Woman rapes man and accuses him of assault 2 years later.

cfedu

Suspended
Original poster
Mar 8, 2009
1,165
1,508
Toronto

VulchR

macrumors 68020
Jun 8, 2009
2,329
10,254
Scotland
I used to work on a crisis hotline, which included helping victims of sexual assault. The newsstory cited by the OP is BS, both in terms of the logic of the argument and in terms of interpreting the woman accuser's behaviour. The first plank of the argument is to pose the question of how a person can tell if somebody is in a blackout state. Well, duh. Slurred speech, lack of coordination, and passing out are clues. Never mind, though, because the relevance of this plank was never explained. The second plank of the argument is that the university tribunal is not a criminal court. Again, well, duh. Courts determine the sentencing of people to jail and fines, so the burden of proof must be very high. A university tribunal is about a person's suitability to be in an academic community, so the burden if proof can be lower. The accused student did have an opportunity to have his say and he was not believed apparently, and Amherst has every right to expel a student it feels is a threat to other students. In any case, this argument amounts to saying the University followed the policy that the accused student agreed to by virtue of attending the University. Now the accused is in the unique position of not liking the outcome... The final and third plank of the argument is the most egregious and outrageous one. The accuser apparently sent a text stating that she was not an 'innocent bystander'. Anybody who has talked to people who have survived a sexual assault will tell you that often the victims question themselves. The accuser's texts might simply reflect her regret about drinking to the point of incapacitation, or perhaps flirting (which is not tantamount to consent for sex). Overall, this is a hatchet job by a accused's lawyer on the accuser, and the reporter who swallowed this nonsense hook, line and sinker bears the responsibility for the impact it will have. The ink stains the printer's hands.
 

Meister

Suspended
Oct 10, 2013
5,455
4,265
I used to work on a crisis hotline, which included helping victims of sexual assault. The newsstory cited by the OP is BS, both in terms of the logic of the argument and in terms of interpreting the woman accuser's behaviour. The first plank of the argument is to pose the question of how a person can tell if somebody is in a blackout state. Well, duh. Slurred speech, lack of coordination, and passing out are clues. Never mind, though, because the relevance of this plank was never explained. The second plank of the argument is that the university tribunal is not a criminal court. Again, well, duh. Courts determine the sentencing of people to jail and fines, so the burden of proof must be very high. A university tribunal is about a person's suitability to be in an academic community, so the burden if proof can be lower. The accused student did have an opportunity to have his say and he was not believed apparently, and Amherst has every right to expel a student it feels is a threat to other students. In any case, this argument amounts to saying the University followed the policy that the accused student agreed to by virtue of attending the University. Now the accused is in the unique position of not liking the outcome... The final and third plank of the argument is the most egregious and outrageous one. The accuser apparently sent a text stating that she was not an 'innocent bystander'. Anybody who has talked to people who have survived a sexual assault will tell you that often the victims question themselves. The accuser's texts might simply reflect her regret about drinking to the point of incapacitation, or perhaps flirting (which is not tantamount to consent for sex). Overall, this is a hatchet job by a accused's lawyer on the accuser, and the reporter who swallowed this nonsense hook, line and sinker bears the responsibility for the impact it will have. The ink stains the printer's hands.
I find your block of text confused. According to the story, she performed the sex act on him, while he was passed out. Are you arguing in her or his defense? :confused:
 
  • Like
Reactions: satcomer

VulchR

macrumors 68020
Jun 8, 2009
2,329
10,254
Scotland
Where in the story is there any evidence whatsoever that the women initiated the sexual contact? The answer is there isn't.
 

Meister

Suspended
Oct 10, 2013
5,455
4,265
Where in the story is there any evidence whatsoever that the women initiated the sexual contact? The answer is there isn't.
An Amherst College student blacked out, accompanied a fellow student back to her dorm room after drinking in February 2012. While he was blacked out, she performed oral sex on him.
According to the story she performed sex acts on him, while he was passed out, hence she raped him.

Where in the story is there any evidence whatsoever that the men initiated the sexual contact? The answer is there isn't.

DreamstimeAmherst College expelled a male student who was accused of sexually assaulting a female student while he was blacked out. Again, while he was blacked out. The woman he allegedly assaulted was fully lucid.
http://reason.com/blog/2015/06/11/amherst-student-was-expelled-for-rape-bu

Please elaborate further ....
 
