Duke lacrosse accuser made previous report

[chookie]

DURHAM, N.C. (AP) -- The woman who says she was raped by three members of Duke's lacrosse team also told police 10 years ago she was raped by three men, filing a 1996 complaint claiming she had been assaulted three years earlier when she was 14.

Authorities in nearby Granville County said Thursday that none of the men named in the decade-old report were ever charged with sexual assault there, but they didn't have details why.
-snip-

According to the Creedmoor police report in August 1996, when the woman was 18, she told officers she was raped and beaten by three men "for a continual time" in 1993, when she was 14. She told police she was attacked at an "unspecified location" on a street in Creedmoor, a town 15 miles northeast of Durham.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/D/DUKE_LACROSSE?SITE=TXSAN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

[IndianaGreen]

1. and the plot thickens!

Nothing like entertainment to get our minds off the war, the gas prices, the loss of civil liberties, etc.

Now, what's the latest from Aruba?

[Erika]

2. She is an evidently attractive girl with a good figure

Do I find it hard to believe she has been taken advantage of more than once? No.

Do I find it hard to believe that a girl who was raped when she was 14 but didn't report it until three years later, and there were no arrests? No.

[chookie]

21. On age and rape and physical attraciveness

Rape is not a sexual crime -- it is a violent crime commited upon victims of any age, from babies to children to women to elderly women -- even men. I conclude from this is that physical attractiveness of a victim is not an absolute predictor of vulnerability to rape.

[Umbram]

25. Please explain this to me - i've never understood it.

I hear all the time that "rape is not a sexual crime - it is a violent crime" or something similar.

Objectively - it would appear to be a crime that is both violent and sexual.

Subjectively from the rapist's point of view it would be on a case by case basis, no? Take the cases of female teachers having sexual relations with their elementary school pupils. We have society have declared this rape (statutory). I'd say that's a sexual but not violent crime.

I guess my question is: what is the purpose of stating that rape is a violent, not sexual crime? Have we adopted it because it's therapeutically useful (as in reassuring a victim that they were in no way at fault)?

[chookie]

26. Don't ask me

I agree with you that it is a violent crime involving sex. Yes that is what sets it apart from other violent assault. I'm no lawyer, but my understanding is that our legal system has a range of categories that differentiate sexual crimes, because there is a lot of variation in specifics of assault.

The point of my post was pretty narrow: that physical attractiveness, age, etc are not definitive predictors of vulnerability to sexual assault; I was responding to the suggestion made by the person who made this claim.. Victims of sexual assault vary a great deal; no type of victim is specifically targetted.

[Umbram]

27. Fair enough.

I wouldn't disagree with any of those latter points.

[Harper_is_Bush]

31. "rape is not a sexual crime"?

It most certainly is. It is violent as well, certainly.

And although rape is commited upon any age and attractiveness, physical beauty can be a predicating factor.

[Rich Hunt]

33. That doesn't mean it's "sexual"

What is the DEAL with people who cling so tightly to the idea that "rape is sexual". To say so doesn't mean ANYTHING. Please be more specific. A rapist can be resentful of women he perceives as "attractive" and therefore "unattainable" and "vain" to them. I know this for a fact.

[chookie]

34. Link?

I do not present myself as an expert in this area and am endeavoring to understand the complexities of sexual assault. If physical beauty is a predicating factor of sexual assault-- which is a fact I am not familiar with -- I would greatly appreciate a link to the statistics that account for this observation. Thanks in advance.

[Harper_is_Bush]

46. I said it can be a predicating factor.

That is obvious.

[MadMaddie]

3. So is this article saying a woman can't be assaulted twice?

Because that is bullshit!!!

[chookie]

10. No it does not

The news reports I posted merely outlines that a strikingly similar charge was made in the past by the accuser. The authors do not offer an opinion or judgement, although defence attorneys, who were unaware of this previous incident, are interpreting the report with suspicion.

[CoffeeCat]

4. It makes sense...

....that a girl of 14 who was raped--and never rec'd justice--would grow up and continue to place herself in the role of vulnerable victim (stripper).

I'm sure most of the lemmings out there will not understand that this is typical of sexual abuse victims. Most victims of childhood sexual abuse are repeatedly victimized throughout their lives. They feel that they are nothing. They don't understand that their bodies are their own. They don't understand that they have boundaries, and they repeatedly put themselves in vulnerable situations that often leader to further sexual assaults.

This will get spun in the media as proof that she's a liar.

It's too bad.

[FrenchieCat]

5. Gee, I got robbed twice.....in 10 years.....

Which, of course, according to this logic, if applied...is really just too much to be the truth? Ok....What-E-ver! :eyes:

[Pavulon]

9. Not in creedmoor, NC you didn't

[chookie]

38. Again...

...If you were robbed by 3 men in the first crime, and then robbed by 3 men again in the second attack, it would be a pretty weird coincidence. But who's to say lightning doesn't strike twice in the same place? Life is, admittedly, strange and complicated.

[Judi Lynn]

6. Some people have become deeply immersed in this story.

Here's the previous 415 post thread, to refresh memories of posters and positions and fervency:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2234396

I might add some cable news, I think Rita, is doing a news feature on Chandra Levy.

What IS the news from Aruba, as I.G. mentioned?

[chookie]

11. Hide the threads n/t

[Hekate]

7. I lived next door to a 14 year old who was raped at 7 and 10

before she moved to my neighborhood. Both times by men who knew her family -- I think the second guy wondered what it would be like to "do it" to a child who'd already "been done."

When I was in my teens a 13-year old girl was pulled off the street by a carful of men -- after they were charged with her rape they had the gall to say "she didn't look 13."

Vulnerable is vulnerable.

The Duke stripper/dancer is making some poor choices in life, but it does NOT give anyone license to rape her, either with their penis or a broomstick.

Incidentally, something that's not been mentioned is the great disparity between what she got paid for this kind of work versus what she could get paid for being -- say -- a sales clerk or office worker or the like.

I worked my way through college as a sales clerk, and let me tell you the wages were pathetic. I supported my children as a secretary, and if my ex hadn't been paying a little child support, groceries would not have been in my budget. (Read Nickled and Dimed by Barbara Ehrenreich.)

I, with my pride and all that stuff, would actually have been way too scared to do the kind of work this woman does (or did) because of the risks involved. But you know, I will not sit in judgment on any woman who decides to take the risk. Women's wages suck.

Hekate

[chookie]

22. Most often...

...violent crimes are commited by culprits known by the accuser. It is very sad. Police start with investigating the family of the victim, and move outward.

>>The Duke stripper/dancer is making some poor choices in life, but it does NOT give anyone license to rape her, either with their penis or a broomstick.
<< Only the most sociopathic among us would disagree.

[LostinVA]

71. I've mentioned the wage disparity in some posts

Plus, the flexible, shorter hours than she would have in retail or fast food. Time ti study, time to be with her kids.

[Pavulon]

8. Close to Home

Creedmoor is tiny. I live up the road. There is almost no crime, all property. rare drug stuff. I read their paper. Think 1 stoplight.

Tawana Brawley should end up in jail. The odds of two seperate gang rapes in less than 10 years is remote.

IMHO will eat crow if wrong.

