Jury orders blogger to pay $8.4 million to ex-Army colonel she accused of rape

[sub_thug]

Sucks that he couldn't retire as a general. Can't they at least promote him ceremoniously for him to get benefits and pension of a retired general?

No, promotions to General ranks have a ton of legal stuff associated with them that isn't there for other ranks. It would require special authorization from Congress in the NDAA.

 

[KnightTemplar]

This is where you have to be incredibly careful.

I think this woman specifically should be punished for publicly saying he raped her having failed to prove it in court.

I think women who make false accusations should only be punished if it is proven beyond doubt that it was in fact a false claim made with the intent to harm. Failing to prove a claim does not prove it was false.

Proving rape is very difficult and many women don't even try. Most women don't try.

Hard to argue with that. However, I would add that both parties should remain anonymous until the end of the judicial process. I don't know how it works in the States, but in the UK, there are almost no barriers to reporting the identity of a man accused of rape, while it's usually illegal to report details on his alleged victim.

If the man is convicted, then by all means identify him in the media. Until then, his name etc should not be revealed. Because even if he is then found not guilty, the fact he was charged with rape will have a huge impact on his life. Many people will take the view that there is no smoke without fire, even though he is innocent in the eyes of the law.

 

[KnightTemplar]

now she knows what its like to pay child support.

 

[sub_thug]

There's obviously more to the story. What made her make such an accusation against someone she hasn't seen in 30 years?

What was this woman's axe to grind with this guy if he didn't rape her all those years ago? I mean she was living her life as a stay-at-home mother with three teenage kids - why blog a lie about some obscure Colonel that nobody outside the military ever heard of?

Could be lots of things. She may just have hated this guy for whatever reason, and she may have thought a juicy story about rape was going to increase her readership and get additional advertising money. People do lots of stupid things for stupid reasons because it makes sense in their heads.

 

[Striderx5]

I don't think I have to read your post ts...just title...if I am wrong, so so.....but.... good! Fck her

 

[loyalyolayal]

No, promotions to General ranks have a ton of legal stuff associated with them that isn't there for other ranks. It would require special authorization from Congress in the NDAA.

Thanks for clearing it up. With that said, that's bullshit!

 

[DoomPatrol]

I'd be interested in the details of the trial.

I'm curious as to how the Colonel could prove falsehoods in a story, 30 years removed.

If that is true, the Army should ceremoniously promote Riggins and up his pension to compensate from a mistake.

It seems like many parts of her story didn't make sense. And she's a conspiracy theorist which is a quick way to discredit yourself.

She has acknowledged staking out controversial positions on her blog, including that the mass school shooting in Newtown, Conn., was “a planned event” and that “I believe our GOVERNMENT shot those kids and teachers and used Adam Lanza and his family to pull it off.” That post was not presented to the jury in Fairfax, but other inflammatory comments by Shannon were placed in evidence, Trichilo said, while witnesses who were prepared to testify against Riggins’s past were not allowed to testify.

Shannon said she didn’t know that Riggins was up for a promotion until the investigators told her. “I had no idea, I don’t read the military press,” she said. But one of her own witnesses testified that Shannon did know, and that it was the motivation for her writing her first blog post. Shannon said the witness misunderstood the question, but the information remained unchallenged for the jury to consider.

“Everything in that blog post was provably false,” said Stephen Horvath, Riggins’s lawyer, “and could not have happened.” He said no free beer was provided on the West Point campus, that drinking was prohibited by cadets, that Riggins did not have a car in 1986, would not have been allowed to drive it on campus, and that anyone emerging from the pedestrian tunnel couldn’t have been seen from the road. Shannon’s claims that her grades plunged after the event and that she returned her class ring were also untrue, Horvath said.

The CID investigation found that, in light of the vastly different stories provided by Riggins and Shannon, and interviews of more than 30 people from that era, there was no “testimonial or physical evidence to corroborate Ms. Shannon or Col. Riggins’ version.” Trichilo said the jury should have been allowed to hear that Riggins’s version of events also was not substantiated. But shortly before the trial began, the judge ordered references to the findings on Riggins’s version struck from the trial, Trichilo said.

 

[Agent Mulder's Hair]

It seems like many parts of her story didn't make sense. And she's a conspiracy theorist which is a quick way to discredit yourself.

