Ohio University student claims she was raped. Incident caught on camera

[alien42]

Wait...where did and "everyone" except the outliers get "all of the evidence"? Were you in the grand jury room? Did you hear testimony from both the woman and the man?

I want to see all the evidence, too. Please share.

all the evidence needed is the videos of the incident as well as the bystander accounts available.

the fact is, you have already seen and heard the evidence.

 

[sixone]

The "that" in my post being the "sexual intercourse agreement" otherwise known as a singed consent contract.

Except then you went on to claim that a woman isn't allowed to stop sex in progress, which has nothing to do with a "signed consent contract".

In reality, both parties have the right to say "no more" at any time during the encounter. No exceptions - refusing to stop IS rape.

 

[nehalem256]

sorry, but if you let a dude finger you and eat you out on the street corner while a bunch of people film it, then walk away with him, you have already consented to sexual relations.

Makes sense to any rational person.

 

[nehalem256]

Except then you went on to claim that a woman isn't allowed to stop sex in progress, which has nothing to do with a "signed consent contract".

In reality, both parties have the right to say "no more" at any time during the encounter. No exceptions - refusing to stop IS rape.

So then you agree with my premise that a signed consent contract in no way protects you from being accused of rape

 

[alien42]

In a criminal court, the burden is on the prosecutor to prove his case, based on the evidence available. Lack of evidence doesn't prove that a crime did NOT take place.

good thing there is no lack of evidence in this case.

 

[sixone]

all the evidence needed is the videos of the incident as well as the bystander accounts available.

the fact is, you have already seen and heard the evidence.

That's a matter of opinion, not a matter of fact.

 

[BikeJunkie]

Only to people who don't take the time to actually read them. The only posts I offered were regarding possibilities, as the full set of facts are still unknown, even after the decision of the grand jury was made public.

If you want to believe something different, go right ahead. There are several here who need to make things up to be pissed off about. Says more about them than it does about me.

Okay so forget these far-fetched "possibilities" and enough with hiding behind this "the full set of facts are still unknown" charade. That will ALWAYS be the case yes? After all we don't know what she ate for lunch and who knows maybe that factored into the events that unfolded. This is a discussion forum and a sensible place for sensible speculation.

So speculate. Assuming we're not missing anything truly relevant that would magically negate the overwhelming evidence that we DO have:

1) do you believe a rape occurred? If so please state on what grounds it occurred.

2) if you believe a rape did NOT occur should potential crimes committed by the woman be pursued?

These are direct questions operating under the premise that nothing substantial is missing from the pool of evidence/information currently available.

 

[alien42]

Except then you went on to claim that a woman isn't allowed to stop sex in progress, which has nothing to do with a "signed consent contract".

In reality, both parties have the right to say "no more" at any time during the encounter. No exceptions - refusing to stop IS rape.

that's fucked up. going by your logic, or lack there of, if i am having sex with a consenting woman and in the middle she decides to say stop or no, i am automatically a rapist with just one more thrust.

 

[sixone]

So then you agree with my premise that a signed consent contract in no way protects you from being accused of rape

Refusing to have sexual contact with someone in no way protects you from being accused of rape. When there's no third-party in the room to stand as a witness, either side can say anything they want.

 

[TerryMathews]

In a criminal court, the burden is on the prosecutor to prove his case, based on the evidence available. Lack of evidence doesn't prove that a crime did NOT take place.

But in the court of sixone evidence is not required?

 

[sixone]

Okay so forget these far-fetched "possibilities" and enough with hiding behind this "the full set of facts are still unknown" charade. That will ALWAYS be the case yes? After all we don't know what she ate for lunch and who knows maybe that factored into the events that unfolded. This is a discussion forum and a sensible place for sensible speculation.

So speculate. Assuming we're not missing anything truly relevant that would magically negate the overwhelming evidence that we DO have:

1) do you believe a rape occurred? If so please state on what grounds it occurred.

2) if you believe a rape did NOT occur should potential crimes committed by the woman be pursued?

These are direct questions operating under the premise that nothing substantial is missing from the pool of evidence/information currently available.

The problem is, there are a LOT of substantial pieces missing from the pool of evidence. We don't have complete statements from either party shown in the video.

