No, never have. I'll say it again, I have no personal stake here.
Now do those who are falsely accused. Incredible how people don't believe in due process.
-
The TMF is sponsored by Clips4sale - By supporting them, you're supporting us. -
>>> If you cannot get into your account email me at [email protected] <<<
Don't forget to include your username
The TMF is sponsored by:
Blind woman drugged, raped at interview for foot fetish website: cops
- Thread starter NY ler
- Start date
- Status
No, never have. I'll say it again, I have no personal stake here.
Now do those who are falsely accused. Incredible how people don't believe in due process.
I was answering you. My confusion came before that...
You're like talking to a fuckin table
Wtf do you mean? I'm well aware about judge and evidence but they ain't conducting their trial here on tmf
TMF Jeff
TMF owner and co-founder
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2001
- Messages
- 27,057
- Points
- 83
He is experiencing due process. Nothing that goes on in this thread had anything to do with due process.
Understood. But wondering why you don't wait for the due process (hear via judge/jury) before making the judgment?
Why did you post the article as a thread here if you want to control the responses.
Take that shit to P&R and name the thread Due Process or "sneaky sneaky incendiary tricksy"
Im not talking about him not getting due process. Im taking about YOU making a judgment BEFORE he gets due process.
I do. I'm not on the jury, and as many people have pointed out, this isn't a court of law.
Belief in due process doesn't mean doubting the victim, either. It means weighing the evidence. So far, it doesn't look good for Jason.
No?
I posted because I wanted to share it with others here. Im sure many are appreciative.
I'm not controlling anyone's responses, you're free to response however you want to. I'm simply disagreeing with it. I'm still allowed to disagree, right?
Interesting. "Weighing the evidence" - which evidence presented by him did you weigh? That is my exact point.
Did he go through the legal process yet, you know the one where he gets to present his side?
Why don't you tell me how to respond
TMF Jeff
TMF owner and co-founder
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2001
- Messages
- 27,057
- Points
- 83
Because there's been a rape, I have to talk about the rapist.
I haven't said "I think this person, whose name I literally don't even know, is definitively the culprit, and let's jump right to the punishment phase."
And neither has anyone else.
You're the one who made that leap, and then started criticizing people for not adding a disclaimer every time they express their outrage over this.
He's not compelled to present any. Are you not familiar with the actual way due process works?
Feel free to respond however you want. Preferably without hyperventilating.
Of course he's not. But he's given a chance to do so. He clearly has not done that yet. But you go ahead and judge him.
Why would I be hyperventilating? What's the insinuation there?
Because there's been a rape, I have to talk about the rapist - I don't know if there was a rape. All we know is that she accused him of rape. I don't know if they had sex and even if they did, if it was consensual.
I haven't said "I think this person, whose name I literally don't even know, is definitively the culprit, and let's jump right to the punishment phase." - but you did convict him in your mind, without hearing his side.
And you're assuming the victim is lying.
1. Why don't you tell me how to respond
2. Take that shit to P&R and name the thread Due Process or "sneaky sneaky incendiary tricksy"
Not at all. Read my posts, I gave it a 90% of her being truthful. But 90 isn't enough in my book to convict him (IN MY MIND).
I did better. I used your words. If that is not hyperventilating, I don't know what it.
- Status