[bluestateguy]

12. I really think this is an issue for Duke and Durham

I do not regard it as national news.

This nation is at war.

[FrenchieCat]

13. True.......

[chookie]

16. So hide the threads

Don't aggravate yourself if you feel a thread addresses unworthy or irrelevant subjects.

If it violates DU rules, then you should report it to the moderators.

[skids]

18. Your knight in shining armor just arrived...

...now whenever anyone asks you what you think about the "Duke sex scandal" you can say "Yeah, that Randy Cunningham, sheesh, and did you hear there are a lot of other congresspeople involved?"

[salin]

106. Great Response!

:thumbsup:

[azurnoir]

14. How did they get juvenile records?

The DA should put a gag order on all involved

[Pavulon]

15. You bet.

None of this should ever have hit the press. Nifong is pandering for votes.

[rsr26]

17. Case Looks Weak

Im a defense attorney and this just adds to my belief that this accuser is full of it. Obviously a stripper can be raped- that is a straw man argument presented to anyone who dares to mention the politically incorrect fact that the woman does, in fact, take her clothes off for money.

But just because the Duke guys are snot nosed frat boys doesnt mean they are guilty. No DNA showing sex, no witnesses to back up her story- nothing but the word of a woman with a criminal history who was wasted when the alleged attack occurred. This case is a circus- the DA cant drop it or he will be accused of being bought off by whitey.

INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.

[chookie]

20. The impending toxicology reports will be important

They will reveal if date rape drugs were used. They will also reveal the amount of alcohol in her blood, and forensic pathologists will be able to assess approximately how many drinks she may have consumed and perhaps over a certain time period, and see if it corroborates the account of events by the accuser and the witnesses.

The poor creature was falling on the ground by 12:03 -- unless she has a seizure disorder, I think it is reasonable to suspect, even before the trial, that she was impaired on the night of the alleged attack.

Thank heavens we live in a time in which forensic science can be an impartial witness to a crime.

[Neil Lisst]

28. it will help, but it won't tell us if she ingested these drugs willingly

A dancer who gets high to perform is not unusual, and this woman has a history of substance abuse.

[chookie]

35. True, but...

...the accuser has likely testified to investigators as to how many drinks she was offered that night by the persons who attended the party; this is important as claims have been made that she was offered, or was forced to consume, either date rape drugs or massive amounts of alcohol which would have deliberately made her more vulnerable to an attack and which can account for the alcohol level present in her blood at the time of the examination. Again, I'm no toxicologist, but such a toxicological expert can assess an approximate timeline of effect-- if drugs were used -- of how the drugs would be processed by one who, voluntarily or involuntarily, injested them. Roofies and GHB -- or any other drug which may be identified by the blood test she received after the attack-- have very different timelines of effect on those who have injested them. I'm not an expert, but -- and this is pure speculation -- but if she has claimed that she consumed, or was forced to consume, a certain amount of alcohol in an approximate period of time, it is probable that her blood alcohol level can corroborate her claim; it may not corroborate her claim, contrary to the claim by the second dancer that the accuser was not impaired when she arrived at the house in which the assault is supposed to have occured. The toxicology report will, hopefully, provide important evidence addressing the possibly conflicting claims by witnesses.

[Neil Lisst]

36. I agree. They will take what she told them and compare it to the Tox

report, which will be accurate in showing how much of what she had in her.

If she had date rape drug in her, and the DA can tie ownership of a date rape drug to an accused, the DA's case just got a lot stronger. If she had it in her, but there's no way to tie it to them, it's an open question how and when she got it. She's open to impeachment because of her drug history.

[TorchTheWitch]

37. date-rape drugs are ingested willingly?

Now I've heard everything.

[Neil Lisst]

40. She's appears to be a serious druggie. How do you know what she takes?

You don't.

[TorchTheWitch]

43. Where is the evidence that says she does drugs?

Dude, not even the defense is saying she has a drug problem. They filed a motion for her medical and mental health records because they "suspect" that she "might"... now, how does this translate into her appearing to be a drug addict that probably takes date-rape drugs on purpose?

The defense knows that pills were seized from the house where the alleged rape took place, and they've heard the prosecutor hinting about date-rape drugs and are therefore terrified that it was found that she had a date-rape drug in her system and that the pills that were seized may be the same as what was found in her system which would seriously hurt their case. They are desperate to use the drug addict angle in order to try to spin that any date-rape drugs were hers and she voluntarily dosed herself with them that night. That is their ONLY option to try to fight the revelation of date-rape drugs being used, and as absurd and bizarre as that option is, they have to counter with SOMETHING and that's their ONLY option.

Ah, but why do I bother... if the defense said she sat on the roof of the house dressed as a Confederate soldier while simultaniously playing the chello and eating the entire carcass of an elephant you'd be here posting that she levitated above the roof of the house wearing an entire regiment's worth of Confederate soldier uniforms while simultaniously playing the harp, flute, violin and chello and eating a whole herd of live elephants.

[Neil Lisst]

72. oh it's there, if you have an open mind and have been listening

[converted_democrat]

79. Really? When? I've been following this pretty close, and I haven't

heard that, or gotten that impression..

[Neil Lisst]

85. you're entitled to make your own conclusions

same as me

I'm not going to explain why I think so to yet another person who hasn't read the thread.

[Marie26]

88. I think this is

Neil Lisst's way of saying that he has nothing to back up that conclusion.

[Neil Lisst]

91. did you ever learn about striking designated expert witnesses

from a real lawyer?

Still waiting on that.

[Marie26]

93. Did you ever learn about

the unethicality of making up false facts about a rape victim from a real human being? Still waiting on that.

[Neil Lisst]

95. thanks for sharing

Keep me posted on your legal insights.

[converted_democrat]

104. Let's really think about this for a second.. Regardless of what we think

or don't think happened with the rape, let's think on this for a minute.. Duke is a notoriously tough school, it isn't the local community college, if you get my drift.. You can't just skate through.. She's going to school, working, and raising kids at the same time.. I've known a few druggies in my day, and I've only met a couple that could even keep their bills current.. What are the chances she could handle school, childrearing, and work while maintaining a drug habit? Slim to none.. You don't have anything, otherwise you'd have posted it with a link..

[Neil Lisst]

107. except she doesn't go to Duke

She went to another school, not one like Duke. And you don't know if she was a good student, or just someone pulling down money for going.

You're dreaming if you think she couldn't go to school, "work," and childrear. Women who are drinking and drugging do it all over America every day.

[BrownOak]

111. From the Newsweek article

On a bulletin board in the student lounge was a long list of students with grades high enough to qualify for the Golden Key International Honour Society. On the list was the name of the alleged rape victim.

FWIW

[Marie26]

87. So annoying

I don't mind if people have a different opinion on this case, but why can't you at least try to get your facts right? There is NO EVIDENCE that she has taken drugs in the past, or that she used any drugs that night. Not only are you repeating defense lies whole-heartedly, you're making up your own out of nothing. I have to wonder why someone would have such an agenda to smear the victim in this case.

[Neil Lisst]

92. sure there is

You lack the objectivity to see or hear it.

