COVID-19 RESOURCES
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

Frat Boy Gets a Slap on the Wrist in Rape Case

HisArpy said:
Why do you say "unfortunately"?

As for the "unlawful restraint" thing, I can think of several instances where restraint would be unlawful but any sex committed during such restraint not be assault. Timing and consent are everything and the court must grapple with questions about when consent was given and to what exactly was consented to, and then search for the answers in the context of reality and facts.

As always, it comes down to nuance. And, with all instances of nuance, one person may view it differently than another. That doesn't make either view "correct" only that one view prevailed in the mind of the judge and he has no choice but to act according to the law.

This is called justice.
Click to expand...

This case had zip to do with what view prevailed in the mind of the judge.
 
beew said:
It was poor wording.

What I meant was that I do understand people's strong emotions and anger related to the subject, since too many men got away with it.

But we shouldn’t operate under the "guilty until proven innocent" premise either.
Click to expand...


In another post in this thread, as in the Kavanaugh thread, you appear to automatically default to "I believe her" without any proof.

Then you posted the "unfortunately" sentence in this thread.

It sounds like now you're trying to waffle but in reality view this through the same lens Adrina has. One in which when someone is alleged to have committed a crime against a woman, that's sufficient for a guilty verdict on your part regardless of the facts or evidence.

Which leads me to wonder if this is a social media training thing or more of the failure of public education.
 
adrina said:
Thanks for playing.

Spew crap. Get called on it. Default to deflection.

Again, please find a quote or find your corner to sit in.
Click to expand...

Don’t forget that he also declares “Victory!”

Still waiting on any quote of you doing that from him....
 
BoyNextDoor said:
Vic Feazell, the victim's attorney, was astounded by the "sweetheart deal," telling KWTX, “It pays to be rich and white in McLennan County when you’re charged with a crime.”

That pretty much sums it up for me. The guy, the perpetrator, had money and connections and the family used them.
Click to expand...

People act like this isn’t a known fact as far as our justice system goes.
 
Aglaopheme said:
This case had zip to do with what view prevailed in the mind of the judge.
Click to expand...


There's a stupid post for ya.

I haven't seen any pics of the alleged victim; does she have grotesque tits or a huge nose or bad acne enough to sway the judge against her beyond any reasonable doubt?
 
Aglaopheme said:
This case had zip to do with what view prevailed in the mind of the judge.
Click to expand...


LOL. And yet another voice from the clueless.

Int he beginning, the judge has to decide whether to allow the case to proceed past arraignment. That's a decision made by the judge based on what prevails in his mind about the facts of the case.

Then, if there's a plea, the judge has to accept the plea. He has to question the defendant about whether the plea is what he wants to do and if there was anything improper about how it was offered. He has to send the case to the "sentencing recommendation department" (which has different names in different jurisdictions - some call it probation, some call it something else) and then read the sentencing report when it comes back. He has to put all of that together with his notes on the case in the case file and come to a decision based on HIS OWN understanding of the case facts.

Then he has to pronounce sentence.

It's ALL ABOUT what prevails in the mind of the judge. Believing otherwise is ridiculous.
 
HisArpy said:
Let's start with the premise "another man getting away with rape." IF the "man" is found not guilty of rape, or pleads to a lesser charge because the prosecutor couldn't prove rape, how did he "get away with it"? Unless you're trying to imply the justice system favors men in ALL cases of rape. In which case, how does that help rape victims? How does that solve crimes of rape? How does it make the harm go away?

It doesn't. Speaking nonsense about how "another man" got away with rape after being brought to trial does NOTHING to help real victims or prevent future incidents of rape.

What it does is make it harder for prosecutors to prove rape because normal people start to be jaded by the constant screaming of "rape! rape! rape!" by people like Adrina.

But, did YOU think of any of that? Or did you just engage your keyboard in outrage from someone trying to discuss the subject matter without resorting to an emotional plea for attention?
Click to expand...

You think pointing out problems in our justice system is not helpful? Of course it is. This judge has a record of being soft on rape, and my guess is he’ll be gone because of it. Brock Turner, anyone?
 
adrina said:
Some things bear repeating. Especially if the misogynistic shoe fits.

"Another" = "all"?

