Posted on 04/16/2006 12:41:53 PM PDT by ncountylee
'We don't know all the facts about the alleged Duke lacrosse rape, but . . ."
That's more or less how most commentators have introduced their remarks on the case that has reduced the Durham, N.C., community to prayers, tears and recriminations.
Let me interpret the code for you: Men are bad.
Even though we don't know what happened, we're not going to let the absence of facts interfere with our indictment of a team, a coach, a school, but more to the point -- of boys.
About the only thing to emerge with any clarity since a black exotic dancer claimed that three white lacrosse players raped her last month is our willingness to believe the worst about males.
That belief is all the more rewarding if the males happen to be white, as well as athletes, and especially if they're perceived to be privileged. If there's one thing we can't bear in this country, it's spoiled white boys who think the world owes them a good time.
snip
While we wait to hear what the grand jury decides, we might turn our harsh judgment inward and recognize that the anti-male groupthink that permitted a presumption of guilt in Durham is little different than the lynch-mob mentality that once channeled rage against blacks.
Obviously, no woman deserves to be raped for any reason, under any circumstances. But nor do men deserve to be presumed guilty just because they're men.
(Excerpt) Read more at orlandosentinel.com ...
>>>>"And they have a legal righ tto be innocent until proven guilty. A right they have been denied."
>>Huh? How did you come to this conclusion?
Because anyone paying attention to this case, who is well-informed about it, knows the case was "tried" in the media and by the Usual Suspects at Duke, in the first week after the accusations, with the boys found "guilty". This "judgement" was upheld by the Duke president.
So only freepers and the different threads and articles that are being posted know the real truth as to whether or not a rape occurred? And I'm the one being absurd? Alrighty then.
Please post here in this thread where I've stated they were guilty.
I believe you have me confused with another poster.
He didn't say they don't. Boy, are you tetchy.
Well the Duke President isn't sitting on the jury at the trial so I don't see what that has to do with anything.
Has nothing to do with FReepers. Has to do with being informed on what is going on with this case.
You seem out to troll, rather than being out to become informed on the facts about this case, as we know them thus far, based on your statements in this thread.
Good day.
my point is that an indictment in no way means there is sufficient evidence to suggest a crime was committed if there is a prosecutor hellbent on prosecuting a case. i suggest that if he were not facing a tough primary contest in a week or two there would be no grand jury convened in this case. have you seen NOTHING of what has been said about the evidence [lack thereof] in this case? i am not talking about what the defense attorneys are saying, since you are dismissing them out of hand, i am talking about LACK OF EVIDENCE to indicate a crime or connect these individuals to the alleged crime, save her accusation>?
Why is everyone out to say that this DA is only prosecuting because he's up for reelection? I can't possibly believe this is the only current rape case being prosecuted at this time.
i am not here to gang up on you, but you are taking flak on this thread because you do not appear to be up to speed on the facts of this case, whereas most people on the LAX threads have been following it, in some depth, since the start of this. as i pointed out, there is nothing to indicate a crime occurred other than her accustion and her story changes daily.
Please post here where I supposedly said you stated that.
Again, what facts? The facts as are being presented by the attorneys who've been retained by the lacross team members who also just happen to be high profile criminal defense attorneys like that of Bill Bennett who defended Bill Clinton in the Paula Jones case?
"Had there been a tall tree and some rope close by those boys woulda been goners."
You directed this to me in your post 76 did you not?
i am not going to do the research for you, if you are interested in informing yourself of her allegations and how they have changed over the course of this, there are threads galore on FR that will give you that information. the defense attorneys are NOT making her statements, SHE IS, and her version of the facts are changing as time goes on.
What version of HER facts are changing? And who is airing them?
READ THE NEWSPAPER ACCOUNTS linked on the FR threads on the Duke LAX case, i am not going to do your work for you.
no its you, have you recanted that concept or just move on to a different illogical theory?
No its not. Please post where I presented that argument.
I have read many articles here on FR and actually other sources believe it or not.
Where have her public statements been reported?
you're a real treat
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.