[Marie26]

100. Oh, well, I'm convinced

:eyes:

[Spike from MN]

114. On your request that others try to get the facts right...

I think you'll find this quote to be applicable:

"I'm not a fan of facts. You see, facts can change, but my opinion will never change, no matter what the facts are." -- Stephen Colbert

You see, facts don't matter in this case. Or in any rape case. Because ALL rape accusations are FALSE ACCUSATIONS made by lying scheming mentally-ill gold-digging alcholic drug-addled whores. There could be 10 unimpeachable eyewitnesses backing up the accuser's story 100%, a videotape of the entire incident, and signed confessions from the perpetrators but that wouldn't change anything. The gist of the arguments would remain the same:

1. The alleged "eyewitnesses" are all liars. The lying scheming mentally-ill gold-digging alcholic drug-addled whore of an accuser bribed them all. Three of the alleged "eyewitnesses" don't even have eyes!!! And one of them received a speeding ticket in 1988. With a criminal background like that, s/he is most definitely NOT a credible witness!! The other six have never in their lives been anywhere near the alleged location where the alleged "incident" allegedly took place. So much for the alleged "eyewitnesses."

2. The videotape proves NOTHING. All it shows is they had SEX with her. The fact that she is fighting, kicking, screaming, repeatedly yelling "No!" and begging them to stop means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. NO means YES!! She WANTED IT!! And they WEREN'T beating her so stop lying about that. She's a slut and she likes it rough. Case closed. Oh, and the accuser is a lying scheming mentally-ill gold-digging alcholic drug-addled whore.

3. The guys are INNOCENT! They HAD to confess because they know how easy it is for the prosecution to prove the case. The alleged "victims" in rape cases are treated with kid gloves by the legal system whereas the accused are invariably raked over the coals. They are all to often called vicious things like "fine upstanding young men" and "pillars of the community." Who in the world would want to put themselves through that kind of horrendous treatment??? The poor innocent guys just didn't want to go through the whole ordeal so they decided to sign a confession and get it over with. The cards were stacked against them from the start. They are INNOCENT and anyone who says otherwise is a fucking liar.

4. Oh. Almost forgot. The accuser is a lying scheming mentally-ill gold-digging alcholic drug-addled whore.

So you see, Colbert was right. The facts can change but certain people's opinions will stay the same regardless. Please try to keep that in mind the next time you ask someone to get their facts right. Just trying to be helpful here...

:sarcasm: Major fucking sarcasm.

As for certain people having an agenda to smear the victim, yes, it DOES seem rather odd, doesn't it? Hmmm...what do you suppose the motivaton could possibly be....

[hexola]

44. I wondered the same thing...

Do people actually party with these "date rape" drugs? Like weed,alcohol,coke?? I would tend to believe some folks do ingest this stuff willingly.

[Neil Lisst]

73. people who need to get high will use anything

if their drug of preference is unavailable

[northzax]

54. GHB? sure.

believe me, if there's a drug out there, there are people who take it for shits and giggles.

[BrownOak]

61. Yeah, but

the idea that any woman would take a date rape drug and then go work as stripper at a party seems a bit of a stretch.

[northzax]

62. dosage is everything

THIS IS COMPLETE SPECULATION, NOT CONNECTED TO THIS CASE IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM, SIMPLY A HYPOTHETICAL.

perhaps you would take sedatives to calm your nerves before a dance? maybe to counteract amphetatimes or other stimulants? maybe you need to be numb before dancing for a bunch of drunk frat boys? who knows?

[Neil Lisst]

74. dancers being bombed out of their minds? - not exactly rare

As for the drugs, there are users who will pop any pill they get into their mouth, with hardly a thought.

We're talking about real hypothetical here, but just because it's called the "date rape" drug doesn't mean that's its only purpose among users.

[northzax]

78. hell, the number one date rape drug of all time

has to be alcohol, right? Heck, they don't call them BEER goggles for nothing.

[Neil Lisst]

83. alcohol blackouts have been around a lot longer than roofies

[Name removed]

53. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[djg21]

50. I'm with you.

I too have served as both a prosecutor and a defense attorney, and I too think the case here is getting weaker by the minute. That being said, my sense is that in light of the media attention that this case has received, the prosecutor cannot drop the rape charges unless the so-called "victim" is charged with filing a false report.

[LostinVA]

69. She isn't a "so-called" victim, she is a rape victim

Unless you think the SANE is a lying skank too?

Oops! Another smear the rape victim/Tawna Brawley poster/false accusations! Man, my ignore list is growing like weeds in a wet summer...

SHE WAS RAPED. Try to actually listen to about the only facts we actually know about the case. But, I doubt you're interested in those...

[Neil Lisst]

75. She's an accuser who may or may not be a victim.

You THINK she was raped, so in your mind, it's a foreclosed issue.

You do not get make the decision for anyone but yourself. At best, there is a SANE who is alleged to have found what she considered evidence of rape.

[ShaneGR]

80. Aha Mr. Lawyer!

"So called Victim"

I would like to offer my services to you for $25 dollars an hour to edit all of your statements. You should have said, "Alleged Victim."

[djg21]

89. Okee Dokee!

The lacrosse players are alleged to have raped her. She purports to be a "rape victim." Unless she was actually raped, she is hardly a "victim." In fact, if her allegations are false, it is the alleged rapists who are being "victimized." Call it what you will!

[LostinVA]

68. Oh my, your post is so unbiased and stays completely on the facts

so much so I';m putting you on Ignore.

[timber84]

70. I know you can't read my post because I am also on your

ignore, but you are the most immature poster. Taking pride on ignoring people how melodramatic and juvenile.

[Exultant Democracy]

84. I would humbly suggest that

when you decided to put people on ignore you should have the class to just ignore them. Don't post replies to people when you have no intention of seeing their response.

[LostinVA]

101. I would humbly suggest you mind your own business

Unless I tell you I'm putting you on Ignore. What's classless is people saying a rape victim is a liar, a prostitute, a druggie, a "so called" victim, etc. I don't waste time with flamebaiters, and I think they deserve to be told that some people are onto their little games. I don't give a DAMN if it bothers them I won't see their oh-so- "classy," unbiased, rational response. In fact, I don't give a tinker's damn.

I am tired of people coming onto the rape threads and thinking they just just spread their poison and lies and rerape this woman and every rape survivor on DU who are being touched and hurt by the sickness some of these posters have. Waste your energy on THEM. Tell THEM they are classless.

What the hell should I have to listen to someone whose views I consider an antithesis to every value I stand for? I am actually letting them know why I won't be answering them.

So... run along and harass them, call them classless. Oh, guess you won't be going that...

[BrownOak]

110. Passive aggressive much? (not that you can see this)

Because that's what the whole "I'm putting you on my ignore list" seems like. You shouldn't have to listen to someone whose views you consider an antithesis to your values. But your approach seems analogous to immaturely get in the last word on the playground and then place your fingers in your ears and sing "na-na-na-na-na.... I can't hear you."

While the original post that spurred your latest proclamation of IGNORE may have been offensive, you have proudly told others that they will be ignored for things merely question elements of the case. In your world, anyone who questions the allegations is a flamebaiter or troll. This means you're right in 98% of rape cases (or 92%, or 60% depending upon whose numbers you want to use) - it's just that there's that pesky 2% that some people aren't comfortable forgetting.

