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]!!
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 AllegationsR. 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.