Brooklyn Gang-Rape case dropped: Woman lied

[MarloStanfield]

Yeah that makes sense, lets support and comfort some dumb bitch who tried to ruin peoples lives.

youre as dumb as dog shit bro!

 

[Banchan]

and having sex with her dad and 4 black teens? dunno man its fishy. i dont see a 50yo man having black teen friends.

I'm not sure her race but the father daughter situation is that the daughter was given up for adoption and reunited with the father recently who is 39 . It appears to be a genetic attraction situation where you lived apart from a relative for a very long time and when you meet them later in life as an adult , you feel an overwhelming connection to them and the feelings get contrude as sexual .

 

[PolishHeadlock]

My initial thought is that the dad was pimping out his girl and the kids didn't pay up.

 

[Zankou]

i'm not sure if you have poor reading comprehension or you are just into misrepresenting facts.

the article doesn't say she "lied." it says she recanted her story - a very common thing to happen with sexual abuse cases, particularly ones that involve family members. and just so happens her father was one of the alleged perps.

and lack of evidence is always a constant in these cases, which is what makes prosecuting sex crimes so hard. no witnesses, vics often don't get rape kits, and fear of getting involved w/ the justice system.

the only thing worse though than a victim lying about rape are stupid retards that don't know what the fuck they are talking about spreading false information to fit their own shit kicker narrative.

"The complainant has recanted her allegations of forcible sexual assault and the existence of a gun, and she does not wish to pursue criminal charges against any of the defendants."

She said there was a gun; there wasn't a gun. She recanted her claim there was a gun, and of course no gun has shown up. She also recanted her allegations of forcible sexual assault.

Without getting into whether the *latter* was a lie (I find it hard to believe anybody wouldn't take it that way, but whatever, look deep within yourself if you do), the *former* was certainly a lie. She completely lied, as did her father, about the force used to procure sex.

The completely unapologetic prosecutors are particularly reprehensible. I can understand crazy people making up crazy allegations -- happens every day, the world is full of crazy people. But to see prosecutors whore themselves out because they want to make a name for themselves is disgusting. Another case of prosecutorial rush for glory, ignoring the red flags that were plastered all over the case. Unfortunately this same phenomenon of dirty prosecutors keeps coming up over and over again.

 

[Madmick]

"The complainant has recanted her allegations of forcible sexual assault and the existence of a gun, and she does not wish to pursue criminal charges against any of the defendants."

She said there was a gun; there wasn't a gun. She recanted her claim there was a gun, and of course no gun has shown up. She also recanted her allegations of forcible sexual assault.

Without getting into whether the *latter* was a lie (I find it hard to believe anybody wouldn't take it that way, but whatever, look deep within yourself if you do), the *former* was certainly a lie. She completely lied, as did her father, about the force used to procure sex.

The completely unapologetic prosecutors are particularly reprehensible. I can understand crazy people making up crazy allegations -- happens every day, the world is full of crazy people. But to see prosecutors whore themselves out because they want to make a name for themselves is disgusting. Another case of prosecutorial rush for glory, ignoring the red flags that were plastered all over the case. Unfortunately this same phenomenon of dirty prosecutors keeps coming up over and over again.

So what actually happened, here, Zankou? This article was the first I can concretely recall reading on the matter, and one of my initial musings was, "Did this girl get raped, but was too drunk to realize anything beyond that, but then after waking up and discovering her father was among them, decided to recant her story?"

It also didn't sound like they apprehended the suspects at the scene or time of the crime, so I didn't make much of "no gun" being found.

 

[Zankou]

Who knows what happened? That's a separate issue from the fact that the case was garbage ... not just simply because the woman didn't want to press charges against her father, but because the witnesses asserted an implausible story about a gun that they both later recanted.

The separate question of what actually, as an objective factual matter, happened is not easy to tell, although it was certainly fucked-up, starting up with the woman having sex with her father. At that point the train was already crazily lurching way off the tracks into fucked-up zone.

 

[Zankou]

Btw, in the DA's own words: "Brooklyn District Attorney Ken Thompson said Wednesday the woman refused to cooperate, gave conflicting accounts,"

That's a euphemism. 'Gave conflicting accounts' is not the same as simply withdrawing an allegation. It's affirmatively stating accounts of the incident that *cannot both be true*, in other words one of the accounts is a *lie.*

 

[ObsoleteSoul]

Nobody will ever know the full story. This was a seriously deranged incident, and none of them are fully telling the truth, at least that is how it seems to me. They will probably go to the grave without telling it exactly how it happened. I would...