Your mantra here has been "she was raped as per the SANE exam" which you'll drop when anyone questions these particular allegations. The fact that she has injuries consistent with sexual assault hasn't been disclosed in enough detail to positively state she was raped. The fact that she has injuries consistent with sexual assault won't ever tell you if she was assaulted by these suspects. Yet if anyone comes near those topics you immediately slap them on the Ignore List... but not before telling them as much. This may feel gratifying to you, but to many it just shows an intolerance to consider all the possibilities and an inability to adequately support your position should anyone question it.

Maybe that's just the way you're wired and that's cool, but trying to sell it as a principled stand seems a bit of a stretch.

[Neil Lisst]

120. the rules provide

it's ok to tell someone you put them on Ignore, if you actually do it

I do so. The purpose of telling them is so they know that you won't be talking to them any more, so they need not waste any more time talking to you. Then I forget them. When 10 people are saying the same shrieking, irrational, nasty message, why listen to all of them? Two or three will represent that POV.

Putting someone IGNORE says "not even your insults matter to me."

[Spike from MN]

118. Yes indeed.

Some of us are onto their little games, aren't we? We have a REAL good idea why they feel the need to smear the victim every chance they get. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out. As some would say, "do the math."

You are dead on LIV. Every single vitriolic post is an insult not only the victim in this particular case but every victim out there that is subjected to reading these posts and/or now or in the future will need to defend themselves in court. Everything said about the victim in this case has been said about every single victim that has come before her and will be said about every single victim that comes after her. It's ALWAYS the "alleged" victim that is a liar. NEVER the person that is accused. The "innocent boys that are wrongfully accused" are ALWAYS telling the truth. Take the Orange County gang rape case for instance. Here's a snippet:

Greg Haidl's father Don did make a startling admission. If it's true, he's a worse savage than I originally thought. And if it's true, Greg may have had more of a conscience than I thought.

About a year after the crime, Haidl said, his son told him he wished they could "forget all the lawyers" and go to the judge and "man up" to what he had done. "I told him it doesn't work that way," Don Haidl recalled.

Greg basically wanted to own up--maybe because he did feel badly, or maybe because he was tired of dragging everything out and figured he could cut a deal. No matter. He did want to own up, he basically admitted what he did, and his father knew it. And he lied, and told his son to lie.

Let's remember that. He lied. And let's get one thing straight--providing a vigorous defense for someone is not the same as lying about the accuser and harassing her. See: Jane Doe's frenemies and their dubious testimony, the rumors spread about Doe, and the campaign of harassment and intimidation against Doe and her family.

http://pinkofeministhellcat.typepad.com/pinko_feminist_hellcat/oc_rape_case/index.html

OOPS! HE WAS GUILTY AND HE LIED. Perhaps I need to repeat that. HE WAS GUILTY AND HE LIED. Oh wait, that NEVER happens. At least according to some of the posters here. ALL defendants in rape trials are INNOCENT. Apparently Greg just didn't get the memo.

[Neil Lisst]

90. wouldn't it be easier for you to tell us who you DON'T have on ignore?

that would save some time

[Moosepoop]

98. Same goes for you, bub.

You were announcing your IGNOREs right and left in another thread.

Pot, meet kettle.

[Marie26]

99. I'm so dissapointed.

I was hoping I made the Neil Lisst ignore list, only to find another response! Darnit. x( What is it going to take? I even threw in some eye-rolling smilies because that got some people ignored before, so I'm crossing my fingers.

[timber84]

49. I believe she reported the incident when she was 18. n/t

[classysassy]

19. Let the crooks dig for more dirt

"Its hard for a black woman to get justice in racist america"

[HuffleClaw]

23. hmmm. what will nancy grace say now?

she's ready to erect a gallows for the entire duke faculty.

[Umbram]

24. She's a sad human being...

...unless she's acting.

[Neil Lisst]

30. with Nancy Grace it's a hanging offense ...

... if you have one of those thingies dangling between your legs

She never met a man she didn't want to kill.

[fleabert]

29. 90-95% of women working in sex industry were raped at some point

in their childhood- at least that's what I read some time back, the incidence is quite high.

not at all out of the realm of reality that she would have been assaulted or raped in her childhood.

[chookie]

32. Yes, but...

...in exactly the same manner? By the same number of attackers? For the same amount of time ("prolonged")? I have no idea of the statistics regarding attacks that involve details of assault which are in detail strikingly similar upon a specific victim, but surely this is a type of occurance which has been analyzed as a variation in sexual assault. I am curious about how common this is.

(The statistics you cite regarding assaults on workers in the sex industry are disturbing. It is painful to consider....)

[fleabert]

42. i do not know the answer to your question.

but I do know that I found myself in a repeating pattern of abusive and unhealthy relationships after a childhood of the same- until I got counseling.

I wish I had a source for my memory- I think it was a documentary. It is a frightening thought, one I wish men would consider when they cheer at their bachelor parties. I know there are at least a few support groups for sex industry workers that try and get the women the counseling they might need, I bet they would have some thoughts on this matter that are important.

I cannot imagine a person willingly bringing this kind of scrutiny and rage on themselves for a fake accusation, so I tend to err on her side for now. The coming weeks will say a lot.

[TorchTheWitch]

39. It's not anywhere near that high

Porn actresses probably have a higher rate than strippers, but I can tell you although it is comparatively high to other types of employment, it's not nearly that high. Seriously, most of us are just single mothers or students or just women sick to death of slaving twice as long for a half or a quarter or even less of the pay.

And I think you may be confusing that percentage with the percentage of women in the industry who have been abused in their childhood in some way... rape, incest, assault, neglect, emotional abuse, etc. (not just rape).

Actually, I find it interesting that there's a pretty high percentage that grew up without a father figure in their lives... don't recall what the number was, but my own experience seems to prove that out... although I personally grew up with a father, I've found that a surprising number of the women I work with haven't. And by high percentage I'm mean it was somewhere around 40 or 50 percent.

[fleabert]

41. I seem to remember the number coming from a documentary I saw.

that said, I have friends that stripped in college. I in no way mean to demean or disrespect the women who work in the industry for whatever reason they might have.

I seriously considered it myself at one time, but was too shy and insecure to put myself on stage. It is more reprehensible to me that the sex industry is the highest paying industry for women in this day and age- not that women choose that path. If there were other paths that paid as much, I think most women would not choose stripping, pornography, prostitution, etc... not all, but most, imho. If we also include prostitution in the equation, I think the numbers shoot into the 90's from the 50 percentile- would you not?

and, for the record, the fact that I was abused as a child and seriously considered working in the sex industry says something, I think.

[TorchTheWitch]

56. I'm so sorry to hear you were abused

That just disgusts me. Children especially should never ever ever have to be subjected to that. :(

Since you were abused, I wouldn't recommend stripping. It may be that you have a very strong sense of self-worth now, which is absolutely needed to do this job with any degree of success and without negative affects to your psych, but I would be afraid that your doing this may bring out or bring back any bad feelings you had/have about yourself since we regularly run into all manner of vile pigs in this business. Probably better for you not to test those waters.

