Replies

Tell you what: why don't you pray that in the far likelier eventuality that a woman you love -- a wife, mother, sister, girlfriend, daughter, etc. -- is raped, that the rape shield laws are still in effect, so that their attacker doesn't have the power of the courts at their disposal to continue thier assault for months on end.

Pray for that, so that you won't have to wake up to the realization that you've enabled their assailants.

If a woman I care about is mentally unstable, suicidal, sleeps around, and frequents men's hotel rooms, I would have a tough time believing that on one of those encounters where she set the whole thing up ( stayed late, arranged the tour, snuck back to the hotel room,etc) that she was raped rather than it be a sexual encounter. Sorry, it's just common sense.

If a woman I care about does not sleep around, is a pretty stable person, has stable relationships, I will be more likely to believe her when she says she was raped.

What if a male friend of yours was accused of rape and the accuser had a history like this one. Woudn't you think that's relevant? I do.

Or, if you don't think so, maybe you think Tucker Carlson and John Fund should be doing time for the rapes they were accused of. I'm sure they would love to have a juror with such a closed mind as yours that would ignore the mental stability of the supposed victim and prevent that evidence from seeing trial.

You blew it with the Potiphar example. Joseph did everything he could to avoid a compromising situation, exactly what you're advocating and somehow you still see fit to learn from his lesson as if he did something wrong.

Finally, if even a feminist, liberal, attorney like Susan Estrich, who is also a rape victim, exactly the person you would think would support a case like this can see that this whole case is a 'trainwreck', and questions how the rape shield laws are applied, you may want to think twice about this ridiculously stance you're taking on this that ignores any and every new evidence that comes out.

If a woman I care about is mentally unstable, suicidal, sleeps around, and frequents men's hotel rooms, I would have a tough time believing that on one of those encounters where she set the whole thing up ( stayed late, arranged the tour, snuck back to the hotel room,etc) that she was raped rather than it be a sexual encounter. Sorry, it's just common sense.

I honestly haven't concluded if Bryant raped this girl. But those that have already decided he's innocent do themselves no favors by constantly tweaking the facts in an effort to paint her in as bad a light as possible.

I think it best to stick to fact, not fiction, when discerning what the truth is.

If a woman I care about is mentally unstable, suicidal, sleeps around, and frequents men's hotel rooms, I would have a tough time believing that on one of those encounters where she set the whole thing up ( stayed late, arranged the tour, snuck back to the hotel room,etc) that she was raped rather than it be a sexual encounter. Sorry, it's just common sense.

Don't kid yourself... you don't care about such a woman at all. Everyone gets a poke.
Your "common sense" is the rapists' best friend. You're giving them a built-in alibi.
"Nut or slut" is alive and well on FR. Congratulations.

Finally, if even a feminist, liberal, attorney like Susan Estrich, who is also a rape victim, exactly the person you would think would support a case like this can see that this whole case is a 'trainwreck', and questions how the rape shield laws are applied, you may want to think twice about this ridiculously stance you're taking on this that ignores any and every new evidence that comes out.

Bad cases make bad law.
The rape shield laws do far more good than harm. Removing them would do far more harm than good, as the vast majority of the beneficiaries would be genuine rapists, not the falsely accused.