The numbers do not support the alleged victim’s claim because they show a very, very small number of rapes are white men attacking a black woman. Lacking any evidence of any sort that lends creedance to the alleged victim’s report, I will go with the statistics (which is all that is left) and state that I do not believe the woman’s story. Now granted, if the numbers went the other way and showed a high percentage of black women being raped by white men, and with no other evidence to consider I would come closer to believing her. I doubt though that I would totally believe her given her past legal trouble and the fact that I would like some proof before sending anyone to jail for rape. But I would come closer to believing her.
I don’t think anyone has said it isn’t plausible. I certainly haven’t. All I have said is that barring any other evidence to support her claim I would not believe her. That is not totally based on the statistics either. It is based on her past legal problems, her occupation, and the statistical likelihood of events unfolding as reported.
The only reason it is pertinent to this case is because the alleged perps and the alleged victim fall into the categories that the statistics speak to. Find me some other statistic that relate to this incident and I will take those into consideration as well. Right now, the only stats that have been produced find that it is very rare for a white male to rape a black female.
Why don’t you stop being a sloppy fucking cunt and call me a racist if that’s what you think? Stop beating around the fucking bush, grow a pair and say it. You’ll be wrong, but at least you’ll be honest.
I’m out for the night. I’ll check back in tomorrow.
You haven’t shown why this is relevant. Your assertion makes as much sense as saying this :
“The numbers do not support the alleged victim’s claim because they show a very, very small number of rapes involve lacrosse players and strippers.”
OR
“The numbers do not support the alleged victim’s claim because they show a very, very small number of rapes involve Duke students and NC State students.”
OR
“The numbers do not support the alleged victim’s claim because they show a very, very small number of rapes involve men named Bradford Montague and women named Tookie LaShawn.”
Do you get how stupid you sound to me yet?
You’ve suggested that crime stats influence your opinion of what is likely in this case.
How do you ascertain the “statistical likelihood of events unfolding as reported”? We are not talking about a computer program here. What you are saying makes no sense.
Never mind the fact that another one of your conclusions is faulty (the stats are based on reported cases only), you still haven’t shown why the race of the participants has anything to do with this case’s validity.
Why are you so upset? Looks like I touched a nerve. Good. I’m also glad that you recognize the racist subtext in your own position and that I didn’t have to spell it out for you. Maybe you are smarter than I thought.
If I’m wrong to believe this about you, correct me already. Your words speak for themselves. If you don’t think race is a function of rape, tell me why you think racial statistics are even relevant in this discussion. Why not focus on other factors? Please tell me why I should not conclude you are racist if you believe that the white men in this case should be afforded an extra benefit of the doubt simply on the basis of the accuser’s race.
The funny part (not funny ha ha) is that the one thing that would really make this guy happy (it seems) is if these white guys raped this black girl. And if lots of white guys had raped black girls so that pesky DOJ statistic wouldn’t be driving him so crazy, and he could revel in heroic (lurid) fantasies of defending black maidenhood from the Plantation master or whatever.
Me, I think it’s a good thing for black women (for all of us) that they don’t run much of a statistical risk at all of being raped by white boys, and me, I kind of tend to hope that the statistical probabilities were borne out here (as statistical probabilities, ya know, tend to be more often than not).
What you with the face either does not realize, or chooses to ignore, is that one would expect very few rapes to be committed by lacrosse players on strippers, as there are relatively few of either; whereas there are a bugger of a lot of both white men and black women, and you would expect, statistically, as large a proportion of rapes to be perpetrated by white men on black women as their respective fractions of the population suggested.
I also liked this bit:
(Underlining mine.) Naturally, you would expect the argument to factor in unreported cases, as well as any other imaginary data we cared to think of. :rolleyes:
The thing about using statistics in this case is that they aren’t going to determine the guilt or innocence of the accused or the validity of the claims of the accuser; they can give us some kind of estimated probability given a few known factors. It’s a tool for determining probabilty of the outcome, not a tool for proving/disproving the evidence-based facts of this specific case.
You can conjecture with statistics until you’re blue in the face (actually you’ve already gone far past that point), but it will not determine the outcome. No shit, Sherlock, I’m sure you’re thinking. But at the end of the day, statistics will not determine the oucome of this case, and spending a ridiculously inordinate amount of time conjecturing about it affects the outcome not one iota.
I’m not hostile towards statistical analysis like you with the face seems to be, but you’re being such a blowhard about it that it tends to give the impression that you’re placing more of an emphasis on it than is warranted in this particular case. If you want to go on and on (and on) about the statistical probability of something, go teach some entry-level actuaries about car wreck statistics or something. Rape is a very emotional issue, and bandying about the probabilities of it strikes some people as rather macabre.
Again, please note that I do believe statistics are an important tool and everything, and I am not questioning the validity or accuracy of your analysis, but to keep on and on about it on such a highly charged emotional issue is kind of inappropriate. Do you not see that at all?
But this is a court of public opinion and we demand a verdict now, based on the evidence that is available to us at this present point in time, at the present moment we cannot state that the lax team are rapists. So, based on currently available evidence we can only conclude she is in fact lying about being raped by any of the lax team. Or maybe what your wanting us to say is that even though the available evidence says she wasn’t raped by one these guys, well we should just assume it happened anyway? Is this really what your saying. You do understand if she can’t prove her case then people will assume she was lying. Does happen you know.
You do understand that in a court of law you are tried and either found guilty or innocent don’t you? And if your accused of a crime by some person and that crime cannot be proven then there is a good chance that the person accusing you is lying. Would you agree with this?
There are problems enough without prison over crowding but in general it would probably be a good idea, people would probably be less inclined to make false allegations.
WE do know and fully understand what you are saying! Do you?
Yes, quite easily, my question to you is, are you too stupid to understand what you are writing? Don’t answer that, your obviously too stupid to know the correct answer!
You do realise that without evidence that a rape has occured and that the said rape occured as alleged then what are we supposed to conclude? What because rape is a highly emotionally charged issue we must conclude she wasn’t lying. Is that what you are saying? we should take her word for it even without evidence? Because even though statistically this could be a false allegation we should convict anyway because she can’t be lying, for fuck sake give me a break are you really that dense?
I’ll assume this is directed at me. Here’s my thought process – I did not enter the affray with any intention of “going on and on” about statistics. I said something pretty simple (and in my view defensible) about my reasons for inclining toward a particular assessment of what might have happened here. It’s only upon encountering a sustained, vehement, Kool-Aid-ish denial that past rapes (or past rape report patterns) could ever have the slightest relevance or predictive value in any future rape or “rape” fact pattern that I defended my defensible views.
Some premises:
We are all speculating because no one has a video of what happened. Okay, presumably that’s fine though, as lots of discussions are partly speculative and still potentially productive in one way or another.
This is an issue of public interest. By “this” you may read whether this young woman was raped, whether her story is true, whether these guys behaved in accordance with some pattern or perceived pattern (either bad-jock-rapist behavior, or dumb-jock-but-not-rapist-of-black-women behavior), whether crimes against blacks are systemically under-remedied, etc. As such, these issues are open to discussion.
In the course of this discussion, our views and evaluations may evolve over time, and may be based upon a dynamic set of factors, depending in part on what information is available to us. There is no requirement in conversation that “all the facts” be in evidence before someone makes an assessment or takes a prelminary stand on an issue. Nor would it be normal human behavior to adopt such a standard. Anyone who says they mantain such Solomonic impartiality is a liar (or very frustrated, because “all the facts” rarely materialize as to any issue in life, ever).
There are murky situations in which it is hard to find concrete proof because the truth lies in grey areas. This is true in, say, cases of alleged date rape, where there can be honest misunderstandings about who consented to what when. In such a case, maybe I can see saying, “Well, we don’t know, let’s wait and see, don’t blame her because she doesn’t have clearer proof of lack of consent, etc.” This isn’t one of those cases. On the night in question, these men either stuck their penii in her orifices, and she is telling the truth, or they did not, and she is lying. If it is the latter case, there is no question (as the Kool-Aider put it) of her a having “insufficient evidence to show for it.” She knows now whether she made the story up, and we may be able to find out (or at least roughly gauge) whether she did – now.
It is not true to say “we haven’t seen the evidence” or “it’s all speculation.” We’ve seen the police report. We know what the DNA didn’t reveal (clear indication of DNA from these guys). But it is fair to say the evidence we do have is not dispositive of innocence or guilt. Is there any other scale-tipping factor we might consult in making our preliminary (as I’ve said before ninety times, until other, more dispositive facts become available) assessment (as debaters, not as prosecutors, though I hope the prosecutor’s using common sense too) on the issues? And yes, there are. The three I thought of were, in no particular order of importance:
a. I place somewhat diminished credence in the reliability of testimony of a woman who is a stripper (“lies for a living” as I put it), has some (fairly penny ante) criminal record, and was way drunk.
b. I know that half of rape reports by university women are, per one study, unfounded.
c. This particular rape story by a university woman posits a fact-pattern that is (according to our government) demographically very uncommon (though not of course impossible, I never said that).
This still does not lead me to conclude she did in fact lie, and if the prosecutor drops a bombshell and has significant incremental evidence that these guys raped her, I won’t feel I have egg on my face, and I’ll root for their conviction. It’s just that for now, the above thought process makes me think that, at a minimum, the prosecutor should be holding fewer triumphal pep rallies/press conferences, the marchers (well, no one’s going to stop J. Jackson from being an idiot) ought to hold on to their outrage at the epidemic of raped black women, and everyone should focus on whether this particular accusation is worth putting these particular guys through a Hell of a lot or (or at least, more) trouble.
