Lying whore.

The BBQ Pit
41

Not at the moment. I don’t know the N.C. procedure – do they take a sample from the alleged victim and the accused at the same time, and test in parallel? Do they wait till they find DNA not her own on her, then test suspects? The standard is going to be (no surprise) “probable cause.” The rub is that this is judged in the first instance by the prosecutor. This prosecutor (as witness his initially trying the case in the press, than backpedaling like crazy when it seemed the DNA wasn’t going to come through) is not necessarily above doubt as to his judgment.

It’s also not clear to me who the “authorities” were who “ordered” the suspects to give DNA samples. Was it the DA, or a local judge? Was it truly an “order” or just a request with which they voluntarily complied?

I don’t know that any of that crim. procedure stuff matters much to the OP or the ultimate issue (did it happen?). How they got from point A to point B (allegation of rape to revelation of non-existence of forensic evidence) seems of limited probative value to the issues we really care (or should care) about (did they do what she said, or is shewhat the OP accuses her of being?).

42

Meanwhile the newspapers etc. are selling like crazy, and raking in the money from all of this hullabaloo. I really dislike the trend in much of the media to trumpet to the rooftops any old thing as “credible” and to hype it up, then turn around and use the exact same procedure as the case unfolds even if it conflicts with what was reported previously.

43

From the article quoted in an earlier post:

[emphasis added by me]

A few posters have speculated that perhaps persons unknown (gate crashers) were the attackers, instead of members of the team. But apparently there was absolutely no DNA, latex or lubricant on her.

Given that, what evidence was that there she was even attacked? This is the first I’ve heard about this case (I’m from Canada, and I don’t follow American news or sports news very closely). Have other news articles given any physical confirmation that she was attacked (e.g. the “broomhandle” scenario?). I would think that she would have massive bruising/lacerations if that were the case. Easy enough to find in a rape exam.

44

No, it’s impossible for no DNA to be found on any person. We’re all covered with it. And anyway, that isn’t what he said.

He doesn’t say there was no DNA on her. He also doesn’t say she wasn’t raped. He’s just saying whatever it was, it wasn’t a young man. Whether he’s reliable, I have no idea.

DNA testing takes time, and if a suspect is named, they don’t have to wait for the initial results to come back before collecting the sample.

45

Ah, bullshit.

You’re reading about it, so we’re going to follow the story. Where ever it leads.

Are you suggesting that when someone makes an accusation such as this that we try to keep it quiet until when? Charges are filed, trial begins, there’s a conviction?

Or are you suggesting that we not report when new information comes forward?

Newsfuckingflash: This is a legitimate story whether she’s telling the truth or lying her ass off.

Are we making money off of a story like this? Yeah, just as much as any other story we run. But if you don’t like it, don’t read newspapers and magazines. Don’t subscribe. Don’t watch TV. Don’t listen to the radio.

But don’t fucking wallow in the gory details and then cluck your tongue with disapproval at the “trends in media.”

46

Here’s a novel idea, why not report the truth and not hype it up or put your own objective slant on it? Hmm? Why not go back to the days of professional journalism. I was thinking of other cases where the media did similar things with BTK. They hyped every single possible theory up sky high, and even seemed to publish speculation as probable fact when there was nothing to report, and didn’t back down even when the DA said the information they put forth was “patently false”. I have a valid point in this, and you should consider it.

47

The thread I linked to is over a year old btw, so don’t ressurect it.

48

Ahem.

What the FUCK is an “objective slant”?

I suggest you at least get your terminology straight before you start talking about things you know nothing about.

49

Biased slant, I meant biased. :smack: I do know better.

50

Now that you’ve gotten the correct phraseology, maybe you could point out some specific examples of things in the media has reported about this case that are “hyped up” or a “biased slant.”

51

For one thing, they aren’t clearly reporting how/why the DNA evidence was taken, and if DNA evidence was even found on the accuser in the first place. There have been video reports on the net (I want to say CNN, but it might not have been. I will see if I can find the clip in a moment and post it.) with a distinct editorial slant that I watched asking people about the racial relations, and white privelege was mentioned. I do not call that unbiased when taken as a whole.

52

Pull up any CNN video from Yahoo news, and then click “more CNN” it is well down the list, but watch “Duke’s Racial Divide Exposed”. My problem is, why bring up the issue in the first place? It is tangental, and especially why bring this up when speaking about the allegations, when there have been no charges filed? The focus should have been on the developing facts, not the tangent of racial tensions on the University.

53

Report the truth? Being that that hasn’t been determined, I repeat my question to you as to when we can publish a story like this?

Next question: What hype?
I’ve seen no hype in the sources I read or listen to.

Third question: What slant?
Again, not seeing it, but you’re welcome to point it out to me.

54

But that would be the people being interviewed’s bias, not the network’s. Of course they could have simply chosen to air all of the people taking the woman’s side as slant, but I don’t think that was the case. One one side you had those people looking to protest any little thing and make a dramatic controversy out of it. On the other side you had those taking a wait and see attitude. Signs saying “Let’s just wait this out and see what evidence shows before passing judgement” aren’t terribly catchy, and those with said attitude simply aren’t the type to protest when they could be working, studying, or sipping on some Black Label while listening to Clapton.

55

Watch the specific CNN clip I name, then get back to me.

56

We all could benefit, in this thread, from a greater understanding of police procedure and DNA evidence. I am by no means an expert (although I play one at parties), but suggest that there is grist here for a GQ thread.

First: when a woman claims to have been raped, the hospital generally does what’s called a Rape Kit. (Why is it called a rape kit? Well, because a gentlemanwho processed the rape evidence was annoyed that he didn’t always get everything he needed, so he put together a little box with all the swabs and samples, etc., so that whoever had to collect evidence from the rape victim would know what to get.)

That rape kit includes taking swabs. Those swabs are then sent to a lab and tested. Before they are tested, it can be difficult, if not impossible, to tell whether there is foreign DNA on them. (As has already been pointed out, the victim’s DNA will be there.) In some cases, you can tell (i.e., by the presence of semen) that there darn well ought to be foreign DNA. In other instances, perhaps where the man used a condom, you will not be able to tell in advance whether there is DNA.

Now, in this case, it appears that the victim reported the attack. It’s unclear (and I don’t feel like looking) how long after the attack she reported, and whether she showered or douched in the interim. I think that it does not require any stretch of the imagination to understand why the victim’s first impulse is to try to get clean. This is, from a prosecutor’s standpoint, the wrong impulse, because it can wash away evidence.

So, in this instance, a woman claims to have been raped, and identifies three white men as her attackers. It is interesting to me, given that we’re talking about members of a sports team for which there must be multiple photographs, why there hasn’t been discussion about whether she identified anyone by photo. (Photo lineups, unlike in-person lineups, can be conducted without the presence of the defendants’ attorney.) Of course, cross-racial identification is difficult, plus I don’t know anything about the attack (lighting, how long she saw them, etc.), so coupled with the trauma of an attack, and how different a man can look when he’s smiling in a photo, I don’t doubt that it could be reasonable that she can’t identify a picture.

Now, after DNA samples have been taken, the defendants’ attorneys have come out with some curious comments. First, they have said that no DNA was found “on her body.” I wonder what they mean by that? One could make the argument that if DNA had been found on a fingernail that broke off, that’s not “on her body” and the attorney believes he can adequately explain that.

The other interesting comment is the “experts will tell you” that you ought to find latex or lube evidence. I am intrigued by that statement, because I’ve encountered some “experts” before. I have no way of knowing whether that’s a mainstream view or not. I also suspect that, if the victim washed before reporting, that would get rid of some of that evidence.

All in all, I don’t believe that this is the end of the story. I agree that we have far, far too little to go on to entirely discount her story yet. But who knows how this will develop?

57

I’m not sure anybody who is reporting knows that. The defense has a vested interest in making this information public, and the prosecution does not. The people who do the actual testing have no interest in making it public; if anything, they’re closer to the prosecution. That’s why these stories are including “defense attorneys say.” However, I just read in the New York Times that the district attorney in Durham is backing up what the attorneys said about the DNA . He says he’s going to keep investigating and that there’s more to this than DNA evidence.

The woman said the lacrosse team members called her all manner of racist names at the party before the assault supposedly occurred. So nobody’s injected anything that wasn’t already going to be part of this story. There have been protests on the Duke campus and in Durham since the night of the alleged assault, and it sure looks like race and class are factors in the anger and the protests. With the way the incidentals stack up in this case - white players at an expense big-name private school and a black woman working as a stripper to support her two kids and get herself through a college - those subtexts were right there. As the stories I’ve read have indicated, Duke is a very rich school in the middle of a pretty poor community, and this series of events has stirred up some resentment that already existed.
If you want to pretend that there’s only one kind of news, go for it, but that’s bullshit.

The people in the media who decried the Duke team for standing behind the rapists (there were stories in the early days of this scandal about the “code of silence” on the team) should eat their words, hard and in public. But I don’t think anybody else who reported on this story has cause for embarrassment. I sure don’t feel bad about it, not that I broke any news.

It’s possible that some gate-crashers did rape this woman. But her side has never suggest that as a possibility, and no evidence suggests it. I’m not going to call her a lying whore, but at the moment I don’t believe her.

58

I think that the young woman (certainly that’s as easy a way to identify her as “victim,” “accuser,” “liar,” “survivor,” “stripper,” “college student,” etc.,) might have lied about her experience, in whole or in part. Any or all of the fifty fine young student-athletes who hired two strippers to entertain and edify them and their guests may be as innocent of any wrongdoing as their parents would like to believe them to be. I don’t know, and I’ll bet fewer than a half-dozen people on the planet do, none of whom were quoted in the SI article.

What I do know is that there’s no evidence presented here to suggest that the woman is a whore, that neither college students, strippers, nor women, as a group, are necessarily whores, and that women have often been labelled “whores” as a way to justify mistreatment, including sexual abuse.

Calling the woman a liar is premature, in my opinion, but arguable. Reaching for the word “whore” to describe her indicates an attitude that seeks to justify exactly the kind of misconduct that’s alleged, and that’s deplorable regardless of the merits of this particular case.

59

There are people who believe, on religious or ethical or aesthetic grounds that I am not prepared to dismiss out of hand, that being a stripper, in itself, is “whorish,” i.e. literally consists of selling (albeit indirectly) one’s body for money.

The majority of people I know who hold this belief (the vast majority, actually) are women, including (anecdotally) my GF, her sister, and her mother (all of whom rather gratuitously referred to this woman as “that whore” when we discussed this case).

How, by the way, does calling her a whore “seek to justify” rape? I have never been tempted to have sex, let alone forcible sex, with a prostitute (why would you? They are available at market rates.). The women about whom I have fantasized (if any) have always been the “good girls.”

60

Fuck you. And please don’t stretch my saying “fuck you” as any literal proposition as it’s clearly, just as my thread title, intended as an insult.