Redbrickbear said:
Mitch Blood Green said:
Redbrickbear said:
Mitch Blood Green said:
Redbrickbear said:
Mitch Blood Green said:
If I send you a text that says free *****What's disturbing is that a text was sent to a group of men saying "free *****" and no one said "***" brothers. Instead, several of them showed up for some.
The "free *ussy" thing was the straw that broke the camels back for you?
Not the Ketamine snorting off peoples naked bodies?
The girl being "excited" about another guy joining in because for whatever strange reason this turned her on sexually that the two guys might be queers?
The other girl and several people have sex in the room of another guy who was his room but upset they were there and eventually kicked them out?
The whole things was depraved and stupid and out of control.
The "free *ussy" text is the least of it
Yes, that's the thing. Play with me.
I send you a text that says "Free *****" and you act appropriately. Do you:
1. Sort Ketamine off of a drunk woman?
2. Do you rape a drunk woman?
3. Is your face posted all over the internet?
4. Do you lose your job?
5. Are you charged with rape?
The text says everything about to happen ain't gonna be good. AND receiving it puts a responsibility on the other 43 men to act.
My family has put me in a few "group text" that I have on ignore. I've considered leaving them but didn't want to appear like an *******. I'm rethinking staying. From my perspective, this risk has shifted to all members in the group especially the ones who can't afford counsel.
The text is the primary evidence in the prosecution.
Another of the problems with trying to police the increasingly depraved sex lives of young adults under the influence of a seriously large number of power intoxicants.
I have no idea how you go about unwinding this or seeking "justice" within this mess & chaos.
And I don't think our actual Justice system is set up to deal with this kind of thing.
Its a problem with no easy solutions.
When did "consent" end...begin...stop...start again...etc.
The standard is drunk women can not consent. You can argue "what about drunk men?" But it's an argument with our freedom attached.
That is the standard that colleges and activists push....yes.....but its not the actual legal standard in Law
[The widespread belief that "a drunk person cannot legally consent" is a social and ethical standard, but it is not the statutory law in the vast majority of legal jurisdictions.
Legally, simply being "drunk" or having consumed alcohol does not automatically mean a person is legally incapable of giving consent. The law generally establishes two distinct thresholds:
Impaired Judgment: A person who is under the influence of alcohol may make decisions they would not make while sober. However, if they are still conscious, aware of their surroundings, and understand the nature of the act, they can legally give consent.
Incapacitation: A person cannot legally consent if they are physically helpless (e.g., unconscious, passed out, or physically unable to communicate a lack of consent) or mentally incapacitated to the point where they cannot understand the nature or consequences of the sexual act]
The whole idea of "standard is drunk women can not consent" is something colleges like because it makes these very messy situations easy to place blame. Guy is responsible (drunk or not) and the woman is the victim because she was drunk. Slam dunk and easy to then sort out. But its not the legal rule in law. In reality its much harder and a much higher standard.
You're not wrong but you're not right.
There's a reason why innocent people take plea deals. To operate at your suggestion a few things must be true.
1. I am dealing with an honest prosecutor.
2. I have competent representation.
3. I can afford (monetarily) to plead my case.
If any of those are not true, then I, personally, cannot let a prosecutor frame my actions in front of a jury.
I know a guy who tells me he didn't do a crime. (I'll let that hang out there). Against my don't trust them mother****ers advice, he took a plea deal for two years hoping to see his children graduate high school.
His lawyer NEVER got the plea deal in writing. Judge gave him 10. Lawyer went to work for prosecutors office.
These men have some real real challenges in front of them.
1. They've been identified as rapists in the court of public opinion. Arguing that she consented ain't something people are hearing right now.
2. They've documented the crime in text.
3. Their livelihoods are under attack.
4. Their brothers let them down. I mentioned the 1987 situation I was in. I drove drunk for the first time ever that night. My sensibilities said get the f out of there after I got her safe.
Let's go forward 37 years. The one guy is a successful (very) person in DFW. How would that have turned out if he'd gone forward?
