Man charged with sexual impropriety; presumed guilty. - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#14865151
Godstud wrote:When numerous women are coming forward it puts a ring of truth. I know protecting sexual predators is your 'thing', but have some common sense about this. When a lot of people come forward it means that it's extremely likely that this person is a scumbag.

It is not my thing to protect sexual predators. My thing is to reveal the truth by common sense. It is becoming clear that these two women are lying about Roy Moore. HalleluYah
#14865153
Truth is subjective. Facts are not.

2 women might be indeed be lying about Roy Moore, or at least exaggerating, but that does not mean the other 7 are. Your argument is flawed, in this regard. You would rather err on the side of the potential perpetrator, than the potential victims. How unChristian of you.
#14865158
Godstud wrote:Truth is subjective. Facts are not.

2 women might be indeed be lying about Roy Moore, or at least exaggerating, but that does not mean the other 7 are. Your argument is flawed, in this regard. You would rather err on the side of the potential perpetrator, than the potential victims. How unChristian of you.

All the other women said was that he asks them for dates, some turned him down and others went out on a date with him and he was a perfect gentleman. So they are not that important. He also asked his future wife for a date. That is normal behavior. Praise the Lord.
#14865175
Godstud wrote:A perfect gentleman asking children out on dates. FUCK [email protected]!! :knife:

Fuck your pedophile promoting god.

In Alabama the age of consent is 16, so these young women 17 to 19 and not children anymore. Anyway, he played it safe by asking their mother's permission. The ones supposedly that claim to be 14 and 16 are lying.
#14865240
When so many come out to accuse men or sexual abuse or misconduct it could mean that:

all the accusations are true
some of the accusations are true
Which could mean that:
some of the accusers are lying and just coming out for their 2 seconds of fame.

Either way, I do not believe that everyone who reports a crime against them is telling the absolute truth. Why wait 20 or so years to come out and speak publicly? Some of these women are just coming out to drag reputations down, 1 or more of these women could be paid to come forward, not to sound cynical. But I doubt people's motives at times.
#14865380
Godstud wrote:When numerous women are coming forward it puts a ring of truth. I know protecting sexual predators is your 'thing', but have some common sense about this. When a lot of people come forward it means that it's extremely likely that this person is a scumbag.


Nope. In fact it probably makes it less likely in terms of sexual abuse.

Alot of people wrote once to the London Police in the 19th century to tell them "I'm Jack The Ripper"... Only one was telling the truth(they did find letters written by him), but because a bunch of liars wanted fame and to "troll the cops"(as we say today) the real killer got away.

People make shit up just to be famous sometimes. In the case of sex abusers they tend to pile on when they smell blood in the press.

Michael Jackson was innocent(as Corey Feldman recently also stated, "He was the only one who didn't do it!"). The pig father couched his kid to lie while under the influence of dental drugs, thinking they'd get good cash out of MJ. Everyone else from the media then piled onto MJ's back till he died at a young 50, to make fucken cash out of scandal as usual. Even though no major serious further allegations of sexual assault came out, we didn't hear the end of it. MJ was weird because of his psychological issues with his father, but he was no abuser.
#14865382
[quote="MistyTiger"] Why wait 20 or so years to come out and speak publicly? Some of these women are just coming out to drag reputations down, 1 or more of these women could be paid to come forward, not to sound cynical. But I doubt people's motives at times.[/quote]

If you look at these claims, Cosby, Weinstein, Moore et al, keeping yourself quiet isn't abnormal.

Imagine you were that 14 yr old. You might have wondered whether or not to say something. But, if you do, your parents are going to hit the roof. In your 14 yr old mind, your folks are going to ask you what you were thinking. In your now adult mind, you realise they'll ultimately want Moores blood, but maybe you would not have at 14.

What you might or might not have realised is that Moore was a lawyer, and knew what he could get away with. You might have held yourself responsible for letting him strip you. You might not have realised he was whole and fully responsible and at 14, you were not.

you might or might not have realised he had more years to practise child seduction than you had had on earth.

you might or might not have realised is he knew you knew nothing, and were just beinging to be curious. He took full advantage of that

you might or might not have realised is he had been tossed out of malls and teachers were warn to keep an eye on him. These are part of the hebeophilic profile

In short, you may well have kept quiet about it too. If you had been a 24 year old with university bills up to here, and your powerful boss was telling you you'd never work again if you spoke about it, you might not report it.