 

[Mike]

I think the more significant point is, at this point, you're going to have to help yourself. There are a plethora of social programs available, welfare, scholarships, academic assistance, job placement assistance, etc, etc, but none of those programs can actually solve any problems for black people, they're designed to help them help themselves. Life is hard, being "successful" is hard, you can get some help, but ultimately you're the captain of your own ship. There is no government program that can force someone to make mostly good choices.

On a related point, giving someone a couple hundred dollars a week as a method to help them improve their lot in life is quite literally one of the worst ideas western democracy has ever produced. Any sort of welfare program should have the ultimate aim of helping someone become self sufficient, not floating them in squalor from week to week.

How about you give someone housing, food, child care, health care, etc., for 5 years, while you provide them with an extensive education on being....an electrician, a plumber, tech support, accounting, office manager, etc, etc, whatever. So that they can actually have a good life, make some good money and be a productive part of society. It will be much cheaper in the long run, and actually improve "quality of life".

Not all of this is directed at you MIke, or meant to be adversarial.

Sure these are all good and reasonable points. A lot of people on here have decided all minorities are scum and come running in here every time a crime happens to parrot the same tired bullshit.


I just point out you can't judge an entire race by their worst members. And their worst members didn't get that way entirely on their own.

 

[Banchan]

Whats so difficult?

The father is epic level piece of shit that deserves biblical retribution.
The kids were 14-15 year old hornballs fucking a willing girl. Not exactly ethical paragons, but not worst people ever.
The girl was drunk as fuck, she was, as admitted by all parties completely unable to reasonably consent.

Nothing unreasonable about saying the girl clearly needs help, starting with someone getting her far away from her father.

It should be noted that the father was also apparently very drunk . Witnesses said that he could barely stand or talk when he came into the store to ask for help . Which is puzzling as to why they would make up the part about the boys forcibily raping the girl with a gun . Neither of them seemed to be able to consent to anything . I'm assuming they did this to keep the father out of the story but still felt that they were taken advantage of and wanted to report the boys for taking advantage of an inenriated woman without mentioning the part where they are in an incestuous relationship or making the father look like cuckhold .

 

[Renard]

Btw, in the DA's own words: "Brooklyn District Attorney Ken Thompson said Wednesday the woman refused to cooperate, gave conflicting accounts,"

That's a euphemism. 'Gave conflicting accounts' is not the same as simply withdrawing an allegation. It's affirmatively stating accounts of the incident that *cannot both be true*, in other words one of the accounts is a *lie.*

Basically she's covering up for her incestuous father.

 

[Zankou]

Basically she's covering up for her incestuous father.

I don't think we can reliably infer what happened here. Just that her account cannot be relied upon.

 

[PolishHeadlock]

this reads like an erotic novel that German Mayor would read.

 

[sloppypie]

That's the only thing worse than lying about being raped?
Talk about spreading false information to fit their own shit kicker narrative.
Dummie, you just did the exact thing you were blasting in your comment.

Maybe you should take a long look at your post and see how it applies to your tendencies.


Another thing, you know who else recants stories? Liars, when they get caught. Now, I know, you've got your own narrative to run with this...

recanting doesn't mean lying. it means they are going back on their initial statements. it's incredibly common for victims in sex crimes and domestic violence cases to recant their initial story to police for a number of reasons. trying to cover for their boyfriend, father, whatever. but you wouldn't know any of this b/ you ar

"The complainant has recanted her allegations of forcible sexual assault and the existence of a gun, and she does not wish to pursue criminal charges against any of the defendants."

She said there was a gun; there wasn't a gun. She recanted her claim there was a gun, and of course no gun has shown up. She also recanted her allegations of forcible sexual assault.

Without getting into whether the *latter* was a lie (I find it hard to believe anybody wouldn't take it that way, but whatever, look deep within yourself if you do), the *former* was certainly a lie. She completely lied, as did her father, about the force used to procure sex.