Last edited:

VulchR

macrumors 68020
Jun 8, 2009
2,329
10,254
Scotland
OK let us review: The quote you cite is from the reporter/writer of the news story, who is mindlessly reiterating the BS argument from the accused's lawyer. The argument from the lawyer is 'her [the accuser's] words, showed — if anything — that she initiated sexual contact'. The words he is referring to are the accuser's text messages, which stated she was not an innocent bystander and she felt she might have done something wrong. Therein lies the crux of the distortion by the accused's lawyer. The accuser might have simply been blaming herself for the assault, as women often do. The woman's texts do not provide any evidence that she initiated sexual contact.
 

Meister

Suspended
Oct 10, 2013
5,455
4,265
OK let us review: The quote you cite is from the reporter/writer of the news story, who is mindlessly reiterating the BS argument from the accused's lawyer. The argument from the lawyer is 'her [the accuser's] words, showed — if anything — that she initiated sexual contact'. The words he is referring to are the accuser's text messages, which stated she was not an innocent bystander and she felt she might have done something wrong. Therein lies the crux of the distortion by the accused lawyer. The accuser might have simply been blaming themselves for the assault, as women often do. The woman's texts do not provide any evidence that she initiated sexual contact.
What a obtuse attempt to evade the essential question:
Where is the evidence that the accused initiated sexual contact?
And even if he did, which is probably impossible to prove, how does that prove, or even indicate, rape?
 

VulchR

macrumors 68020
Jun 8, 2009
2,329
10,254
Scotland
I presume that Amherst felt there was enough evidence to reach that conclusion. After all, they heard the story from the accuser and the accused directly. We haven't, nor has the reporter who was parroting the arguments of the accused's lawyer. Ask yourself this: why hasn't the reporter asked the accuser for her side of the story?
 

Meister

Suspended
Oct 10, 2013
5,455
4,265
I presume that Amherst felt there was enough evidence to reach that conclusion. After all, they heard the story from the accuser and the accused directly. We haven't, nor has the reporter who was parroting the arguments of the accused's lawyer. Ask yourself this: why hasn't the reporter asked the accuser for her side of the story?
So, you do not have any source that would give any information whatsoever on why he would've been found guilty of rape?
 

lowendlinux

macrumors 603
Sep 24, 2014
5,155
6,312
North Country (way upstate NY)
I used to work on a crisis hotline, which included helping victims of sexual assault. The newsstory cited by the OP is BS, both in terms of the logic of the argument and in terms of interpreting the woman accuser's behaviour. The first plank of the argument is to pose the question of how a person can tell if somebody is in a blackout state. Well, duh. Slurred speech, lack of coordination, and passing out are clues. Never mind, though, because the relevance of this plank was never explained. The second plank of the argument is that the university tribunal is not a criminal court. Again, well, duh. Courts determine the sentencing of people to jail and fines, so the burden of proof must be very high. A university tribunal is about a person's suitability to be in an academic community, so the burden if proof can be lower. The accused student did have an opportunity to have his say and he was not believed apparently, and Amherst has every right to expel a student it feels is a threat to other students. In any case, this argument amounts to saying the University followed the policy that the accused student agreed to by virtue of attending the University. Now the accused is in the unique position of not liking the outcome... The final and third plank of the argument is the most egregious and outrageous one. The accuser apparently sent a text stating that she was not an 'innocent bystander'. Anybody who has talked to people who have survived a sexual assault will tell you that often the victims question themselves. The accuser's texts might simply reflect her regret about drinking to the point of incapacitation, or perhaps flirting (which is not tantamount to consent for sex). Overall, this is a hatchet job by a accused's lawyer on the accuser, and the reporter who swallowed this nonsense hook, line and sinker bears the responsibility for the impact it will have. The ink stains the printer's hands.
Take it from a guy whose had more than his share of problems with booze these do not necessarily indicate nor are they a good measure of a blackout state.
 

