U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-16-2016, 09:16 AM
 
13,991 posts, read 6,354,627 times
Reputation: 14555

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by dechatelet View Post
And your evidence for that?

Non-existent.

Oh, sure you're not. You just always support the liberal side.

How have I deflected? I won't hold my breath waiting for an answer.

She doesn't know whether or not she gave consent, because she doesn't even remember the incident.

She, by her own admission, blacked out. People who black out don't remember what happened.

I love how femi-Nazis just make up "facts" to support their non-existent "case."

Oh, I am. But you're not. Unlike you, I actually pay attention to the evidence.

There is no evidence that she didn't consent. There is no evidence that she was unconscious when the sex play started.

As for his being convicted, so what?

Juries are often wrong.

Isn't that why libs are opposed to the death penalty -- because so many innocent people have been convicted by juries and executed?

More lib hypocrisy. It never ends.

I have my doubts about you being a man if you ignore the lack of evidence in this case.

Real men are interested in the truth. You, obviously, are not.

I don't need your stupid lessons.

Well, duh.

They were on the ground, playing with each other.

That's how the "ride" got hitched.

There is no evidence that she was unconscious when the foreplay started.

I suspect "Little Brockie' could kick your ass.

Very brave of you, talking about him like that on the internet.

Yeah, go ahead and make your hypocrisy even more obvious.

Yeah -- sure you are.

What issues?

They were drunk, fondled each other, and now he's a "rapist."

No one has proven that she was unconscious when they started "playing" with each other (there was no sexual intercourse.)

No one has proven that she didn't consent when they started fondling each other.

And no one has proven that he was aware that she had passed out.

People with common sense don't ignore facts.

So you're not a good judge in this regard.

No physical force, lack of consent, or rape (which means actual sexual intercourse) was proven in this case.

And guess what. Actual rape WAS severely punished in the 1950s. In some states, it got the death penalty.

So much for your "knowledge" about the 1950s....

Why?

Are you saying that women are incapable of lying or being mistaken?

I love your standard of "justice."

Simply to be accused means you're "guilty."

Nobody has said that they didn't fondle each other.

And pine needles can travel on fingers.

Duh!

The difference is that the rapes by Muslims against non-Muslims in Europe really ARE rapes -- with actual forced sexual intercourse, and no consent by the victims.

Yadda yadda yadda.

This must be the dumbest thread ever on C-D.
I have an idea: get off the thread.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-16-2016, 09:47 AM
 
Location: H-Tine, Texas
6,742 posts, read 4,107,455 times
Reputation: 8528
Quote:
Originally Posted by dechatelet View Post
And your evidence for that?

Non-existent.

The "evidence" is that you hadn't even heard of the other major rape case involving Brian Banks in the same state or the other rape cases similar to this that involved black men. I can't make it any easier for you to understand. You only care because golden boy Brockie is in trouble. I know if it was a Muslim who did the exact same thing, you would be typing a different tone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dechatelet View Post
Oh, sure you're not. You just always support the liberal side.
I support the side of logic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dechatelet View Post
How have I deflected? I won't hold my breath waiting for an answer.
You're making every excuse for Brock, despite the fact that he a) sexually assaulted an unconscious woman and b) was found guilty of sex crimes. There were witnesses who saw him with the unconscious woman and then he ran.

You attempt to ignore all of that, and then when I ask you to explain all of that, you ignore it and respond with other non-intelligible nonsense.

That's pretty much called deflection. Probably should know what the word means before you use it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dechatelet View Post
She doesn't know whether or not she gave consent, because she doesn't even remember the incident.

She, by her own admission, blacked out. People who black out don't remember what happened.

I love how femi-Nazis just make up "facts" to support their non-existent "case."

Oh, I am. But you're not. Unlike you, I actually pay attention to the evidence.
Non-existent case? FYI...the evidence found him guilty of raping an intoxicated and unconscious woman. The evidence, the witnesses, the testimony, in a court of law, found him guilty. That's not made up. And what part of unconscious do you not understand? You do not continue to engage in sexual activities with someone who is unconscious.

So no, it's pretty obvious that you haven't paid attention to anything, especially the evidence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dechatelet View Post
I suspect "Little Brockie' could kick your ass.
Please. That 155 pound POS is only a threat to unconscious women.

I know you have a crush on Brockie, but it's pretty obvious, since I've been around his type, that the only way he can get laid is if the woman is drunk or unconscious.

This thread makes it obvious some can relate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2016, 09:49 AM
 
12,241 posts, read 3,151,985 times
Reputation: 1519
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefragile View Post
I have an idea: get off the thread.
That idea is far from a new one...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2016, 10:08 AM
 
Location: USA
4,787 posts, read 4,221,592 times
Reputation: 2835
Quote:
Originally Posted by dechatelet View Post
And your evidence for that?

Non-existent.

Oh, sure you're not. You just always support the liberal side.

How have I deflected? I won't hold my breath waiting for an answer.

She doesn't know whether or not she gave consent, because she doesn't even remember the incident.