The completely unapologetic prosecutors are particularly reprehensible. I can understand crazy people making up crazy allegations -- happens every day, the world is full of crazy people. But to see prosecutors whore themselves out because they want to make a name for themselves is disgusting. Another case of prosecutorial rush for glory, ignoring the red flags that were plastered all over the case. Unfortunately this same phenomenon of dirty prosecutors keeps coming up over and over again.

The point being, people are making illogical conclusions. People recant for a number of reasons. Yes, lying can be one. However, in most, most cases, victims recant for other reasons, mostly to protect the people that hurt them. But can also be to protect themselves bc they are afraid of repercussions for testifying.

Sex crimes prosecutors see this all the time. That's why they are so aggressive, bc you have to be to build a case with people that don't want to testify.

Sounds to me more like you and others in your mind set think any time a woman recants we have a duke lacrosse scenario. And the media drives it home so much you'd think that it happens all the time, and it doesn't. The former scenario happens all the time.

You also base your facts on what you read in the media. Which is very often missing many pieces of a puzzle, though it doesn't stop people from making half a puzzle that should show a boat and declare that the picture is a panda bear. And that's bc armchair investigators on the Internet have big egos, big mouths and terrible analytical abilities.

A great trifecta of attributes for any aspiring detective.

 

[MC Paul Barman]

recanting doesn't mean lying. it means they are going back on their initial statements. it's incredibly common for victims in sex crimes and domestic violence cases to recant their initial story to police for a number of reasons. trying to cover for their boyfriend, father, whatever. but you wouldn't know any of this b/ you ar

Never said "recanting means lying".
You either intentionally or through some mental defect lack the ability to comprehend the implications of what you are saying as well as what others are saying to you.

I made the pretty humdrum comment that liars, when caught, may fall into the category of those who recant. You have to dig pretty deep, or conjure pretty hard, to find something wrong with that comment.

You use words to stack the deck in favor of your position ("it's INCREDIBLY COMMON....")
You don't know that for certain. Like you've plumbed the depths and sifted the veracity of every claim out there.... opposed to reading popular level articles on it that speak to your bias on the matter.

 

[Zankou]

Making false statements to 'cover for' their boyfriends/fathers etc. may be extremely common, sure, but it's also a lie. That's why they make the false statements in the first place. To cover the truth. It doesn't lose lie status because you are doing it for what you think is a good cause.

This doesn't mean, of course, that something didn't happen just because the witness is lying. If a domestic abuse victim lies and says "he never hit me," again it's still a lie. May be an understandable lie, but still a lie.

Conversely, if an alleged victim says "he hit me," and then later says "actually, he didn't hit me," again, one of those statements is a lie. Except this is a much more damaging situation, since you are affirmatively accusing -- falsely -- another human being of a severe criminal act that never happened.

'Recanting' your former factual allegations does not mean the 'the witness takes no position regarding the validity of her former statement,' as if you were simply electing to dismiss a civil case without pronouncing judgment on its validity. Check its synonyms, cut-and-pasted: "renounce, disavow, deny, repudiate, renege on; formal forswear, abjure." It's not identical to saying your former statement is a lie, but neither is it a purely neutral withdrawal.

Similarly, you are ignoring the DA's comment that the woman gave *inconsistent accounts* of what happened, which again is not credibly interpreted to mean she made some sort of agnostic and non-judgmental withdrawal from pressing charges. Her affirmative factual accounts were not consistent, such that they could not all be true. Some of her accounts, by necessary logical implication, were false. This is what we, humans, call lying. A laudable desire to protect women no more turns such lies into truths than it turns them into unicorns. One might also hope it would be accompanied by a laudable desire to protect men.

As I mentioned in my post above, immediately prior to your post, we can't reliably infer what "really" happened from this. But the witness certainly lied about what happened. There's no getting away from that, no much how much of an agenda one might have.

 

[Mondo Freaks]

I've been in the suburbs too long. Can't believe shit like this still happens.

 

[UpaLoompa]

without mentioning the part where they are in an incestuous relationship or making the father look like cuckhold .

... so when you are fucking your daughter are you really worried about who else she's fucking?

 

[Banchan]

... so when you are fucking your daughter are you really worried about who else she's fucking?

Why not ? It's bizarre but it appears to happen more often then we expect (genetic sexual attraction) .