What you might consider is dressing up and putting on a private show once in awhile for your SO if you have one or getting together with your friends or just your girl friends if you feel more comfortable and putting on a show for/with them, or even just by yourself in front of a big mirror. There's definitely something empowering about sensually dancing out of your clothes even if you're by yourself.

:hug:

In any case, if you include non legal brothel prostitutes in the percentages I would think those numbers would shoot up pretty significantly. I tend to only think about strippers, porn actresses, agency escorts and legal brothel prostitutes as "the industry" since those are the ones connected with a legitimate legal business that's taxed. The 40-50 percent I was thinking of I should have clarified as just the strippers, not the whole of all "the industry" workers. Personally, I find non brothel prostitution to be sheer madness... probably nearly every one of them who have been doing it for any length of time have been raped at some point. Actually, since it's only really been pretty recently that strippers have been dumped into the sex industry (we used to be part of the entertainment industry) that 90% may not have included strippers, so if you discount them in the percentage and include the "underground" industry (non legal brothel prostitutes and independent "escorts"), yeah, I could see 90% or close to it as being valid.

As a side note... there's actually a difference between agency escorts and "escorts". Agency escorts are often normally still working as prostitutes, but not all of them have sex for pay, and the ones that do (which these days is probably most of them) the bulk of their paid time isn't necessarily taken up with sex. They're connected with a legal business that hires them out for the purpose of non-sex companionship (although the agencies know damn well most of their escorts are being paid for sex). Independent "escorts" are much like non legal brothel prostitutes but with a different pay structure than street prostitutes, and they may spend some amount of paid time with a customer engaged in legal non-sex companionship. Instead of being paid a fee per menu item as in street prostitution, "escorts" are paid for a block of time in which sex takes place. The term of "escort" today pretty much describes the "call girl" of yesterday... same job, different title. Actually, the job of legal brothel prostitutes and "escorts" is more similar than that of agency escorts and "escorts", but legal brothel prostitutes and agency escorts are more similar in how they get paid.

[fleabert]

58. Thanks. I am a long in tooth when it comes to considering it an option

these days, lol, they wouldn't take me! This was back in my college days and I am way healthier now. I definitely didn't have the psyche or the self esteem to get into it back then, I am glad I didn't.

Thank you for your professional perspective, it's frustrating how much the industry is perceived, and hopefully some might see your post and change their mind about it.

I feel the same way you do about illegal prostitution, I am much more inclined to consider legal prostitution after a small amount of research into the matter- I used to be rabidly opposed to it, but it actually holds some promise for the women involved as opposed to being on the street and all alone against the pimps, johns, the law, and the public.

as a side note, I recently completed a bit of professional massage therapy training, accredited and above the board; and if I want to practice professionally in CA, I have to register as an 'adult entertainer', fingerprints and all. if sexual massage is illegal, why is there a legal name attached to it? Strange, but true.

[BrownOak]

57. The big factor isn't the gender gap here

I don't mean for this to sound like I'm dismissing the differential in pay between men and women in the non-sex industries. I accept that as both fact and as sad reflection of our corporate culture. However, I think the fact that the sex industry is the highest paying industry for women in these days (and I've never seen that supported but I'm willing to accept it at face value) is more a factor of supply and demand for those positions than a byproduct of the differences in pay between the genders in the non-sex industries.

Women strippers make more than men strippers because there's a bigger demand for whatever reason you would like to assign (biological or cultural). But if the demand were identical regardless of gender, then you would have the same situation for men - the highest paying industry would be the sex industry. The only difference would be in the percentages - male sex workers would still make more than their non-sex workers, but the differential wouldn't be as great as their female counterparts.

So I think the better social commentary here is not a question of gender but a question of priorities. We pay those who provide us sexual gratification more than we pay those who teach our children, fight our fires, or protect us from crime. I'm fine with people making a living stripping if they want (although it takes a very strong person not to be exploited and disposed by the industry). I just think it's fucked up that someone would spend several hundred dollars in a strip club one evening but bitch the next morning when he reads about new funding requirements for teachers or schools.

[BrownOak]

47. It seemed really high

Granted my personal sample size in this (strippers I've known personally) is a total of 2. But neither of them was abused growing up so I questioned that 90% figure as well. That's not to say there aren't some pretty sad stories in that profession, but there are also some really balanced people as well.

The first was a woman I dated for several months and she did grow up without a father. She moved away for school and we fell apart and she eventually ended up dancing. She's probably just heading past the peak of the stripper career span and I hope things work out for her. The retirement plan in that business isn't always the softest landing.

The second is one of my favorite stories because it shows the absurdities of making assumptions about people. Her family life as a young girl was hardcore Southern Baptists... I'm talking tent show kind of religion. She ended up working at a local hospital as a admissions clerk in the ER where she met one of my friends who was a doctor. He had recently divorced his wife,a lawyer whom he had been married to for more than 7 years. They started dating which seemed really odd to most of us who knew the doctor and didn't know the new girlfriend too well. He was a New York/Miami Jew who had been through med school and she was pure Southern country Baptist without any college experience.

It got even more curious to those on the outside when she moved in with him and started working as a waitress at a strip club and then peaked when he got her the ubiquitous boob job and started dancing. The other part of the story is that along the way they married, had two children, and she put herself through college, grad school, and just finished with her PhD in Psychiatry.

So if you're scoring at home using general public perception she went from what looked like a fundamentalist Christian (good to crowd A, questionable to crowd B) to stripper (bad to crowd A, acceptable to crowd B) to PhD (good to almost all). Or maybe she was the same person all along and what changed was the filter through which everyone saw her.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

45. you know, it is quite possible to get sexually assaulted multiple times

[chookie]

51. Of course

But what is significant in this specific case is that the alleged sexual assaults were in both cases were carried out by three attackers for what was described as a prolonged period of time. It is remarkable that the attacks are so similar in their complexity. Then again, as I stated above, life is strange and complicated and one cannot discount a story simply because it is unusual.

[cap]

48. i wonder if cops found drugs at the frat house and just overlooked them?

there are two standards of justice here. A sports fraternity and no drugs???? Come on...no pot... no coke... give me a break.

Fox just said that all the stripper's past records will be looked into: credit report, criminal history, any legal complaints, etc.

There's an article somewhere saying that if you dont want rape, dont engage in activities like stripping. aka she got what she was asking for.

Regardless of what really happened...the message is clear:

What is happening is code talk against women: don't complain or we'll destroy you personally. code talk against blacks... you'all are trying to game the system again...

[chookie]

52. If the toxicology report is positive for these substances...

...then the cops and the defence attorneys have a lot of 'splaining to do.

[northzax]

55. no way they would overlook drugs in a house like this

as I recall, if a search warrant turns up illegal substances, even if they aren't mentioned in the warrant, you can still be busted for them. have you ever heard of a cop overlooking coke? I've had a cop overlook a reefer, and simply take it (back in my wayward youth) but no chance would they overlook coke, that's a felony.

[BrownOak]

59. Agreed

People want to make this look like the cops would treat the LAX players favorably because they're associated with Duke, they white, and they're rich. But when Duke made the move several years ago to crack down on drinking on campus because they didn't want the liability that would follow should anything happen, the natural result occurred; college kids didn't stop partying, they just moved off campus. The result is that those rental properties closest to the campus have become prime party spots which rather much sucks for the non-students who live in that area.

