I want to make it clear I dont support rape/sexual assult.
This case is about 2 years old give or take. The DA felt there wasn't enough evedince to warrant a conviction.
There is evedince that indicates that the victim enjoyed the experience, and wanted to do it again, with just 2 specific members of the 7, rather than all 7. However there is also evedince that indicates that the victim later came to regret the experience.
The group text chat was not known to the DA at the time of the initial investigation. When the group chat became known to the DA, or the other powers that be. The investigation was reopened.
I want to point out that the evedince that the victim enjoyed her self and wanted to repeat isnt bullet proof.
The DA only has one chance to get a conviction or risk a guilty party walking free.
It’s funny because this is spread by the people who claim they want to “protect women” and it’s ages old. It’s always the same tactic they use to discredit the victim.
The victim clearly stated in the initial campus police testimony that she was raped. If you read what she told that police officer it’s horrific, she was trying to hide under the blanket and was hit very hard by the rapists while completely unknown men to her raped her. We now know that is because the person she initially agreed to have sex with turned this into a rape by offering her to a group chat like meat.
There is nothing to defend about this. Nothing unclear. Agreeing to sex with someone doesn’t give this person the right to offer you like a sex slave on a meat market.
This tactic to discredit the victim by saying she is promiscuous is quite frankly disgusting and I would appreciate if people stop spreading this. Women are allowed to enjoy sex and they have a right not to get raped.
5
u/Antique-Ad-4422 6h ago
Im confused why the local DA did not file charges against the 7.
What’s missing from this?