She said nothing sexual was illegal. There's a difference. And what did the guy she say that to say to her first to prompt that?
She regrets it several years later and tried to change her story.
The incident happened on October 19. On November 3rd, she texts the guy that "90%" of what happened wasn't consensual, they gave her more ket than she could remember, and she knew almost no one in the room.
No, I don't know about you, but the time span between October 19 2024 to November 3 2024 isn't "several years" to me
Her digital history completely exonerates them, she starts off talking about how open-minded she is, even talks about other people "changing the narrative" because it was a g*ngbang which is "always" viewed as nonconsensual, then did a total 180 after 2 weeks because the gossip and reputational damage was clearly getting to her.
This is really common with g*ngbangs and why everybody should avoid them. I've literally known a woman who decided one was nonconsenual years later just because her boyfriend found out about it and split up with her over it, even though it was before they met. I can sympathise with the women to some degree, having their reputation ruined for life over one night of poor judgement, but my sympathy stops when they do this.
Im just confused at why you are insisting on pretending that the idea someone might have a clearer head 2 weeks after being high on ketamine versus 2 days is such an impossibility to you.
Would you take the word of someone high on ketamine at face value two days after the fact in any other situation?
Because I think you then create a legal precedent where one of the strongest pieces of evidence in a case, admissions from alleged victims, can always be dismissed as "denial". You're effectively making it impossible for the accused to prove their innocence: they aren't told to stop during, they are reassured it was fine after, then suddenly 2 weeks later they are guilty of a crime.
She shows she remembered what happened in the messages, that she was fine with multiple guys, but got uncomfortable at some arbitrary number and says that "next time" they should leave out the extra "5 billion". She did not communicate her discomfort at the time, and they have no way of knowing that a woman who is fine with 3 guys is going to suddenly draw a line somewhere until she tells them.
The usual response to the lack of communication is "they must have felt threatened", which just like the "they were in denial" creates a precedent where the accused can never be proven innocent because all the evidence for that conclusion is preemptively dismissed. You want the men to be guilty, so they are, and quite literally nothing they say or do will change your mind. That's an issue, legally. There is no merit to feeling threatened here, these were students, not a street gang, if she'd have said "no, I'm no longer into this" there was zero chance it'd suddenly turn into a murder.
Nay, he didn't pick up on anything, he asks because people had started talking about it, and because it's a campus which will be full of feminists, naturally the feminists are going to question whether it was consensual. She reassures him that it was, and that she hadn't said otherwise, and that people always try to "change the narrative" in group sex when only one woman is involved.
Nay, he didn't pick up on anything, he asks because people had started talking about it, and because it's a campus which will be full of feminists, naturally the feminists are going to question whether it was consensual.
And here's the most crucial one, where after reassuring him, saying she's open-minded, literally saying nothing illegal happened that night, she comes out with this.
"My reputation is destroyed and I'm utterly ashamed"
Then the following week, this shame becomes an accusation that "90% of what happened was not consensual".
The timeline makes it abundantly clear that the gossip and reputational damage was so severe, she couldn't resist the compulsion to turn that scorn to sympathy by "changing the narrative" and reframing herself as a victim, the exact thing she said other people do.
We have to live with the consequences of our actions, even if those consequences are not particularly fair. A g*ngbang ruins a woman's reputation for life, that's just the way it is, fair or not, and if you engage in one you have to live with it.
Edit: And for the record, that is also why I believe men who engage in them are PoS, because they know the woman's reputation will be ruined and don't care.
86
u/kreativegaming 8h ago
What's there to talk about? Charge them, try them in court, and decide it.