Meant to say this before: I daresay false allegations are a very emotional issue (for at least the families involved). There is not one grievous crime or public policy issue possibly involved here, there are two. Either we got some out of control jock rapists whom the culture encouraged to think they could abuse women, or we got an out of control woman who somehow felt entitled to drag some non-rapist jocks through Hell for whatever reason. There really isn’t a significant third possibility, or a “oops, no harm, no foul” walkaway from this particular situation. We need to resolve either the [rape problem] or the [false accusation problem]. If the rate of unfounded allegations of rape in university women really is 50%, (reading that astounding article is what catalyzed my vigorous participation here) then rough justice says we should keep our minds just about equally open to addressing either problem.
Your comment about “speculation” being “macabre” might be relevant if this were a private psycho-sexual drama being experienced by some woman I don’t know. But she and her supporters have made it a public issue, and because rape is not the only public issue here (instead, possible abuse of the justice system may also be an issue), there’s nothing macabre or off-limits about even skeptical scrutiny of any story told by anyone involved.
Just a brief break in your regularly scheduled bullshit to let you with the face and Campion know that their points are not lost on everybody, though I would understand if they want to give up. You are doing a great job in the face of what I can only hope is deliberate obtuseness.
I’m not jumping into the fray because if **you with the face’**s excellent posts are falling on deaf ears, I don’t my think my arguments would do anything to sway anyone’s opinions.
No, you misunderstand what I’m saying completely. I am leaning towards the allegation being false because there seems to be a lack of evidence supporting it (i.e. no DNA). But you or I are not the judge or jury, and we don’t have to conclude anything. It’s not our job. I just have seen all these “conclusions” flying around that are conjecture, speculation. And that’s fine, but such emphasis is being inferred on it that it gives the impression that you think you have all the information that is needed. You may, you may not. At this early point, I’m thinking not.
That’s all I’m saying.
And Huerta88, I see where you’re coming from. I don’t totally disagree, I’m just saying that there are some sensitivities involved here that y’all are running roughshod over in your carrying on about the statistics and such. Again, I’m not sensitive about that, but some folks are. And yeah, with false allegations, it’s the same deal. It’s very emotional, and a lot of damage has already been done. And many of the people involved in the case have acted inappropriately (IMHO)by going so public with all of this. Lots of blame to go around in the handling of this.
I’m just trying to be a bit more cautious about all of this and seeing where the facts lead I don’t see why there’s anything wrong with that.
And what Malacandra doesn’t understand is that you would not necessarily expect that if:
White men and black women are geographically segregated to the extent that it makes them unlikely to cross paths enough to make the rape rate equal to the norm.
Black women who are raped by whites are less likely to report it than average, due to factors correlated with race (such as trust in authority).
Cultural/social factors that are associated with race make black women less likely to be in certain situations that put them at risk of being raped by white men.
(Date rape, for instance, may not have a chance to occur frequently because “dating a white boy/black girl is so gross!”).
Due to the way history has made things, all three of these things could explain why white-on-black rape statistics do not mirror what you see in the general population. So this is not like reaching in a bag and expecting a set probability of pulling out a red ball. Populations are a lot more complicated than that.
I don’t know why’d you expect the rape stats to be proportionate to the number of blacks and whites in the population when hardly any stats are.
But anyway, that all aside: Malacandra do you think there is an innate property to being a white that would make it unlikely one could rape a black woman? I ask because no one apparently wants to admit that they believe this, and yet they are essentially saying exactly that by stringently defending whatever interpretation they can squeeze out of some numbers.
Of course, you are correct, or would you care to enlighten me as to what INNOCENT until proven guilty really means. What are we left to conclude not guilty must mean your probably guilty but it’s just unfortunate that it’s unproveable. These guys are then truely fuck for the rest of their lives aren’t they? They will always been known as rapist (not guilty of course).
But this is the court of public opinion in which the prosecutor seems to have been trying this case isn’t it? So then in this court of public opinion we can change our verdict if more evidence is presented, unlike a court of law where getting a conviction overturned is much more difficult. I’m more inclined to think that they are innocent until proven guilty. Unlike Guin and the facless one who presume rapist must mean guilty until proven not guilty by reason of lack of evidence in which case your actually are guilty just unfortunately lacking evidence of guilt.
Just thinking about this a bit more does this mean that innocent until proven guilty is a falacy and what it really means is innocent until found guilty but for the lack of evidence.
Finding the defendant guilty by way of a lack of evidence? This is really funny Guin. I had always thought you were smarter than that, my bad, I guess.