Not very precise for a lawyer.

And you laugh too much for it to be taken as anything but a presentation gambit.

Perhaps someone can find the time to educate you two asshats on these matters. Not like you'd listen. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.
Click to expand...

Somewhere in the shallow depths of your mind you've constructed an entire argument with yourself.

Then declared yourself the winner.
 
HisArpy said:
LOL. And yet another voice from the clueless.

Int he beginning, the judge has to decide whether to allow the case to proceed past arraignment. That's a decision made by the judge based on what prevails in his mind about the facts of the case.

Then, if there's a plea, the judge has to accept the plea. He has to question the defendant about whether the plea is what he wants to do and if there was anything improper about how it was offered. He has to send the case to the "sentencing recommendation department" (which has different names in different jurisdictions - some call it probation, some call it something else) and then read the sentencing report when it comes back. He has to put all of that together with his notes on the case in the case file and come to a decision based on HIS OWN understanding of the case facts.

Then he has to pronounce sentence.

It's ALL ABOUT what prevails in the mind of the judge. Believing otherwise is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Okey dokey. None of that had zip to do with what you said. Nice try though.
 
Raise your hand if you're surprised that the Nazi sympathizer also sympathizes with judges who are soft on rape. No one? Good.
 
HisArpy said:
Let's start with the premise "another man getting away with rape." IF the "man" is found not guilty of rape, or pleads to a lesser charge because the prosecutor couldn't prove rape, how did he "get away with it"? Unless you're trying to imply the justice system favors men in ALL cases of rape. In which case, how does that help rape victims? How does that solve crimes of rape? How does it make the harm go away?

It doesn't. Speaking nonsense about how "another man" got away with rape after being brought to trial does NOTHING to help real victims or prevent future incidents of rape.

What it does is make it harder for prosecutors to prove rape because normal people start to be jaded by the constant screaming of "rape! rape! rape!" by people like Adrina.

But, did YOU think of any of that? Or did you just engage your keyboard in outrage from someone trying to discuss the subject matter without resorting to an emotional plea for attention?
Click to expand...

You're attacking me is the emotional plea for attention. Although you might want to try and address what people actually are saying instead of the random deflections running through your head.

"Another man" does not mean "all" men no matter how you try and spin that.

I already showed how what she posted would in fact help solve the problems but you chose to completely ignore that to rant and make ad hominem attacks.

The backlog of unprocessed rape kits in this country is an utter and complete travesty of justice. Processing those would help identify and convict rapists thereby, solving some existing rape cases and preventing further ones by incarcerating the rapists identified.

The Brock Turner case is another example of a sexual predator being let off with a slap on the wrist. There are plenty more which you would know if you didn't jump to defend rapists - which honestly is totally creepy.

What is wrong with you?
 
Aglaopheme said:
You think pointing out problems in our justice system is not helpful? Of course it is. This judge has a record of being soft on rape, and my guess is he’ll be gone because of it. Brock Turner, anyone?
Click to expand...

Where is the "pointing out the problems in our justice system" in Adrina's post about "another man got away with it"?

Not every man accused of rape is guilty of rape. If there are problems in getting proof, then the State needs to up it's game, not lower the standard to make it easier to prove a crime.

Nor is it the judge's fault if the prosecutor can't bring sufficient evidence in these types of cases. And you can't say the judge biased if the sentencing report makes a recommendation based on the facts that the judge agrees with.

What you imply is that because the judge is a man, he supports or condones rape. And THAT is the only "problem with our justice system".
 
Comshaw said:
How in the world did you even get that from what I posted? My comments or the DA's?

With out having access to all the information that has been hidden I can't say the judge did a bad job or not. The DA said she just couldn't make the case beyond a reasonable doubt. Like I said earlier, reading between the lines and a bunch of speculation on my part I'd say he got his buddies to lie for him. Since we are a country of laws, if the DA can't prove rape beyond a reasonable doubt (she said in one of the linked articles that she was afraid the young man would be exonerated if they went to trial) she did the next best thing and took the plea deal. The law isn't perfect. Sometimes people can scam the system. I think this was one of those times. That doesn't make it any more palatable, but it's the way things happen sometimes.




Comshaw
Click to expand...

