Interesting statistical findings that definitively belie the feminist bromide that "women never lie about r*pe". If any good comes from the Duke case, it will be to shine the light on that falsehood, and maybe even bring the laws back into balance.
1 posted on
12/17/2006 6:10:08 PM PST by
WL-law
To: WL-law
To: WL-law
3 posted on
12/17/2006 6:12:00 PM PST by
GraniteStateConservative
(...He had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here...-- Worst.President.Ever.)
To: WL-law
4 posted on
12/17/2006 6:13:32 PM PST by
Signalman
To: WL-law
Why do references to rape and sex have their vowels replaced by consonants? It's not like they're dirty words or anything, they're part of our vocabulary.
Cindie
5 posted on
12/17/2006 6:15:01 PM PST by
gardencatz
(My COLLEGE EDUCATED Marine recruit can beat up your metrosexual Massachusetts senator)
To: Petronski; martin_fierro
6 posted on
12/17/2006 6:15:11 PM PST by
jdm
To: WL-law
Honestly, the "*" crap is annoying. The link doesn't have it. We are adult enough to read the words "rape" and "sexual."
8 posted on
12/17/2006 6:19:13 PM PST by
TankerKC
(When I think about me, I touch myself.)
To: WL-law
Women who make false rape claims should get life in prison.
9 posted on
12/17/2006 6:20:57 PM PST by
Mr. Mojo
To: WL-law
"I d*d n*t h**e s*x wi*h th*t w*m*n..."
Is it just me or does Hillary look kinda h*t in this photo?
10 posted on
12/17/2006 6:21:22 PM PST by
jdm
To: WL-law
P*rsonally, I l*ke th* st*rs.
-SIDEN*T
11 posted on
12/17/2006 6:22:00 PM PST by
SIDENET
(Everybody was kung-fu fighting)
To: WL-law
Rope case?.....Ripe case?. Help a brutha out here!
14 posted on
12/17/2006 6:23:43 PM PST by
Uriah_lost
(We've got enough youth, how about a "fountain of smart")
To: WL-law
H*h? I d*n't g*t *t. *s th*s abo*t th* DUKE RAPE FARCE?
17 posted on
12/17/2006 6:25:01 PM PST by
Sue Perkick
(Just a water spider on the pond of life.)
To: WL-law
N*fong based his who*e case on the kn*wled*e that Cr*stal is a ly*ing dr*ggie hoo*er.
20 posted on
12/17/2006 6:26:35 PM PST by
rock_lobsta
(Offending liberals since 1993)
To: WL-law
24 posted on
12/17/2006 6:30:44 PM PST by
jdm
To: WL-law
Hey, is anybody else seeing astericks????
31 posted on
12/17/2006 6:41:21 PM PST by
raybbr
(You think it's bad now - wait till the anchor babies start to vote.)
To: WL-law
Are you such a r*t*ard you think adults can't handle the words ripe and sox? I mean what the fack!
32 posted on
12/17/2006 6:43:09 PM PST by
cloud8
To: WL-law
"556 rape allegations ... 220 were judged to be truthful"
Which translates into only 40%. That means that 6 in every 10 rape charges are BOGUS! WOW!!
35 posted on
12/17/2006 7:07:43 PM PST by
moonman
(`)
To: WL-law
To be considered false one or more of the following criteria had to be met: the victim unequivocally admitted to the false allegation, indicated deception in a polygraph test, and provided a plausible recantation.
I'd like to see what the results would be if they left out polygraph tests as a a criteria. They are notoriously unreliable.
41 posted on
12/17/2006 7:14:12 PM PST by
murdoog
To: WL-law
There's an error in the first paragraph, I fixed it:
"n another twist in an already questionable criminal case, DNA testing in the infamous Duke lacrosse r*pe case found no genetic material from any of the accused males on the woman's body or on her clothing, but analysts found DNA from several unknown male on in the accuser's body."
To: WL-law
This needs its own "P*ng L*st"
46 posted on
12/17/2006 7:21:42 PM PST by
freedomlover
(Sorry, a tagline occurred. The tagline has been logged.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
