Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lawyer: Woman Came to Duke Party Injured
My Way News ^ | 4/9/06 | SAMUEL SPIES/AP

Posted on 04/09/2006 5:16:52 PM PDT by wagglebee

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 441-456 next last
To: proud2beconservativeinNJ

I think that Oak has had an excellent record in posting the truth about this sorry incident, as opposed to the liberal media spin that has so many here enthralled.


161 posted on 04/10/2006 8:38:25 AM PDT by anton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: proud2beconservativeinNJ

I don't know whether he is right or wrong, but it seems to me that Oak Oak didn't get punchy until you got accusatory. Looks like another game of smear the newbie here at Free Republic. Why can't you, Howlin, etc. make your points without qusetioning someone else's motive? Isn't that a personal attack? Aren't personal attacks supposed to be forbidden here?


162 posted on 04/10/2006 8:38:32 AM PDT by wiltale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

If this is a shakedown, makes me wonder how many times this was done. The routine is pretty standard with regards to the investigation.

If she came with bruises from some other attack, those can easily be used with consentual sex to build a case of "rape".

Even with a proper investigation path, it comes down to was the sex consentual?

If she came to the event with bruises and that police/rape investigation indicates those bruises as having been aquired at the party the she is done. It also becomes an issue as to the natural progression of the bruises.


163 posted on 04/10/2006 8:40:20 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

I do find it interesting that the players all provided their DNA samples. What happens if none of them match the semen found in the victim? I agree there has been a rush to judgment.


164 posted on 04/10/2006 8:41:51 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wiltale
Why can't you, Howlin, etc. make your points without qusetioning someone else's motive?

Because we're interested in the facts, not misinformation.

165 posted on 04/10/2006 8:43:39 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: SirJohnBarleycorn

You are correct in that when I understood about the titles, I changed my methodology. The problem is they have trouble with the facts because they are invested in the guilt of these boys.

I didn't think automatically this woman was lying until I saw all the holes in the stories.

Why didn't they use their cell phone to call 911? Why did Dancer #2 deny asking the security guard to call 911?
Why did the woman tell the N&O it was her fist time stripping in front of a group when she has a 2002 convictions from an incident that started while she was dancing in a strip club? Why doesn't the timeline add up?
Why didn't they tell the authorities they made the first 911 call? Why did her boyfriend take her to the hospital instead of the police? Why did stripper #2 lie about finding the woman walking half-clothed near the Kroger when a neighbor witnessed her getting into the car and leaving with the other stripper? Why is it unknown where the accuser was before she came to the Duke Party around Midnight?

But, I'm making all this stuff up.. Obviously, you can tell by the number of posts ...

.


166 posted on 04/10/2006 8:45:41 AM PDT by OakOak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
If she came with bruises from some other attack, those can easily be used with consentual sex to build a case of "rape".

Remember the players are not putting up a consenual sex defense, they are saying they didn't have sex with her at all and that any bruises she had were on her prior to her arrival. It is possible that she had sex with someone else prior to the party, but thanks to DNA we can determine whose semen if any was left inside her.

167 posted on 04/10/2006 8:45:56 AM PDT by LWalk18
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: kabar
I do find it interesting that the players all provided their DNA samples. What happens if none of them match the semen found in the victim?

Yes, and has the DA taken a DNA sample from the boyfriend? If he was the one who picked her up from the Kroger parking lot and took her to the hospital, wouldn't a thorough investigation necessarily include his DNA swab?

Somehow I won't be surprised if we learn the DA never considered that.

168 posted on 04/10/2006 8:46:23 AM PDT by SirJohnBarleycorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: wiltale
Yea, didn't one of these posters suggest that Oak was a defense lawyer trying to smear the "victim?" Why don't you all just lose that rhetoric, and address the facts instead on impugning a poster's motives. I'm wondering what motive there would be to come to the aid of a drunken slut who has made a so-far unsubstantiated claim of rape against some college students. Let's face it, we don't know the answers here, but what we do know is that a stripper was drunk and made a claim of rape right after she or her companion made a claim of being called the N word without mentioning the rape.
169 posted on 04/10/2006 8:46:33 AM PDT by anton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

You didn't get the point of my post at all did you? Ad hominem attacks on a poster do not make the facts any clearer. You can point out any inconsistencies in an argument WITHOUT making personal attacks on the poster. You are insinuating things about which you have no evidence. The same thing you are accusing OAK OAK of doing, I might add. I, for one, would be more likely to remain open to your arguments if you don't turn this into a smear campaign.


170 posted on 04/10/2006 8:47:50 AM PDT by wiltale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: OakOak

I don't think Howlin is invested in the guilt of these boys and I think she has a pretty good handle on the reported facts of the case.


171 posted on 04/10/2006 8:49:07 AM PDT by SirJohnBarleycorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Are you still on the rampage about OakOak posting his own titled article in News instead of Vanity. Geez, get over it.


172 posted on 04/10/2006 8:49:56 AM PDT by anton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: Bubbatuck
I don't know what happened that night, and neither do you. But I think automatically assuming the alleged victim could gain from this accusation is pretty silly.

How quickly you forget. Remember Kobe Bryant's alleged victim? She got a financial settlement from him.

173 posted on 04/10/2006 8:50:03 AM PDT by demkicker (democrats and terrorists are familiar bedfellows)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: wiltale
You can point out any inconsistencies in an argument WITHOUT making personal attacks on the poster.

Which is exactly what I have done. I've been very clear to Oak on more than one occasion that we need the facts, not embellishments.

You are insinuating things about which you have no evidence

Why don't you point out a post where I did that. I can wait.

174 posted on 04/10/2006 8:50:12 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Howlin,

You are interested in facts that support your side of the story. You made nasty posts to me the other day and I didn't say anything but, Thank you.

But, if you going to accuse me of making stuff up, Put up or shut up.

The one error I made was typing fast and argueing with you and your buds. I mis-typed when I said she said she had been raped. I meant she said she had been raped within an hour, but didn't provide details and I was illustrating how the Police came to be at Kroger.

.


175 posted on 04/10/2006 8:50:16 AM PDT by OakOak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: anton

I was asked a question -- and I answered it.

Get over it.


176 posted on 04/10/2006 8:51:20 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Oh, how about the one where you suggest he will disappear as soon as this case is over?


177 posted on 04/10/2006 8:51:38 AM PDT by wiltale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: LWalk18

my understanding from the reports in the media is that there are potentially three sex partners that eventing from that party.

(she could argue they wore condoms too which woudl negate leaving anything behind)

I think the DNA is to elimanate all but the absolute minimum.


178 posted on 04/10/2006 8:51:55 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: OakOak

I apologized, more than once, for NOT following protocol with the titles.

Yesterday, I used the exact title, but someone had posted it just before me.

I'm guilty. So, what have I fabricated in regards to the facts in this case?
.


179 posted on 04/10/2006 8:52:39 AM PDT by OakOak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: SirJohnBarleycorn
If he was the one who picked her up from the Kroger parking lot and took her to the hospital, wouldn't a thorough investigation necessarily include his DNA swab?

The main point is to determine if any of the lacrosse players had sexual intercourse with her. Either there is a match with them or there isn't- there is no need to determine who the semen actually belongs to- given her profession, it could be any number of men.

Keep in mind that having her boyfriend's semen wouldn't prove a whole lot other than the fact that they had sex recently- it is hardly mindblowing concept that she had sex with her boyfriend earlier in the day.

180 posted on 04/10/2006 8:52:50 AM PDT by LWalk18
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 441-456 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson