- Joined
- Jun 6, 2011
- Messages
- 2,184
- Reaction score
- 0
was the victim white? were all the other guys with Lloyd also black? if so then that whole case is probably bullshit
Except that isn't what he was charged with, and his acquittal on a stronger charge means double jeopardy applies. The DA doesn't get to keep issuing different charges for the same incident until he can get a conviction. Some are saying the "attempted" charge didn't exist at the time, but I haven't seen that confirmed.
Any of the lawyers here want to confirm that? And while we're at it, can we discuss what kind of evidence would have been necessary to convict someone on attempted rape in these circumstances? Do we even have the facts to say he would have definitely been convicted of attempted rape?
Actually, that's not true. Common sense says she was raped. However, if this goes to trial, the state still has to prove their case on the point of consent. If they fail to do so, such a statement could indeed get him sued.
Lloyd believes she was raped. However, he's a public figure making a formal public statement, which was likely vetted through a lawyer or PR person. Using the qualifier is standard practice, and only indicates a lack of support to the kind of folks that think he's got a limitless capacity for evil. To everyone else, it's no different than the news referring to it as an alleged rape.
Censorship? It's his damn Facebook page, not the NY Times. It's also something from years ago and he was acquitted.
Just sayin, if you went to Ray Lewis's page and posted links to stories about his involvement in a stabbing during Super Bowl week several years ago, there's a pretty good chance he'd delete it. Is it because he's trying to bury the story? No, it's because it was a long time ago, and even though the details make him look terrible he was never convicted of any crime. He's long since moved on.
Likewise, if you went to Kobe or Roethlisberger's pages posting about their past rape charges and demanding answers you'd get deleted. At some point, public figures aren't going to comment on ancient history that makes them look bad just because another group of fans just now discovered it.
Correct. And aside from people talking about it, it'd die down with only occasional activity when new developments occur. What's wrong with that?
It's a 22 year old case. If you're worried about it blowing over you're a couple decades too late. The news isn't going to touch it because it's a non-story. No matter how bad his actions, the guy was acquitted. Reporting the details of that case to 'retry it in the court of public opinion' isn't what news organizations do. It's a good way to get themselves sued for defamation. At best, they'll tack a footnote onto reports that says "Lloyd Irvin, the jiu-jitsu coach of the victim and defendants was himself acquitted of a rape charge in 1990".
Frankly, IMO all Lloyd really needs to do is come out with a statement that says he made a mistake in a situation where he didn't fully understand what was taking place at the time, that his involvement in that case made him realize the seriousness and horrors involved with the crime of rape, and that his experience inspired him to begin teaching rape prevention in order to help women avoid this sort of terrible crime.
But that's not going to be enough. Why? Because some see this as an opportunity to take the guy down.
There's no rape seminar in the world that's going to teach a woman how to defend herself while blackout drunk and betrayed by two people she trusts. Every rape prevention seminar in the world warns woman about drink to excess when out alone or with people she doesn't trust implicitly.
I disagree with this on a personal level. I think if he were honestly supporting the victim, he would validate her claim that she was raped, by admitting she was raped. No father releases a statement to the press about his daughter's "alleged" rape. They believe their daughter and call it what she calls it.
Now, I am not arguing that Irvin has any obligation to act in that way, but his use of language that a news corporation would use marks his statement as very reserved, removed, and generally just not that supportive of the victim. No more than I would expect a journalist using the qualifier "alleged" in writing their story to be supportive of the victim.
Keeping in mind, that saying "A female student of mine was raped on New Year's Eve, and I am fully supporting her in getting past this difficult time" is in no way saying "Maldonado and Schultz raped her."
It just looks bad.
Quite right. I would like to mention that I don't participate in any of the facebook hate posting, nor have I ever once contacted LI demanding answers for the 1990 case. I have posted on an anonymous forum, expressing my opinion regarding the situation. I think I am allowed to do that.
And that's all I am personally waiting for, and have said as much in... well, one of the threads.
I can't speak for others. I was simply providing you with my subjective experience of why I am still talking about this.
Exactly why marketing a rape prevention seminar directly following the brutal rape of one of his students is in poor taste. They don't work.
Unless Lloyd's seminar is essentially, "Get thee to a nunnery" and they all actually do it. Then they just need to worry about pillaging Vikings I guess.
Some states allow a jury to find a "lessor included" offense.
So, sometimes there is a situation where you charge a person with rape but the evidence doesn't go that far, so they jury can also choose a lessor offense that they are informed about.
I don't know that state's laws. Some states actually do not allow lessor included offenses, which actually encourages prosecutors to under charge so that they get a conviction at least.
Did any of you even watch the video on www.lloydirvinrape.com?
2) I HATE (IFRICKINHATE) when people pitch BJJ to women as some magical antiviolence pill that you get after a couple months of classes. No. Nononono. I'm 6.5 years in, I'm pretty good at it, and I would never choose to engage in conflict with a large male. I bum girls out when they playfully ask, "Can you teach me to beat up guys?!" "Yeah, give me a decade and 4 days a week." He's taking advantage of ignorance and this is just making my blood boil.
Holy Shit
I thought I was good at putting my foot in my mouth, but Lloyd is deepthroating his knee right now.
Might make you a piece of trash, doesn't make you a murderer. That's what people are trying to do here. He didn't actually rape her, but in their eyes he's still a rapist.
bjj can help a woman in a rape situation. don't hate the guy for trying to want to help potential rape victims.
I appreciate the civil and well reasoned reply.
I"m not trying to control anything honestly. This is not my job, It just amazes me how things over time are always the same. This is a modern day online lynch mob.
You're posting from a proxy, you created this account 2 days ago as did envee, and other than a few nominal posts initially, every one of your posts is in a LI thread here.
Easy to draw conclusions as to your motive.
You're posting from a proxy, you created this account 2 days ago as did envee, and other than a few nominal posts initially, every one of your posts is in a LI thread here.
Easy to draw conclusions as to your motive.
Funny how none of the regular Irving pundits have posted in any of these threads yet, just these new accounts.
I see what you're saying and certainly you're a correct in a "legal" sense.
However, in my view, the fact that someone attempts murder/rape but fails, makes them as big of piece of trash as someone who succeeds.
So while you're statement is correct from a legal perspective, I believe mine to be correct from a moral perspective.
Someone who changes their mind before attempting to commit horrible moral act, is different. I don't believe that is the case here though.