The cops make so many visits to those student houses in that area that there isn't a whole lot of love between the cops and the students. Just look at how many alcohol violations these guys had. If they're going to bust you for a can of beer, imagine what they would do if they found a little blow or a joint.

Plus, remember that the DA is using those deferred prosecution deals from the earlier violations to leverage the players into revealing who was at the party (this should make one question his confidence in the identifications). If he had the bigger hammer of a bag of coke sitting around you can bet he would use it.

[northzax]

60. oh yeah

people think the Durham cops are going to give a break to Dukies for partying off campus, and that ain't gonna happen. After all, if there were drugs there, the legal resident of the house is on the hook. So the DA sits him down and says "Look, Joe, you're facing X years for drug possession, let's talk."

worth noting as well, that they can't even get them for corrupting a minor with alcohol, since the party hosts were smart enough to clean up all the booze.

[mliddell78]

63. sheesh

They can't prove there were booze there anyway? Crazy.

[northzax]

64. well anecdotally

but it's kinda tough to prove it without actually finding a minor drinking alcohol.

[mliddell78]

65. True

Guess that's true. And really, kind of silly to bust for them for underage drinking when there was so much more going on.

[cap]

67. sorry... but upper middle class white fraternities do not get busted

for coke.... if they did and the kids did hard time, we wouldnt see it.

Sorry but the big preppy fraternities at Ivy League schools are full of the white stuff. I know, my room-mate hung out with those folks and there was coke a plenty as well as some drugs that I never knew existed....

[onenote]

77. why it wouldn't be a surprise if no drugs were found at the house

First, I think the characterization of the Buchanan Street residence as a "frat house" is incorrect. It was my understanding that it was simply a house where the three captains of the lacrosse team lived. Not a big "frat house".

Second, Duke student athletes are subject to unannounced drug testing, so it wouldn't surprise me at all that there were no drugs in the house (especially since a blind eye seemed to be turned, as it is at many schools, towards alcohol use/abuse).

onenote

[Neil Lisst]

82. items seized by the police pursuant to the original warrant:

The following items were seized by the police pursuant to the original warrant:

1. make up bag with ID
2. laptop
3. PC card
4. laptop
5. notebook adapter
6. web cam
7. digital camera case
8. micro cassette recorder
9. cell phone
10. laptop
11. cell phone
12. hard drive
13. laptop book
14. camera
15. camera
16. digital camera
17. large rectangular green bath rug
18. small bath mat
19. white floor cleaning wipe,
(20.) hand towel with initials
21. swabbings
22. 5 fingernails
23. dish rag
24. green rug
25. plastic bag with wet paper towel
26. large rug
27. paper towels
28. pills
29. $160
30. KY jelly bottle

The most interesting item is #28, the pills. If these are hers, they provide some insight to what she might be using. If these are properly prescribed for one of the three players who rents the house, they don't mean anything unless the drug is found in the accuser.

[Neil Lisst]

86. Item 28 seized: "pills"

Whose pills or what pills, we do not know.

[BrownOak]

112. All this shows is that Rush was in the house n/t

[TorchTheWitch]

66. Now this just makes me sick

http://www.wbz1030.com/topic/ap_news.php?story=AP/APTV/National/a/a/DukeLacrosse-aa
"That's the very first I've heard of that," said Bill Cotter, the attorney for indicted lacrosse player Collin Finnerty, who along with fellow Duke sophomore Reade Seligmann is charged with first-degree rape, kidnapping and sexual assault. He declined additional comment.

Attorney Joe Cheshire, who represents one of the uncharged players on the team, said he wants to know if prosecutors in the current case knew about the earlier allegation, or if the accuser told them about it.

He added that he found it notable that authorities apparently declined to prosecute the earlier case.

"These are serious allegations, particularly for a person that age. In my mind, it would raise real issues about her credibility," he said.

First of all, she reported this rape 4 years after the fact when she was 18 years old. Now, why in the world would he find it "notable" that the case was dropped by the authorities considering that 4 years after the fact there wouldn't be a speck of evidence, there's no witnesses, and they know it would be a case of he-1 said, he-2 said, he-3 said vs. she said? No prosecutor in the world would want to try such a case because they would undoubtedly lose. Add the fact that the prosecutor would have had to tell her that the ONLY way she could possibly win the case is with her own testimony being more credible then that of the 3 males accused, and she would have to face her entire life being shredded by defense counsel (much like the defense counsel in the current case), and she'd take an emotional beating by the defense counsel in cross-examination. Tell that to an 18 year old girl and see how fast she says she wants to drop the case... the case would already be a no-go with her testimony, but without it, it's completely dead in the water. And this swine finds it "notable".

What does her age have to do with credibility??? If a child or young woman tells someone she was raped we're supposed to think she's not credible because of her AGE??? Is the general public suddenly on the side of pedophiles now? Children and young women are suddenly too young to know whether or not they've been raped when they have been??? We're supposed to just automatically disbelieve children and young women when they tell someone they've been raped??? "Oh sorry, honey, you're only 14 (or 15 or 16 or 17 or 18), we have to question your credibility about this serious alligation because you're too young to know whether or not you've been forceably violated. If it happens again when you're 23 or so get back to us". UGH!

"These are serious allegations, particularly for a person that age. In my mind, it would raise real issues about her credibility".

I've re-read this sentence at least a dozen times trying very hard to believe he meant something other than what he's saying, and it just doesn't. This stinking pig is actually saying that someone of that age alleging she was raped should have her credibility questioned because of her AGE.

I can't believe that any sane person wouldn't be utterly disgusted by this attorney's remarks.

[Neil Lisst]

76. she made a complaint at age 18, alleging 3 men raped her

We know

1. She was an adult at the time she filed the charges.
2. The case was not pursued by authorities
3. The accuser's father says she was not raped on that occasion
4. The accused men have denied all her claims
5. At least one of the accused men says he didn't even know she'd filed the report mentioning him, as he was 13 in 1993.

To those who think a case should be looked at with an eye towards justice, this kind of information matters.

[Spike from MN]

102. They did not tell her father about the first rape.

She told her mother at the time it happened and they talked about it and decided not to tell the father. The reason they gave for not telling him is that he is something like 125 lbs. soaking wet and they thought he would become so enraged that he would go after the boys and maybe wind up getting hurt.

One of the boys in the first assault was her boyfriend at the time. I don't believe that has been mentioned here yet. IIRC, they went to a house somewhere and I think the other two were already there waiting. I believe they said something like he "offered her up" to his buddies. This info as well as the above info about not telling the father was reported on one of the many TV shows covering this story so I don't have a link.

Also, your statement "that the case was not pursued by authorities" is misleading. It wasn't pursued because she declined to press charges. They mentioned this on one of the TV shows when they covered this story and here's a quote that backs that up:

"Relatives told Essence magazine in an online story this week that the woman declined to pursue the case out of fear for her safety."

Link:

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/D/DUKE_LACROSSE?SITE=TXSAN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

[Neil Lisst]

103. so they say now, as their whole story comes unraveled

The case was not pursued. You can believe the latest tall tale from the family if you wish, but I'm not. The DA didn't pursue the case, and it appears the police didn't either.