She has acknowledged staking out controversial positions on her blog, including that the mass school shooting in Newtown, Conn., was “a planned event” and that “I believe our GOVERNMENT shot those kids and teachers and used Adam Lanza and his family to pull it off.” That post was not presented to the jury in Fairfax, but other inflammatory comments by Shannon were placed in evidence, Trichilo said, while witnesses who were prepared to testify against Riggins’s past were not allowed to testify.

Shannon said she didn’t know that Riggins was up for a promotion until the investigators told her. “I had no idea, I don’t read the military press,” she said. But one of her own witnesses testified that Shannon did know, and that it was the motivation for her writing her first blog post. Shannon said the witness misunderstood the question, but the information remained unchallenged for the jury to consider.

“Everything in that blog post was provably false,” said Stephen Horvath, Riggins’s lawyer, “and could not have happened.” He said no free beer was provided on the West Point campus, that drinking was prohibited by cadets, that Riggins did not have a car in 1986, would not have been allowed to drive it on campus, and that anyone emerging from the pedestrian tunnel couldn’t have been seen from the road. Shannon’s claims that her grades plunged after the event and that she returned her class ring were also untrue, Horvath said.

The CID investigation found that, in light of the vastly different stories provided by Riggins and Shannon, and interviews of more than 30 people from that era, there was no “testimonial or physical evidence to corroborate Ms. Shannon or Col. Riggins’ version.” Trichilo said the jury should have been allowed to hear that Riggins’s version of events also was not substantiated. But shortly before the trial began, the judge ordered references to the findings on Riggins’s version struck from the trial, Trichilo said.

Hmm. Now I don't know what to think.

 

[BEER]

It seems like many parts of her story didn't make sense. And she's a conspiracy theorist which is a quick way to discredit yourself.

She has acknowledged staking out controversial positions on her blog, including that the mass school shooting in Newtown, Conn., was “a planned event” and that “I believe our GOVERNMENT shot those kids and teachers and used Adam Lanza and his family to pull it off.” That post was not presented to the jury in Fairfax, but other inflammatory comments by Shannon were placed in evidence, Trichilo said, while witnesses who were prepared to testify against Riggins’s past were not allowed to testify.

Shannon said she didn’t know that Riggins was up for a promotion until the investigators told her. “I had no idea, I don’t read the military press,” she said. But one of her own witnesses testified that Shannon did know, and that it was the motivation for her writing her first blog post. Shannon said the witness misunderstood the question, but the information remained unchallenged for the jury to consider.

“Everything in that blog post was provably false,” said Stephen Horvath, Riggins’s lawyer, “and could not have happened.” He said no free beer was provided on the West Point campus, that drinking was prohibited by cadets, that Riggins did not have a car in 1986, would not have been allowed to drive it on campus, and that anyone emerging from the pedestrian tunnel couldn’t have been seen from the road. Shannon’s claims that her grades plunged after the event and that she returned her class ring were also untrue, Horvath said.

The CID investigation found that, in light of the vastly different stories provided by Riggins and Shannon, and interviews of more than 30 people from that era, there was no “testimonial or physical evidence to corroborate Ms. Shannon or Col. Riggins’ version.” Trichilo said the jury should have been allowed to hear that Riggins’s version of events also was not substantiated. But shortly before the trial began, the judge ordered references to the findings on Riggins’s version struck from the trial, Trichilo said.

Sorry, I see now that it was all in the article. When I tried to read it, the autoplay videos and unblocked ads [I guess they're getting better, I have ABP installed on Chrome] were slowing the website considerably, so I went off the OP.

So, just like the Duke lacrosse case, the UVA story, Mattress Girl, etc, this was another case of "cry rape" in which every verifiable aspect of the story is provably false.

You would think that if someone was going to go through the trouble of falsely accusing someone of a crime [nevertheless rape], they wouldn't offer up so many details that can be tracked down, even 30 years later.

 

[cooks1]

She will never be able to pay $8 million, or $1 million, or anything close to it. And the damage to him is done. Bomb's already gone off.

He should just be allowed to rape her. Assuming she is worth raping of course. If she's not worth personally raping, he should be allowed to outsource her rape. That would approach justice.