There are lots of reasons for women to not mention it when men behave badly, from embarrassment to sheer fear.
#14865400
I have been told by several older victims of abuse(some by bastard priests) that "Back then the Cops would treat you like shit anyway, especially in a small community where they probably knew your abuser and went to mass on Sunday".

And that Police Corruption or the fear of Police Corruption(even if the "friends with the abuser" type) kept them mostly quiet. I'm sure this specific fear of bent/biased Cops is probably also had by Women too. Even with female police officers.
Last edited by colliric on 24 Nov 2017 08:26, edited 1 time in total.
#14865402
Exactly, we all know what sort of person is attracted to the police force, why would someone go to complain to them about a rape? They would probably just get more of the same in the cells before being sent on their way. When the revolution comes and the police put on trial and are replaced by the red guard taken from the local working class things will be much better.
#14865429
Godstud wrote:Most people charged with sexual crimes are guilty of them. That's simply fact.

You argued precisely the opposite earlier; that is, that most allegations aren't even reported. Women sometimes make false charges if they feel they are emotionally wounded--e.g., a man they like has consensual sex with them, and then doesn't call them for a second date. So in their spite, the women charge the men with rape when no such thing occurred.

Hindsite wrote:That is true because they have sufficient evidence to charge them with sexual crimes. In the case of Roy Moore, there are only accusatations, so he has yet to be charged with sexual crimes.

100,000 assaults. 1,000 rapists sentenced. Shockingly low conviction rates revealed
Most private allegations of sexual assault are likely false; they are women who use the charge as an emotional bludgeon against men who have jilted them. 90% of the supposed victims know the identity of their "attacker," and it's usually a boyfriend or prospective boyfriend.

Although 90 per cent of rape victims said they knew the identity of their attacker, just 15 per cent went to the police, telling researchers it was “too embarrassing”, “too trivial” or a “private/family matter”.


Godstud wrote:How do you think these things start? You think evidence magically appears and makes people make accusations, or do the accusations comes first?

Someone runs for the Senate. His opponents think there is no way in hell he can even win the primary. He wins the primary in spite of all the support from the President and the Senate Majority Leader. Then, suddenly, after the candidate has run a primary run off, and in spite of being in public life for the bulk of his adult life, people start alleging that he acted inappropriately. Then, one of the people alleging misbehavior makes a criminal allegation in hopes that the non-criminal ones will buttress the criminal allegation even though the person alleging wrongdoing has probably forged the signature of the person they allege wronged them.

Godstud wrote:YET. Just The word of 12 women over his...

11 of them are non-criminal, and the 12th is not believable due to her conflict of interest and probable forgery of Moore's signature. Preponderance of the evidence is a civil matter. You need proof beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal case.

Godstud wrote:When numerous women are coming forward it puts a ring of truth.

When they withhold allegations for 40 years, and they continue to withhold allegations as he's running for the Senate, and then they come forward only after he won a primary run-off, it has a ring of bullshit to it.

Godstud wrote:2 women might be indeed be lying about Roy Moore, or at least exaggerating, but that does not mean the other 7 are. Your argument is flawed, in this regard. You would rather err on the side of the potential perpetrator, than the potential victims. How unChristian of you.

He's just a patriotic American upholding the presumption of innocence.

Godstud wrote:A perfect gentleman asking children out on dates. FUCK [email protected]!! :knife:

Fuck your pedophile promoting god.

So should we ban Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet? You haven't answered yet. Was Romeo a paedophile?

colliric wrote:Michael Jackson was innocent(as Corey Feldman recently also stated, "He was the only one who didn't do it!"). The pig father couched his kid to lie while under the influence of dental drugs, thinking they'd get good cash out of MJ. Everyone else from the media then piled onto MJ's back till he died at a young 50, to make fucken cash out of scandal as usual. Even though no major serious further allegations of sexual assault came out, we didn't hear the end of it. MJ was weird because of his psychological issues with his father, but he was no abuser.