She, by her own admission, blacked out. People who black out don't remember what happened.

I love how femi-Nazis just make up "facts" to support their non-existent "case."

Oh, I am. But you're not. Unlike you, I actually pay attention to the evidence.

There is no evidence that she didn't consent. There is no evidence that she was unconscious when the sex play started.

As for his being convicted, so what?

Juries are often wrong.

Isn't that why libs are opposed to the death penalty -- because so many innocent people have been convicted by juries and executed?

More lib hypocrisy. It never ends.

I have my doubts about you being a man if you ignore the lack of evidence in this case.

Real men are interested in the truth. You, obviously, are not.

I don't need your stupid lessons.

Well, duh.

They were on the ground, playing with each other.

That's how the "ride" got hitched.

There is no evidence that she was unconscious when the foreplay started.

I suspect "Little Brockie' could kick your ass.

Very brave of you, talking about him like that on the internet.

Yeah, go ahead and make your hypocrisy even more obvious.

Yeah -- sure you are.

What issues?

They were drunk, fondled each other, and now he's a "rapist."

No one has proven that she was unconscious when they started "playing" with each other (there was no sexual intercourse.)

No one has proven that she didn't consent when they started fondling each other.

And no one has proven that he was aware that she had passed out.

People with common sense don't ignore facts.

So you're not a good judge in this regard.

No physical force, lack of consent, or rape (which means actual sexual intercourse) was proven in this case.

And guess what. Actual rape WAS severely punished in the 1950s. In some states, it got the death penalty.

So much for your "knowledge" about the 1950s....

Why?

Are you saying that women are incapable of lying or being mistaken?

I love your standard of "justice."

Simply to be accused means you're "guilty."

Nobody has said that they didn't fondle each other.

And pine needles can travel on fingers.

Duh!

The difference is that the rapes by Muslims against non-Muslims in Europe really ARE rapes -- with actual forced sexual intercourse, and no consent by the victims.

Yadda yadda yadda.

This must be the dumbest thread ever on C-D.
The smoking gun is that he RAN AWAY when two people confronted him.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2016, 10:55 AM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,886 posts, read 102,281,764 times
Reputation: 32946
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark Enlightenment View Post
What?
Those rapes you describe are "different" somehow from this rape, more "serious" than this rape. (According to you.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by tamajane View Post
While it may seem like common sense that we recognize a person in trouble, a lot of younger people don't, and further if a guy tries to help a woman now he may be shamed for "white knighting". Men are supposed to ignore women in distress lest they be sexually rejected, or something. Unfortunately with messages like this out there parents do need to talk to their kids about doing the right thing.
Oh, for Pity's Sake! Now you're saying society teaches guys to not stop to help a woman in need! I don't have sons, but I grew up with a brother and I can assure you that's nuts. Some misogynist parents might teach their kids that, but it's not a societal norm. My sons-in-law would be appalled.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2016, 11:26 AM
Status: "Trumpism is a mental disorder" (set 19 days ago)
 
9,420 posts, read 17,405,131 times
Reputation: 10421
Quote:
Originally Posted by dechatelet View Post
There is no evidence that she didn't consent. There is no evidence that she was unconscious when the sex play started.

As for his being convicted, so what?

Juries are often wrong.
There's plenty of evidence because he was CONVICTED.

No one is arguing that he didn't do the crime, just whether the sentence was correct. You can stick your head in the sand and scream "LALALALA" until the cows come home and it won't change anything. The only question here is why are you doing this?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2016, 11:42 AM
 
Location: H-Tine, Texas
6,742 posts, read 4,107,455 times
Reputation: 8528
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdog View Post
There's plenty of evidence because he was CONVICTED.

No one is arguing that he didn't do the crime, just whether the sentence was correct. You can stick your head in the sand and scream "LALALALA" until the cows come home and it won't change anything. The only question here is why are you doing this?
I have a couple of theories.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2016, 04:30 PM
 
Location: The State Of California
9,454 posts, read 12,254,159 times
Reputation: 3585
Moving upward toward 100 pages and the Apologists still aren't convinced that " Golden Boy " did it (!!!!)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2016, 05:19 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,886 posts, read 102,281,764 times
Reputation: 32946
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdog View Post
There's plenty of evidence because he was CONVICTED.

No one is arguing that he didn't do the crime, just whether the sentence was correct. You can stick your head in the sand and scream "LALALALA" until the cows come home and it won't change anything. The only question here is why are you doing this?
Are you serious? No one? No one? Have you been following this thread? There have been a few. Plus, there have been some deleted posts regarding same.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2016, 05:22 PM
 
Location: Camberville
11,981 posts, read 16,703,857 times
Reputation: 19585
P.S. If you are ACTIVELY HAVING SEX WITH SOMEONE and previously consented, then revoke your consent halfway through, that's OK. If your partner continues to have sex with you AFTER YOU REVOKE YOUR CONSENT, then it is rape.

Claiming that "we don't know if she consented or not" doesn't matter. She was passed out. That means her consent was revoked - she was not able to maintain consent. It was rape. Period.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:12 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top