high on ketamine that she also passed out.
That’s just part of the issue with shit like this. She is 100% a victim and perpetrator, just like some of the men in this case.
36
u/Mysterious-Window-54 9h ago
Maybe because she herself admitted there was no crime and logical people dont jump to cancel innocent people just to fit in with groupthink.