Maybe it really happened to her, but I've found no reason to believe her or her family about anything thus far. I've found reasons not to believe them, as mentioned numerous times on this thread.

[Spike from MN]

113. Um, no.

Neil, the information I posted was taken from a show that broke the story about the decade-old rape. The family isn't "saying this now because their story unraveled." It's what they have said from the start (of their informing the media about the first rape) and their story hasn't changed.

Regarding the fact that the case was not pursued, as TTW and Moosepoop have already pointed out in this thread, it's not at all unusual that a decade-old rape would not be prosecuted. Please refer to their posts for further info. No need for me to repeat what has already been said.

You state that you have found reasons not to believe the family, "as mentioned numerous times in this thread." Hmmm...let me look back through the thread to refresh my memory. Here's what I have found:

1. You imply that if a date rape drug is found in the victim's system, she took it willingly. :eyes:
2. You state that the victim in this case has a drug history. You offer nothing to back up this assertion even though others have posted that the victim does not have a history of using drugs. Not even the defense is saying she has a drug problem. Yet you continue to insist she does and apparently expect everyone to just take that as fact because you said so. :eyes:
3. If people have an open mind and are listening, they will believe the victim has a drug problem even though you offer no proof to back up that assertion. :eyes:
4. The victim is (was?) attending school and might be a good student or she might be "just someone pulling down money for going." Yes, we ALL know how lucrative going to college is for a working gal. :eyes:
5. Everyone else on this board that doesn't agree with you lacks objectivity. :eyes:
6. You state that LostinVA THINKS the woman was raped so her mind is closed on the issue. You KNOW with ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY that the victim is DEFINITELY LYING and there is NO WAY IN HELL she was ever raped. But you have an open mind on the issue. :eyes:
7. A lot of people have you on their ignore list. :evilgrin:

You find reasons not to believe the victim and her family. I can find reasons to not believe the sky is blue but my saying that "the sky isn't blue" doesn't change the fact that it is. You are obviously hellbent on smearing this victim in this case which makes me question what your motive might be in doing so. Why do you feel the need to continuously attack her in post after post? What has she ever done to you? Why do you feel so threatened by her?

I have my suspicions...

[Neil Lisst]

117. others have already argued your position

better

Yours merely repeats the kind of misinformation and misapprehension common to your side of this issue.

Anyone who uses that many rolling eyes is someone whose posts I'll never want to read, so this is where I put you Ignore. Your POV is adequately covered by others who may not be as bright as you, but are more amusing.

[Spike from MN]

121. First off, kudos to all those that have argued my position

better than I have. I would like to thank each and every one of them for fighting the good fight against the rape deniers. I humbly bow to their superiority and offer my sincere and heartfelt thanks. Please keep it up!

As for the "misinformation and misapprehension common to my side of the house" that I may have conveyed in my post, please feel free to give me the details on the aforementioned offenses. From your post, apparently it's my "position" rather than anything that I actually stated that caused you to make such a statement. Since my "position" was to question quotes from your own posts and, rather than back them up, and your solution was to put me on ignore, I can only deduce from your actions that you have no way of supporting your own posts. If you did, you would have no doubt posted them in response. I find that whole concept to be rather puzzling.

I'm glad you will be happy to spar with others that may not be "as bright as me," but are "more amusing." I will take note of that and try to be less bright and more humorous in the future in order to gain your acceptance even though you have me on ignore. I will appeal to my fellow DUers in the hopes that they will be able to teach me how to funnier and I will appeal to the folks at freerepublic.com in the hopes that they can teach me to be "less bright." However, I couldn't help but notice that you failed to address any of the questions I proffered in my post. Hmmm...why is that...what were the questions again? Oh yeah. I remember now. They were in regard to the victim in the Duke case:

Why do you feel the need to continuously attack her in post after post?
What has she ever done to you?
Why do you feel so threatened by her?

Hmmm...why would Neil avoid answering these questions...

[ShaneGR]

81. You just totally misread that...

The defense attorney is trying to point out that the victim alleged that she had been raped at 14 and the DA never pressed charges. That's unusual, child rape cases are treated VERY seriously but the DA chose not to pursue it. The victims own relative picked her up from the house she was at and publicly stated nothing had happened to her.

This case is weak. No one is against punishing rapists, but every man or woman in this country deserves a fair hearing of evidence.

[Moosepoop]

94. No, TorchTheWitch didn't misread it at all...

and her assessment of the situation and the attorney's remarks were exactly right.

Yes, the victim alleged that she had been raped at 14, but she didn't do the alleging until she was 18, four years after the fact. Why? I don't know -- it could have been for any of the reasons already offered by others in this thread. I'm thinking that if, at 14, her father didn't believe her... then how the hell was she supposed to know how to go through the legal system on her own?? Perhaps the lack of an adult to do the "reporting" of the crime when she was a child is why she waited until she was a legal adult in her own right, then reported it herself. But after 4 years, as TTW pointed out, there would be no evidence of any kind, rendering the case impossible to prove. I think she may have reported it at 18, only to have it explained to her that at that point it would be unprovable, so the case was never pursued.

I don't know whether the defense lawyer was referring to her age at the time of the event (14), or at the time she reported it (18), but his remarks and the thought processes involved in them are reprehensible either way, and for the exact reasons that TTW gave.

[Neil Lisst]

96. if the prior case had been valid, it likely would have created a file

and that file would contain all the work which tells what was done to confirm her story

You're right. If an 18 year old woman reports she was gang raped at age 14, it's very likely to be prosecuted.

[Moosepoop]

97. Ahh... Mr. Lisst.

Did you not inform me on a previous day, in a previous thread, that you were putting me on "ignore"?

How then, pray tell, are you able to respond to my post just now??

You obviously lied in the other post, therefore anything you say now, have said up to this point, or will ever say in the future is NOT CREDIBLE.

Have a nice day.

[TorchTheWitch]

105. Yes and no

Yes, there should be a file. It's a paper file since they hadn't converted to computers yet at that time...

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=2424601&campaign=rss&source=ESPNHeadlines
Nifong's office contacted Creedmoor police Friday morning, seeking information about the incident report, said Mayor Darryl Moss. He and police Chief Ted Pollard said officials there are continuing to look for additional records, but have so far been unable to locate any other paperwork.

The previous rape allegation may not be able to be introduced at trial since there needs to be some kind of evidence that it was a false accusation.

http://cbs.sportsline.com/general/story/9401307/rss
North Carolina's rape shield law lists "narrowly defined categories" under which an accuser's past sexual history is allowed as evidence, Nifong said. The court must hold a hearing to determine if the evidence meets those categories and to decide how it can be presented, he said.

The rape shield law allows an accuser's past sexual history to be introduced under the following conditions: if it concerns sex between the accuser and defendant; if it shows the acts charged were not committed by the defendant; if it suggests the accuser granted consent; or if it suggests the accuser fantasized or invented the allegations.

Arnold Loewy, a criminal law professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said that unless there is reason to believe the woman made a false accusation long ago, the defense may not be allowed to put the information before the jury.