LIVEFRMNYC

macrumors 604
Oct 27, 2009
7,433
8,607
I presume that Amherst felt there was enough evidence to reach that conclusion. After all, they heard the story from the accuser and the accused directly. We haven't, nor has the reporter who was parroting the arguments of the accused's lawyer. Ask yourself this: why hasn't the reporter asked the accuser for her side of the story?
The accusation itself is the accuser's side of the story. Pretty sure she didn't just say "I was sexually assaulted" and left it at that.
 

sim667

macrumors 65816
Dec 7, 2010
1,365
2,837
Why are colleges making judgements and decisions about these cases? As part of their duty of care to both students surely the logical thing to do would to let it be dealt with due legal diligence in a court?
 

unlinked

macrumors 6502a
Jul 12, 2010
695
1,199
Ireland
Why are colleges making judgements and decisions about these cases? As part of their duty of care to both students surely the logical thing to do would to let it be dealt with due legal diligence in a court?
It is happening because the Justice department reinterpreted the law and instructed universities to do this or risk losing federal funding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: satcomer

sim667

macrumors 65816
Dec 7, 2010
1,365
2,837
It is happening because the Justice department reinterpreted the law and instructed universities to do this or risk losing federal funding.
So the justice department is basically shirking its responsibilities.
 

cfedu

Suspended
Original poster
Mar 8, 2009
1,165
1,508
Toronto
I used to work on a crisis hotline, which included helping victims of sexual assault. The newsstory cited by the OP is BS, both in terms of the logic of the argument and in terms of interpreting the woman accuser's behaviour. The first plank of the argument is to pose the question of how a person can tell if somebody is in a blackout state. Well, duh. Slurred speech, lack of coordination, and passing out are clues. Never mind, though, because the relevance of this plank was never explained. The second plank of the argument is that the university tribunal is not a criminal court. Again, well, duh. Courts determine the sentencing of people to jail and fines, so the burden of proof must be very high. A university tribunal is about a person's suitability to be in an academic community, so the burden if proof can be lower. The accused student did have an opportunity to have his say and he was not believed apparently, and Amherst has every right to expel a student it feels is a threat to other students. In any case, this argument amounts to saying the University followed the policy that the accused student agreed to by virtue of attending the University. Now the accused is in the unique position of not liking the outcome... The final and third plank of the argument is the most egregious and outrageous one. The accuser apparently sent a text stating that she was not an 'innocent bystander'. Anybody who has talked to people who have survived a sexual assault will tell you that often the victims question themselves. The accuser's texts might simply reflect her regret about drinking to the point of incapacitation, or perhaps flirting (which is not tantamount to consent for sex). Overall, this is a hatchet job by a accused's lawyer on the accuser, and the reporter who swallowed this nonsense hook, line and sinker bears the responsibility for the impact it will have. The ink stains the printer's hands.

You sound like a rape apologist and victim blamer!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meister

LIVEFRMNYC

macrumors 604
Oct 27, 2009
7,433
8,607
regret about what they did might make them make up claims of rape.
It's like the "Girls Gone Wild" videos. Those females of age, consented in writing and verbally on tape, but they tried to sue anyway cause it made them look bad.

As I remember(could be wrong), there was only one legit suit because the girl lied about her age and had a fake ID.
 

cfedu

Suspended
Original poster
Mar 8, 2009
1,165
1,508
Toronto
I think I understand this case now. This was called rape because one of the new feminist definitions of rap is that denying sex to a woman is rape. When he was blacked out, she gave John Doe a BJ in the hopes he would wake up and penetrate her. Since that did not happen she left ands got another man to finish the job that John Doe could not finish.

http://thoughtcatalog.com/anne-gus/2014/06/when-he-says-no-denying-a-woman-sex-is-rape/

 
Last edited:

VulchR

macrumors 68020
Jun 8, 2009
2,329
10,254
Scotland
So, you do not have any source that would give any information whatsoever on why he would've been found guilty of rape?
I noticed you changed your tactic of accusing the woman of rape. I also note that nobody here has explained why the journalist did not try to contact the woman for her side of the story. In any case, my point is that the journalist who authored this story is making unsupported claims based on their interpretations of the woman's text messages. My claim is that the woman's behaviour is not inconsistent with suffering a sexual assault, nothing more.

Take it from a guy whose had more than his share of problems with booze these do not necessarily indicate nor are they a good measure of a blackout state.
The symptoms are usually more noticeable in binge drinkers. Besides, how do you what you were acting like when you blacked out? :p

So without any evidence, it's automatically the guy's fault?
Saying that the woman's behaviour is compatible with suffering sexual assault is not the same thing as saying the guy is guilty. We do not know the facts in the case, but the reporting of it is naive at best and biased at worst.

You sound like a rape apologist and victim blamer!!
No, I sound like somebody who evaluates evidence. You should try it sometime.

I think I understand this case now. ...
You lost me when citing Faux News. Their reporting was even more flawed than the original post, and of course they blame Obama....