 

[sixone]

that's fucked up. going by your logic, or lack there of, if i am having sex with a consenting woman and in the middle she decides to say stop or no, i am automatically a rapist with just one more thrust.

What part of "no" don't you understand?

 

[nehalem256]

that's fucked up. going by your logic, or lack there of, if i am having sex with a consenting woman and in the middle she decides to say stop or no, i am automatically a rapist with just one more thrust.

So much for keeping the government out of the bedroom.

 

[TerryMathews]

The problem is, there are a LOT of substantial pieces missing from the pool of evidence. We don't have complete statements from either party shown in the video.

I think I'm going to start videotaping all of the sex I have with women "on the advice of my lawyer." 😎

 

[alien42]

What part of "no" don't you understand?

the part where my penis is already in her vagina because she said YES.

shit, going by your logic, as soon as the woman says no or stop, i am automatically a rapist without even an extra thrust because MY PENIS IS ALREADY CONSENSUALLY IN HER VAGINA!!!

what part of consenting don't you understand?

 

[SMOGZINN]

Makes sense to any rational person.

No it does not. A person has the right to decide When, With who, and What acts are acceptable for each and every sexual encounter. Breaking any one of those constitutes rape. Consenting once to one act does not imply consent later or for other acts.

 

[BikeJunkie]

The problem is, there are a LOT of substantial pieces missing from the pool of evidence. We don't have complete statements from either party shown in the video.

Oh you mean a collegiate game of "he said she said" could potentially blow this whole thing wide open? You and I have very different standards when it comes to evidence.

But I digress.

Assuming no substantial pieces of evidence are missing, did a rape occur?

If so, on what grounds?

If not, should charges against the woman be explored?

Three very easy questions that give you a safe out in the event evidence is truly missing.

 

[SMOGZINN]

I think I'm going to start videotaping all of the sex I have with women "on the advice of my lawyer." 😎

That would be illegal in almost all states with out your partners consent (and probably illegal in most even with consent)

 

[nehalem256]

No it does not. A person has the right to decide When, With who, and What acts are acceptable for each and every sexual encounter. Breaking any one of those constitutes rape. Consenting once to one act does not imply consent later or for other acts.

Well according to some people in this thread even a consent form signed in your own blood does not constitute consent.

 

[TerryMathews]

That would be illegal in almost all states with out your partners consent (and probably illegal in most even with consent)

But then what evidence will I have to protect myself in sixone's kangaroo court?

BTW, I clearly said I was going to disclose. So how exactly would that be illegal?

 

[nehalem256]

the part where my penis is already in her vagina because she said YES.

shit, going by your logic, as soon as the woman says no or stop, i am automatically a rapist without even an extra thrust because MY PENIS IS ALREADY CONSENSUALLY IN HER VAGINA!!!

what part of consenting don't you understand?

If you don't pull out exactly as fast as she wants you are no different than a guy who chloroforms a woman and has his way with everyone of her orifices in a dark alley...

Feminist views on what rape is are a complete joke.

 

[SP33Demon]

He needs to countersue her for defamation of character.

Any intentional false communication, either written or spoken, that harms a person's reputation; decreases the respect, regard, or confidence in which a person is held; or induces disparaging, hostile, or disagreeable opinions or feelings against a person.

Defamation may be a criminal or civil charge. It encompasses both written statements, known as libel, and spoken statements, called slander.

 

[justoh]

He needs to countersue her for defamation of character.

Except he wasn't being sued....

 

[SMOGZINN]

Well according to some people in this thread even a consent form signed in your own blood does not constitute consent.

Consent is an ongoing state that can be withdrawn at any time, not a one time event. You can't say that she gave me consent at one time so that goes for all time.

Even in the world of D/s where there are actually written consent contracts this is known and carefully delt with.

But then what evidence will I have to protect myself in sixone's kangaroo court?

BTW, I clearly said I was going to disclose. So how exactly would that be illegal?

Sorry, I didn't read it as you were going to disclose, but I can see how you could have meant that. Because of pornography laws filming any act of sex might very well be illegal no matter what the state of consent.

 

[SMOGZINN]

He needs to countersue her for defamation of character.

Yes, he does. And he might even win such a lawsuit.