As you are quickly finding out in this thread, no one gives a shit that this is a country of laws. Not probable cause, not guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, not the right to remain silent (MOST particularly exercised by those who MIGHT actually be innocent), and not even the First Amendment.

Liberals and conservatives alike routinely judge "the system" to have failed whenever the body of laws which entail the very PROCESS of justice do not produce the specific result they define as "just." In those moments, you simply cannot defend that system juxtaposed with that result. They simply will not allow it. They will invariably equate your defense of a system that operates as it was designed WITH the very crime that (in many cases including this one) was most likely committed.

The prosecution of the most heinous crimes imaginable is SUPPOSED to be extraordinarily difficult with the benefit of any reasonable doubt being extended to the accused. And while the severity of penalties for different crimes vary according to the severity of the crimes, the evedentiary process is essentially only differentiated by whether the offense is of a civil vs. criminal nature.

But in the criminal judicial process, prosecutors and victims of crime are SUPPOSED to carry the greater burden of proof when they walk into a courtroom. That is the system our Constitution very carefully and most purposefully designed.

And precious few people in this country, and even fewer in this thread, believe in that designed imbalance, if in fact they ever did. They just don't have the stomach for guilty people going free as a (also imperfect) "safequard" against the far greater injustice of innocent people being incarcerated or executed.

Not for a moment. But oddly enough, if anyone ever did, it used to be liberals. It fit with the overall philosophy. But not anymore. Not in a nation so consumed by partisanship.
 
zipman said:
You're attacking me is the emotional plea for attention. Although you might want to try and address what people actually are saying instead of the random deflections running through your head.

"Another man" does not mean "all" men no matter how you try and spin that.

I already showed how what she posted would in fact help solve the problems but you chose to completely ignore that to rant and make ad hominem attacks.

The backlog of unprocessed rape kits in this country is an utter and complete travesty of justice. Processing those would help identify and convict rapists thereby, solving some existing rape cases and preventing further ones by incarcerating the rapists identified.

The Brock Turner case is another example of a sexual predator being let off with a slap on the wrist. There are plenty more which you would know if you didn't jump to defend rapists - which honestly is totally creepy.

What is wrong with you?
Click to expand...

Oh pleeze, play the victim card some more. That way you get to toss some more ad hominem bombs around and Adrina and Aglo will be justified in their rants.

Adrina posted NOTHING that would help "solve" anything.

THIS CASE isn't the Brock Turner case. It turns on it's own merits. The merits in this case are that the DA offered a plea deal and the accused accepted it. Thus, he didn't get away with anything. He pleaded guilty, and got sentenced for that. If you don't like it, tough, them's the FACTS.

The backlog of rape kits going unprocessed is a priority problem for the State, not the courts. BLAME YOUR LEGISLATORS, not the accused. Or the next guy to be accused. Or the courts. Or the judge. Or try to make all men into mysogynists because they understand that true justice requires more than an accusation in a loud angry voice.
 
adrina said:
Rape culture - when a woman can't express frustration about the appalling manner in which we as a society treat the atrocities of rape without being accused of hating men, screaming, pointing fingers, accusing all men of rape etc.
Click to expand...

Is not the definition of "rape culture" by any google-able source.

According to wiki, like 18 universities including the one cited for the definition posted, several dictionaries and encyclopedias this seems to be......

Rape Culture is an environment in which rape is prevalent and in which sexual violence is normalized and excused in the media and popular culture.
Click to expand...

http://www.southernct.edu/sexual-misconduct/facts.html

The actual definition of rape culture....which we don't have in the USA or any western 1st world nation that I'm aware of.

You know what is a big time rape culture though?

Every progressive leftist VERY favorite, intersectionally bulletproof class....

ALLAHHHHHHHH AKABAR!!!
19539877_303.jpg


:D

adrina said:
Fuck right off with your overly defensive, dismissive and condescending bullshit.
Click to expand...

As the kettle said to the pot....:rolleyes:

adrina said:
There sure are a lot of rape apologists who are quick to misinterpret what is being said.
Click to expand...

Who's a rape apologist?

I didn't see a single person post any such comments.....sounds like someone is overly defensive.