 

[Only Here for Attachments]

False rape accusations should be punishable by 10 years in prison

 

[WorldofWarcraft]

Took me awhile to find the picture of the general, but I finally found it. Here's him wearing the new US army general uniform

 

[DoomPatrol]

Hmm. Now I don't know what to think.

It's certainly strange. After this amount of time, it's entirely possible she's misremembering. Eyewitness testimony is the lowest form of scientific evidence. Then again, the thing about knowing about his promotion to General and lying about knowing it before the blog article seems bad. It would be interesting to hear her justification for that, which according to her was a misinterpretation. It is weird that she would lie about something so long ago, but weirder things have happened.

Sorry, I see now that it was all in the article. When I tried to read it, the autoplay videos and unblocked ads [I guess they're getting better, I have ABP installed on Chrome] were slowing the website considerably, so I went off the OP.

So, just like the Duke lacrosse case, the UVA story, Mattress Girl, etc, this was another case of "cry rape" in which every verifiable aspect of the story is provably false.

You would think that if someone was going to go through the trouble of falsely accusing someone of a crime [nevertheless rape], they wouldn't offer up so many details that can be tracked down, even 30 years later.

Yeah it seems weird to even lie about a crime that old. Especially now with a family and nothing really worth gaining

 

[Jack Reacheround]

If the guilty party was brought to light good.

If the guilty party was not the one found at fault, tragic.

Yeah, you can just never know in cases like these, or rape cases. I mean, there is definitely too high a number of both cases where men rape or sexually assault women and get away with it, and cases where women wrongly accuse men of either and get away with it. It is likely more of the former, but can you imagine how devistating it would be to you and your entire life if you were wrongly convicted of rape? I'm sure your life is pretty fucked up if you're a woman who gets raped too. It's just that, being a man, I am unable to put myself in a situation where sex would not be welcomed. So it's hard d for me to identify with that.

 

[loyalyolayal]

What was this woman's axe to grind with this guy if he didn't rape her all those years ago? I mean she was living her life as a stay-at-home mother with three teenage kids - why blog a lie about some obscure Colonel that nobody outside the military ever heard of?

Because she's a stay-at-home mom with 3 teenage kids. What else is there to do? It's not like she has to change diapers or look after them.

 

[BEER]

Yeah it seems weird to even lie about a crime that old. Especially now with a family and nothing really worth gaining

I think, in these cases of false accusations long after the fact come with some sort of broken logic of "why would I lie about it after all this time?" that they think will lead people to believe them.

 

[DoomPatrol]

I think, in these cases of false accusations long after the fact come with some sort of broken logic of "why would I lie about it after all this time?" that they think will lead people to believe them.

Yeah. I was also thinking it's possible that they had some sort of bad experience, while it was consensual sex, and she later saw an opportunity to enact revenge. She is a Sandy Hook truther after all. In my opinion, anyone disgusting enough to push that theory has zero credibility. Bring some physical evidence or shut the fuck up crazy bitch.

 

[DoomPatrol]

Took me awhile to find the picture of the general, but I finally found it. Here's him wearing the new US army general uniform

@sub_thug

Damn you look good in that photo! Not as sexy as Marine blues, but not too shabby. I thought you'd be bigger though.

 

[TidWell]

There's obviously more to the story. What made her make such an accusation against someone she hasn't seen in 30 years?

Apparently from what people are saying in comments She is a looney she is one of those that think tragic events are not real and fake hoaxs like newton, and san bernandino, etc

 

[BEER]

Yeah. I was also thinking it's possible that they had some sort of bad experience, while it was consensual sex, and she later saw an opportunity to enact revenge. She is a Sandy Hook truther after all. In my opinion, anyone disgusting enough to push that theory has zero credibility. Bring some physical evidence or shut the fuck up crazy bitch.

I've seen shit like that. Not quite as old, but plenty of false accusations start with "revisionist consent".

Read something recently that fucked my brain up. Initially, in the Mattress Girl case, three women filed complaints against the accused with sexual assault. One of which was a "former girlfriend who said she was emotionally abused during their long-term relationship, and later came to view their sexual relations as non-consensual".

Apparently, it's perfectly rational to look back at sexual encounters that you consented to and say "that was rape". The same woman eventually dropped her complaint when she was unable to answer questions by the review board that overlooks sexual assault allegations.

We've all heard of "regret rape", but that takes it to an entirely new level.