Perhaps. However, if he were guilty, that would fit the definition of paedophilia. What the accusers of Roy Moore are doing is trying to conflate paedophilia with dating women above the age of consent.


Now, back to the shaming of heterosexual males:
The Head of Pixar Is Taking Leave After Sexual Misconduct Allegations

R. Kelly is the subject of new round of sexual misconduct allegations
Should we believe this allegation Godstud, because the perpetrator is black?
Singer R. Kelly is facing a new round of accusations of sexual misconduct by parents of several women over the age of consent who contend that he is holding their daughters as sex slaves, according to a BuzzFeed report by veteran Chicago journalist Jim DeRogatis.

The women's parents have enlisted the help of local police and the FBI in attempts to regain contact with their children, but have largely been unable to proceed because law enforcement officials say the women are legally free to engage in consensual relationships.

What if the women, I mean children, in this case are white?

Kelly was subsequently acquitted on charges of child pornography. He has settled multiple lawsuits involving sexual misconduct allegations.

In the BuzzFeed story, Kelly is accused of holding several women against their will at homes he owns in Illinois, where the age of consent is 17, and in Georgia, where the age of consent is reached at age 16.

DeRogatis interviewed several of the parents as well as three women identified as former members of Kelly's inner circle --Cheryl Mack, Kitti Jones and Asante McGee -- who accuse Kelly of exerting "mind control" over the women who are staying in those residences.

Mind control! A black man exerting mind control over teenage girls! Tell us Godstud! What should we do?

Sexual misconduct allegations rock statehouses
In Illinois alone, hundreds of women signed onto an open letter charging a pervasive predatory culture in the state capitol, prompting a public hearing that exposed a grossly neglected, nearly nonexistent reporting system.

Gulp! Barack Obama used to work there!

POLITICO Florida reported Friday that six women claimed that the state Senate’s powerful budget chairman, Republican gubernatorial candidate Jack Latvala, had inappropriately touched them without their consent or uttered demeaning remarks about their bodies.

Hmm.... "He raped them or he said they had fat asses." You just can't trust the media these days. They could have said, "Two women claimed he touched them inappropriately, while 4 others claim he made demeaning remarks about their bodies." Alternative logic means one of the statements could be entirely without merit.
#14865510
Stormsmith wrote:
If you look at these claims, Cosby, Weinstein, Moore et al, keeping yourself quiet isn't abnormal.

Imagine you were that 14 yr old. You might have wondered whether or not to say something. But, if you do, your parents are going to hit the roof. In your 14 yr old mind, your folks are going to ask you what you were thinking. In your now adult mind, you realise they'll ultimately want Moores blood, but maybe you would not have at 14.

What you might or might not have realised is that Moore was a lawyer, and knew what he could get away with. You might have held yourself responsible for letting him strip you. You might not have realised he was whole and fully responsible and at 14, you were not.

you might or might not have realised he had more years to practise child seduction than you had had on earth.

you might or might not have realised is he knew you knew nothing, and were just beinging to be curious. He took full advantage of that

you might or might not have realised is he had been tossed out of malls and teachers were warn to keep an eye on him. These are part of the hebeophilic profile

In short, you may well have kept quiet about it too. If you had been a 24 year old with university bills up to here, and your powerful boss was telling you you'd never work again if you spoke about it, you might not report it.

There are lots of reasons for women to not mention it when men behave badly, from embarrassment to sheer fear.


It just smells fishy that they wait till they're 40 or 50 and then they all come out in flocks to make "public" accusations. I think of the logical fallacy of "jumping on the bandwagon". Just because everyone says the earth is flat for example, does that mean that the earth is flat? Or when I was in school and I was being bullied, it was always a group of girls or boys who were bullying me and trying to make me miserable. If one of the group was alone, they would not even have dared to insult me because they knew it was wrong. But if they had others with them, they all thought nothing of trying to bring me down.

