For those keeping score at home, file these items under “reasons why I’m glad we have rules of evidence.”
I’m glad you’re taking him on. I don’t have the stomach for it. Arguing with irrationality is quite wearying.
I just know you have a cite for your made-up projections. No? Oh well, why would you? No one else aside from me does.
The social, economic, and cultural dynamics that (may have) made it predictable that a rural 1855 slaveholder in a frigid marriage might (statistically, predictably, exploitatively) find his peons his most-attractive sexual option have not existed for well over 100 years. Thus the predictive value of such (ancient) patterns on contemporary behaviors is nil.
The statistics I cited were three (not 103) years old. They strongly suggest that Bad White Men (who do exist – some of them are per the DOJ off raping whites, but not raping black gals) do not CURRENTLY see black girls as a preferential target.
Read, peoples.
First off, an estimated 58% of rapes go unreported .
Cite I would bet that their cites are good.
I found more of the same, but from Canada, so I’m sure you would say how our women are more spiteful, etc.
And for the record, my earlier statements assumed that there was evidence of rape to start with. I didn’t see the police collecting DNA for a clean rape kit and lack of trauma.
And if you insist on assuming that half of rapes are false, then you must concede that half (or more) are real. Of course, no one would believe them with all those lying whores crying rape all the time.
Well, I’m glad you “would bet” that. The source I cited had lots and lots of citations. Yours has . . . blind faith!
You win!
My sympathy for you is infinite. Which does not mean I don’t take your failure to counter my specific data with anything as a concession that I am right, and you are a mediocre ideologue.
astro, is it coincidental that the more evidence that emerges seeming to point toward Hypothesis B (the “Tawana Brawley Hypothesis”), the more bitter and angry the recriminations on SDMB become?
Inquiring minds like mine, they want to know.
Uh, no, I do not. As far as I can tell, you hate Cubans and the former placekicker for the University of Miami.
It’s nice to have an explicit admission that your official position is that of willfully-ignorant
Great. We don’t know which of these scenarios applies. The rate could be greater or less than 50%. Let’s use the reported data as a default in the absence of better data, for the moment.
Do you have any evidence drugs were involved? No? We don’t know yet? Then, we revert to the default data.
You are the ONLY DOPER WITH BALLS, PERIOD. You rock, so much. Your balls are HUGE.
Satisfied?
This is the part that proves (to me) that you are not very intelligent. Could you not tell I was being [sarcastic]/[/sarcastic]? Are you that obtuse? I (obviously) don’t care what the feminists think either – maybe that’s not a surprise? I was making the point that your otherwise-P.C. rants were not very P.C. on the issue of desire having anything to do with rape. I don’t (in fact) believe that desire is divorced from rape. But you’ve aligned yourself with a crowd who does. We’ll see how that shakes out.
Hey, I’m still managing this without calling you “stupid.” Wow.
Since when does stuff like “she was supposedly grinning” and “purported photographs” count as emerging evidence? If this information is coming from the defense, then clearly it is not impartial. I wonder if you believed OJ when he said he was 100% absolutely not guilty, 'cause afterall the stats should have told you that the murder rate for retired football players was practically nill back then.
The only people are who are angry in this thread are folks like the OP who have branded the accuser a lying whore, by the way. The name-calling and condemnation seems to be coming from only one side of the debate.
I have given up on you. Bye.
You will note that the “grinning” point, and the supposed DNA report quoted by Sahky Jake, are not among the sources on which I rely.
Hmm. You’ve called me “stupid” repeatedly, and implied that I am a racist for citing government statistics (that you don’t and can’t factually dispute) on rape (by the way, if I were a real racist, I would have cited the statistics showing that while interracial rape by whites-on-blacks is statiscally non-existent, the opposite is far from true – but I did not, because it was not germane to my argument). Who is “angry” and indulging in “name-calling,” again?
Great! Apology accepted. And I’ll take that as a definitive admission that you gots nothing, nowhere. Because you sure as Hell haven’t brought it to the table here.
Bye now!
Dude for all I know, your statistical inferences may be sound…I’m certainly not here to quibble about that. But why do all that stuff when all you have to do is wait for the evidence for this case to come out? It’s an open case, it’s widely reported in the media (which of course should be viewed critically), and there should be sufficient info forthcoming in the next few days.
And it’s not just you. There’s a bunch of She’s a lying whore/They’re a bunch of monsters woofing going on, which I suppose is natural, but regardless of feelings, lawyer’s media statements or statistics, we simply don’t know what really happened yet. Why can’t we just wait and see? Is that really so hard?
Uh, the OP was inveighing against the rush-to-judgment against the guys. That’s what I was joining in. And, some of the evidence is coming out. What’s out so far does not, putting it charitably, move the ball forward for the prosecution.
You’re right it could all be a smokescreen, and she might have been raped and this is a diabolical tactic by the defense to confuse things, but the defense claims to date (ie “No DNA at all will be found - Period”) have been borne out so far, and there is (so far as news reports indicate) no one accused who refusing to cooperate with the DNA requests. It would be odd that the defense would be so adamant that here is important photographic evidence of her pre-existing “rape injuries” and general attitude if these did not exist.
And… I don’t know if it will be allowed in evidence, but the story about the stripper lap dance, stolen cab, police chase, jail time scenario is (to me) indicative of a somewhat unstable person who might do any or all sorts of crazy crap including making a false accusation if she was under stress.
She might have be raped, who knows for sure at this juncture, but from a practical arms length view, however, the case does not appear to be shaping up in her favor.
And you, my dear, are stercoraceous.
There has been a continuing attempt in this thread to have you address the points and arguments made by others. Your resistance to doing so has become comical. I am not surprised that you with the face has finally bowed out. The fact that you have accused me of being an ideologue demonstrates most plainly that you lack fundamental critical thinking and reading skills, or, at best, you’ve failed to honestly engage whatever skills you may have.
I have failed “to counter [your] specific data” because your specific data is irrelevant. I understand that you can’t grasp that simple point. I won’t argue it with you, because you’ve demonstrated that there’s no point in doing so.
The “ideology” that I and others have advocated, and that you in your rush to demonstrate your superior google skills have refused to acknowledge, is that in this case we still lack fundamental evidence or information that would inform our judgment, and we ought to wait until that evidence is out there before reaching a conclusion. That you are willing to write this case off based on statistics and the statements of defense lawyers is unfortunate.
As for me, I’ll wait for evidence. I’m a bit nutty that way.
I can’t find that post. Can you point me to it?
No, I’m not talking about that; I’m talking about spending hours digging up statistics/arguing with people instead of just waiting for the facts to actually come out. Not just you; people on either side doing a lot of wheel spinning is just a waste of effort. There are certainly other issues worthy of discussion/debate, such as trying the case in the media and the guilty-until-proven-innocent aspect of the coach having to resign/the teams season being cancelled. That’s all I’m saying. I don’t care who started it.
:eek: It’s gone! How did that happen? It appeared either right before my post about it or two posts before my post about it. That’s crazy.
Which point or argument have I not addressed?
Chirp chirp.
Musta beena sock.