Will you be dismissive and condescending too?? :D
 
Last edited:
HisArpy said:
Or try to make all men into mysogynists because they understand that true justice requires more than an accusation in a loud angry voice.
Click to expand...

FUCK DUE PROCESS OR YOU'RE A RAPE APOLOGIST!!!

BELIEVE ALL WOMEN!!!

GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT!!!!

1539503304963.jpg
 
People understand that. I’ve explained my issue with this particular case twice already. There is a civil case as well. We shall see what happens there.





Psst. In case the Harpy missed it, this case went through a grand jury that came back with 4 indictments.
 
Colonel Hogan said:
As you are quickly finding out in this thread, no one gives a shit that this is a country of laws. Not probable cause, not guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, not the right to remain silent (MOST particularly exercised by those who MIGHT actually be innocent), and not even the First Amendment.

Liberals and conservatives alike routinely judge "the system" to have failed whenever the body of laws which entail the very PROCESS of justice do not produce the specific result they define as "just." In those moments, you simply cannot defend that system juxtaposed with that result. They simply will not allow it. They will invariably equate your defense of a system that operates as it was designed WITH the very crime that (in many cases including this one) was most likely committed.

The prosecution of the most heinous crimes imaginable is SUPPOSED to be extraordinarily difficult with the benefit of any reasonable doubt being extended to the accused. And while the severity of penalties for different crimes vary according to the severity of the crimes, the evedentiary process is essentially only differentiated by whether the offense is of a civil vs. criminal nature.

But in the criminal judicial process, prosecutors and victims of crime are SUPPOSED to carry the greater burden of proof when they walk into a courtroom. That is the system our Constitution very carefully and most purposefully designed.

And precious few people in this country, and even fewer in this thread, believe in that designed imbalance, if in fact they ever did. They just don't have the stomach for guilty people going free as a (also imperfect) "safequard" against the far greater injustice of innocent people being incarcerated or executed.

Not for a moment. But oddly enough, if anyone ever did, it used to be liberals. It fit with the overall philosophy. But not anymore. Not in a nation so consumed by partisanship.
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone**7s_ratio
 
Aglaopheme said:
People understand that. I’ve explained my issue with this particular case twice already. There is a civil case as well. We shall see what happens there.

Psst. In case the Harpy missed it, this case went through a grand jury that came back with 4 indictments.
Click to expand...


This is irrelevant. Grand juries are presented with ONLY the evidence that proves the prosecutors case.

It doesn't get any exculpatory evidence. It doesn't get any other evidence that may be presented by the defense.

And NONE OF THAT has anything to do with the plea deal offered and accepted by the prosecution. Nor does it impact the sentencing report for the lesser crimes being pleaded guilty to.

But, good job trying to muddy the water with irrelevancies.
 
HisArpy said:
This is irrelevant. Grand juries are presented with ONLY the evidence that proves the prosecutors case.

It doesn't get any exculpatory evidence. It doesn't get any other evidence that may be presented by the defense.

And NONE OF THAT has anything to do with the plea deal offered and accepted by the prosecution. Nor does it impact the sentencing report for the lesser crimes being pleaded guilty to.

But, good job trying to muddy the water with irrelevancies.
Click to expand...

Oh sweet baby Jesus. It flies to your the judges view had everything to do with everything backpedaling post. Perhaps some bee balm could help you with your memory issues.

*facepalm*
 
adrina said:
:rolleyes:

Surprised? Not one little bit.
Click to expand...

Of course you aren't. You'd already made up your mind that the man was guilty even before the evidence was presented and nothing anyone could possibly say will ever change it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Antifa Rioter Convicted of 5 Felonies Gets a Slap on the Wrist
2
Replies
25
Views
437
ll74
ll74
Busybody
Male Teen Has Consensual Sex with Female Teen. He Gets 25 Years as Sex Offender, Bann
Replies
14
Views
1K
Busybody
Busybody
Busybody
The New Tawana Brawley Case Found In Tacoma, Washington
Replies
4
Views
292
McMax
M
K
This is what happens when you try to drown government in a bathtub
2 3
Replies
55
Views
3K
KingOrfeo
K
Light Ice
Windsong - A Tale of The Sword and the Spear
Replies
2
Views
1K
Light Ice
Light Ice
Back
Top