There is still a way to bring the men to justice, they could choose to be anonymous. The fact that so many are making the accusations public does look suspicious. I can understand feeling ashamed or scared but if I were abused like these women, I would fear for my life so I would make my accusation in private directly to a police officer and/or send a letter to the local newspaper; I would not be wanting to go in front of a camera and crying. The police would make a statement or if I felt brave enough I'd bring a lawsuit against the abuser. To me, going on camera as these women are doing is just pointing a finger as if to say, "He's a witch!" and are we supposed to accept their words as truth, without seeing all the evidence? If they sue the pants off the criminals and make a public statement, then that is a different story. If they can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that all of them were raped and abused by these powerful men, then I will stop feeling suspicious of them.
#14865524
blackjack21 wrote:You argued precisely the opposite earlier; that is, that most allegations aren't even reported
:roll: What part of "charged" did you not understand?

blackjack21 wrote:11 of them are non-criminal, and the 12th is not believable due to her conflict of interest and probable forgery of Moore's signature. Preponderance of the evidence is a civil matter. You need proof beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal case.
I never said differently, so your point is not applicable. Still, just because there's not enough to convict him(mostly because of statue of Limitations), doesn't mean he did not do it.

blackjack21 wrote:He's just a patriotic American upholding the presumption of innocence.
No, patriotism is about upholding values and principles, and I am sure that child molesting isn't an American value, unless something in the US has changed and I was not aware of it...

blackjack21 wrote:So should we ban Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet? You haven't answered yet. Was Romeo a paedophile?
:lol: Logical Fallacy, and stupid. If you're going to make up nonsense arguments, then go to your Warcraft forum. Who was talking about banning anything? :knife:

@blackjack21 Why don't you try to respond to a whole paragraph, instead of individual sentences. You lose a lot of context when you post in this manner, and your arguments are made weaker, as a result.
#14865529
blackjack21 wrote:11 of them are non-criminal, and the 12th is not believable due to her conflict of interest and probable forgery of Moore's signature. Preponderance of the evidence is a civil matter. You need proof beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal case.

I am only aware of 9 women.

1. Leigh Corfman said she was 14 in 1979 when Moore kissed her, and that during a second visit he took off his clothes and removed her shirt and pants, touching her and making her touch his crotch.

2. Debbie Wesson Gibson said she was 17 when he kissed her during their 2 or 3 months of dating.

3. Windy Miller said she was 16 when Moore asked her out on a date, but did not go because her mother disapproved.

4. Gloria Thacker Deason said she was 18 when they went on dates over several months and drank alcohol on numerous occasions, despite her being underage. However, she said their physical relationship never got any further than kissing and hugging.

5. Beverly Young Nelson said when she was 16 Moore groped her and tried to force her head onto his crotch. She claims her yearbook was signed by Moore.

6. Kelly Harrison Throp said she was 17 when Moore asked her for a date. Thorp turned him down and said she had a boyfriend, and Moore walked away.

7. Gena Richardson said just before or after she became 18 Moore visited her at Sears and that Moore later called her school to ask her out and while out on the date he forcibly kissed her.

8. Becky Gray said she was 18 at the time that Moore kept asking her out and she kept saying no.

9. Tina Johnson said she was 28 in 1991 when he grabbed her buttocks.

These are 9 women and their complaints. Who are the other 3 women and what are their complaints.
#14865595
Misty what are you talking about. Do you really believe women want to make a career out of being victims of rape/abuse?

colliric wrote:Michael Jackson was innocent...he was no abuser.


I said this forever. I knew. Sometimes I'm psychic, this is proof. :D
#14865646
In the end one sbould always be answering what differntiates a false accuser from a victim and one finds that one should always look at evidence and not the speculstive motives without any supporting evidence. Things like being public, suing for money and so on aren't clear points of demarcation. Instead the evidence is and even then the evidence may not prove false or not. As such, in the end the answer is that we dont really know with any confidence. To go beyond the essence of consent is to simply incurring prejudicial associations that have no bearing on whether something constitutes assault. And most people are ignorant even to the legal nature of consent or any explicit ideal of what constitutes it.
#14865859
Wellsy wrote:In the end one sbould always be answering what differntiates a false accuser from a victim and one finds that one should always look at evidence and not the speculstive motives without any supporting evidence.


:lol:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7

In a world where international travel is prevalent[…]

haha that is exactly what you and some others are[…]

EU-BREXIT

Oh no! Please Decky, please Nigel, you must not l[…]

What! No festive cheer on PoFo?

I went to the school Xmas concert last night. Ozzy[…]