If this women did go through therapy after the rape and because of the rape as her mother said, there would be documentation that a rape probably occurred as well as testimony by her therapist. If this evidence exists it may not be a bad idea to let it be introduced after all. Most people seem to believe that strippers very often gravitate to the business because of past sexual abuse... the jury may actually feel sorry for her and blame her alleged alcohol/drug abuse and stripper "lifestyle" on that previous rape thereby blaming the reason she was at that house with those men at all on what the previous rape "did to her".

All the damn time I get people thinking I was "pushed" or "fell" into the business, ask me "what happened in your life to make you do this" and wanting to "save" me. UGH. I freakin' hate it when people think I need to be pitied. While it isn't that way in my case, considering some of the women I know that I've worked with, yeah, I think there is a good percentage of women that get into this business that is connected to their being abused or raped. I also think alcohol/drug abuse may be fairly common for women that have been raped, particularly for women where were disbelieved or never got justice or a chance to get justice.

I don't know... I'm no prosecutor.

Here's where you're mistaken... If an 18 year old woman reports a gang rape that occurred when she was 14 it is very likely NOT to be prosecuted for the very reasons I mentioned. It would/should be INVESTIGATED, but a case that old has almost zero chance of winning. There would be no physical evidence at that time, and since it's highly unlikely that there would be a credible eye witness to testify, the case then becomes a case of he said, he said, he said (however many were in the gang)/she said. And this is only if the accuser knows who it is that raped her, can identify them and at least one of them can be found for trial. Prosecutors are required to try rape cases if the woman wants to and there is some sort of evidence that would suggest she was indeed raped. This is the reason why the prosecutor in the Duke case is still going forward... on the basis that he finds the accuser credible, and most importantly, there is sufficient physical evidence (notably the SANE). Without the physical evidence, he may not go through with the case even if the woman wanted to... it's his call at that point.

The prosecutor at that point has to tell the woman that the ONLY way the case could be won is if she is found to be more credible than the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. The prosecutor would have to warn her of what she will go through if she pursues the case... her personal sexual history and nearly every aspect of her life being dragged through the mud publicly and being vilified in cross-examination. The prosecutor needs to let the woman decide for herself if she is willing to go through that. Some women are willing and manage to make it through the whole trial until the end. But most women, particularly women that young, would not be able to face such an ordeal. Most of these old cases are dropped by the accuser for the very slim chance they have of winning if they can get through the whole trial and the fact that they can't face the abuse they'll get from the defense counsel.

I find it interesting that you make this statement about the prosecutors usually trying old rape cases when there is zero physical evidence yet complain that the prosecutor in the CURRENT Duke case should NOT be prosecuting on the basis of no DNA evidence, never mind the fact that there is other physical evidence.

Oh, wait... is it because of the AGE of the women when they were raped that you think prosecutors would be likely to try these cases? You mean, an 18 year old reporting a 4 year old rape is more credible than a 27 year old reporting a current one? Wow, for the first time I've seen you make a statement that not only doesn't mimic a statement from the defense but directly contradicts it. Amazing. This revelation makes this an historical moment. We should have a national holiday. Compose an anthem. Wave flags and eat snacks. Throw confetti and wear silly paper hats. Why, I feel positively underdressed for such an occasion... bring out the taffeta and white gloves.

[Neil Lisst]

108. sometimes it is best to stick to what one knows

Your fantasies of what is and is not true in law are amusing.

[philosophie_en_rose]

109. So what?

It is possible to be assaulted more than once. Sexual assault is extremely difficult to prosecute. even if this were true, it doesn't prove anything about the current situation. Even if she lied the first time (which I think is a baseless presumption), it doesn't mean that she could never be assaulted in the future.

[Spike from MN]

115. Please allow me to correct you on that.

Perhaps you haven't been following the Duke threads all that much. In order to help you out, I'll provide a brief summary of what I have learned from these threads so far. (Point number 4 addresses your allegation that a person can be raped more than once.)

1. No woman in the history of mankind has EVER been raped. In fact, it's not even physically possible to rape a woman. Women are unrapeable.

2. If a woman "claims" she was raped, she's a lying scheming mentally-ill gold-digging alcholic drug-addled whore.

3. If a guy is accused of rape and he says he didn't do it, he is ALWAYS telling the truth. And the accuser is a lying whore. That does drugs. And is an alcoholic. And is mentally ill.

4. Since all women are unrapeable, it's impossible that the lying so-called alleged "victim" in this case was ever raped even once, much less twice. She's a slut and a liar and she deserves to go to prison for being a lying slut.

5. There is no such thing as a rapist. There are only innocent men that are falsely accused by lying scheming gold-digging alcholic drug-addled whores. Anyone who says differently is a lying sack of shit.

6. Rape = sex. Since the two terms are absolutely identical and it's not legally possible to be charged with "sexing" someone, how the hell is it legally possible to be charged with "raping" someone?!? It's NOT. ALL rape charges are bogus. End of story.

7. If a woman has any sort of date rape drug in her system, she took it willingly. She WANTED to be raped. Oh wait. There's no such thing as rape. She wanted to be "sexed." Yeah, that's it.

8. All dancers take date rape drugs before performing. Even the ones that don't do drugs. If a dancer says that they don't do drugs, they are lying.

9. The SANE means absolutely NOTHING and shouldn't even be admissable in a court of law. People that administer SANEs are lying sacks of shit.

10. Rape cases are notoriously easy to prosecute. The accuser is treated with kid gloves in court and the guy(s) that are accused (who are ALWAYS innocent, BTW) are absolutely run through the mill and treated as if they are lower than pond scum. The legal system is stacked against them. Especially if they have lots of money.

11. Broomsticking is NO BIG DEAL. In fact, it's such a minor thing that it shouldn't even remotely be considered a crime. The only thing criminal about broomsticking is that it's a crime in the first place. It should be LEGALIZED. Broomstickers of the world unite! Hey, broomstickers have rights too ya know.

Hopefully that will help get you up to speed on the Duke threads.

:sarcasm: Major fucking sarcasm.

[LostinVA]

116. You forgot three things

1. The lying scheming mentally-ill gold-digging alcoholic drug-addled whore is sometimes a prostitute whose pimp fakes rape injuries on her so they can get money from the rich Duke lacrosse players (even though the dancers were not told it was the Duke Lacrosse team).

and:

2.) The lying scheming mentally-ill gold-digging alcoholic drug-addled whore faked rape injuries on herself with a "sex toy" to get money from the rich white boys.

3.) Anyone who even thinks there's a tiny shred of possibility the Duke Lacrosse players are guilty are racist, because the players are only being targeted because they are white.


I've actually read all of this stuff on threads. I may have forgot one or two... there's just sooo much to remember, you know.

Hell of a primer, Spike...

[Spike from MN]

119. Thanks for the additions LIV.

I knew I had missed a few things here and there but I figured I could count on my fellow DUers to point them out.
:thumbsup:
Yeah, it gets hard to keep track of the particulars but the same general arguments always seem to crop up so that makes it a little easier.

Hell of a primer? Heh heh. Shit, I've only just begun. ;)
Neil claims he put me on ignore with my second reply to him. I'm hoping a.) he's not lying and b). that's a record. :headbang: