Nobody but the two who were there that night can know for sure what happened.
Although I admit her behavior after the “rape” damages her credibility.
Saying that you absolutely, positively know she is lying is just as unjustified as saying you absolutely, positively know she is telling the truth.
Our justice system, however, has been designed to not convict except when there is proof “beyond a reasonable doubt,” which there most certainly is not in this case.
It never went through our legal system. I don't think a formal charge was filed.
What about all the texts she sent after the “rape”?
Her communication with the alledged “Rapist” which were published make it pretty clear she didn’t act like she had been raped.
Not according to the whole story:
she had sex with him on more than one occasion, maybe 3 times or more, THEN decided she'd been "raped" because he had another girlfriend...
She reported the "rape" months later.
Her long string of text conversations is pretty damning to her credibility though.
The boy was not allowed to present evidence in his college hearing in the form of emails BEFORE the alleged rape where she was talking about their sexual encounters and anal intercourse.
The emails are part of the lawsuit as exhibits.
Could it be she was chasing him and felt rejected when he decided not to continue the relationship?
Well, the problem is that she and her supporters are more than happy to make absolute claims in the midst of the uncertainty. Whoever made these posters is pushing back against that. They’re putting the other side of the argument out there. All the caveats and uncertainties exist and should be discussed but the posters aren’t the right place for that. Their job is to be pithy and make a statement.