@dstark - in this thread there is one link. I read the whole article. What point are you trying to make in the post above? Its very unclear to me.
What links are you referring to?
My question to you was not even so much about this case, but your comment that not guilty does not mean innocent. Everyone knows that is true, but you seemed to suggest that it doesn’t matter that he was found not guilty, he is still guilty just because the accuser did not back down.
And I find it remarkable that no matter what incriminating evidence a woman brings forward, it is inevitably dismissed.
I can’t tell whether Nungesser is innocent. He has been accused by three different people, which suggests that there might be merit to the accusations. There’s no proof. He denies the accusations. Sometimes accusers are lying, and sometimes they are not lying but their memories of the event are incorrect. Sometimes, more often than not, accusers are telling the truth.
Women remain friendly with abusive boyfriends all the time, so Sulkowicz remaining friendly with Nungesser tells me nothing.
I just can’t tell whether the accusations have merit. Columbia can’t tell either, which means they were correct to dismiss the charges. But that doesn’t mean the charges are untrue. It just means they can’t tell.
Nungesser says he’s innocent, because of course he does. Sulkowicz says he’s guilty, because of course she does. I can’t tell.
I didn’t say the guy was guilty in this thread.
I said he wasn’t found innocent.
http://mustangnews.net/police-will-not-charge-suspects-in-poly-canyon-rape-cases/
I don’t know why the above didn’t link.
May have to copy and paste.
One does wonder why he would not mount a media campaign to counteract all the negative publicity that the mattress protest is generating for him. This story already has a lot of traction so it would be relatively easy to get interviews and get his side of the story out there. It would be more powerful coming directly from him. He does seem to be hiding and there are no pictures of him published anywhere in the mainstream media.
If I was found “not responsible” by the University you can bet I would be out there shouting my side of the story from the rooftops.
With this set of facts, I am on the fence. This case is particularly complicated since the alleged attack took place during consensual sex. I think it may be hard for some men to wrap their brains around that. Don’t think we will ever know.
Not everyone wants to be a media sensation and talk about anal sex on TV for a few years. I get that, easily.
As a hs senior male (accepted into college!!) i find the article posted in the Daily Beast outright terrifying. Last semester I was called into my dean’s office because I was accused of sexual harassment. I was completely dumbfounded until the dean explained a female member of our class felt “belittled” by me in debate class. I, too, consider myself a “feminist.” I don’t see any reason to punches whether my opposition is male or female, and I never attacked her as a person, only her positions. So I can identify with the German exchange student. If he is, in fact, innocent of rape,!the entire experience must feel Kafkaesque.
I wish that was the case but reading the posts here, that is obviously false. 
I am on the fence about the accused’s guilt as well. Emma has been public with her story for a while now, and Nungesser is just now crawling out of the shadows when he could have been defending himself this entire time.
But still, from his word, there seemed to be no animosity between them after the alleged attack.
I don’t wonder. If I were Nungesser, and I were innocent, I’d probably not mount a media campaign. Anyway he does seem now to be mounting a campaign.
Emma has reacted to the text messages in the article:
I don’t see how the reporter is anti-feminist. That’s a bit much.
The reporter wants to confirm something before publishing and now the reporter is being attacked for not believing the victim which did not work out so well for the RS reporter, so yeah.
If think the guy just wants to get his degree but the Emma media just keep steamrolling ahead so the responding with the social media chain makes some sense and yes after RS the mainstream media is going to be more careful.
I believe the reason you have not heard very much from the male student is he was studying abroad. He requested to continue studying abroad his senior year, but that was denied by the university.
I agree with Consolation #9.
I have a hard time with the fact that there were no criminal charges, and he was cleared of any wrongdoing by the school (on all 3 complaints, 2 of which weren’t alleging rape according the the Beast article), and yet Ms. Sulkowicz goes around calling him a “serial rapist” to anyone who will listen.
This, from Nungesser’s parent in the Daily Beast article, hit home:
"Both Probosch and Nungesser express bafflement at the practice of letting colleges handle allegations of violent rape. But if such a process must exist, says Probosch, “doesn’t [it] only make sense if people accept its outcome?” "
Ms. Sulkowicz went through the process. She even appealed. She lost both times. Maybe she is right and the school and Mr. Nungesser are evil. But no one, not the school, not the police, not the court system–no one–has found him to be a “serial rapist”.
I don’t like frivolous lawsuits but this might be a matter where I would take some action to protect my reputation.
I also will admit to some confusion about the friendly texts and messages, including telling him “I love you” 2 months after such a horrific (alleged) attack. And yes, I know people throw that around in a casual way, but still. Even in a casual way it confuses me.
The reporter is not mainstream. She is an advocate. 
Also, there is a big difference between “not guilty” meaning “not enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt” or “not enough evidence to prosecute on a reasonable doubt standard” and “not guilty” meaning investigation, hearing held on a “preponderance of the evidence” standard and under rules that hamper a full-blown defense, and the hearing officers concluded that there was not a preponderance of evidence of guilt. That still does not mean quite the same thing as “innocent,” but it’s a lot closer than is usually the case with “not guilty.”
I want to add that, like Cardinal Fang, I don’t regard the text messages/e-mails as necessarily inconsistent with a rape. At the same time, like many others, I do think they add some nuance to the situation. They are certainly not inconsistent with deciding that this was not a case of rape, too. If I had any significant role in this matter besides gossiping online, I would want to know what Sulkowicz said about them, and how they compare to her normal digital voice.
And all of this serves as a reminder that real life is rarely as simple as propagandists would have us believe. I am not among those who think an adversary system is a good way to generate something resembling truth (although it may be the least evil functional method available). It’s pretty obvious that Sulkowicz has been leaving a bunch of stuff out of her story for tactical reasons, but I am not satisfied that Nungesser’s equally self-serving reply is filling in all the blanks that need filling.
The text messages are a bit confusing but we know that some rape victims can be in denial for hours, days, months, etc. and even stay in a relationship with their abuser. Not really an issue to me.
And again, she came forward later after she had found out that he had treated other women that way. So what?
What worries me is this - what is it about Emma that makes people hate her so much? She has a difficult case, where she had consensual sex with someone who then went on to anally rape her. She probably didn’t expect to send him to jail with a case like that. She DID expect to be treated well by her university and she was not.
The board that found him “not responsible” or whatever they call it, allowed him representation but it was denied to her. They didn’t allow her to question part of his testimony that was an outright, provable, lie. They told her it was impossible to have anal sex without lubricant so therefore she couldn’t have been raped. (She’s probably carrying that mattress around more because she’s angry at Columbia U than she’s angry at him).
The same breaches of fairness and due process when applied to men have certain posters screaming for justice (you know who you are) and yet in Emma’s case they are convinced she is guilty of some kind of malice against this man and are completely blind to her mistreatment by Columbia U.
So really, what is the disconnect here? Is she too angry, too strong, getting too much attention? I get the impression she angers people the way strong women have always angered people.