Read the texts and emails, Cardinal Fang.
And you know that someone who had actually been raped wouldn’t have texted and emailed that way, how? Common sense doesn’t apply, when evaluating someone who has experienced trauma. Look at domestic abuse victims. They don’t behave at all the way we think they would or should behave. I was just in another thread where someone wrote, in a different context, “Denial is a powerful force.” It is. A rape victim wants to make it all not have happened.
I’m not saying Sulkowicz was raped. I don’t know whether Sulkowicz was raped. And neither do you. You can’t know.
Sulkowitz said that they had never discussed anal sex before he supposed did it to her.
She lied. Just one of the many.
CF, if the accused guy had been arrested and convicted in court of raping her, would you say that we can’t know whether she was raped or not?
@Hunt, the cases are not parallel. If a rapist is convicted in court, that means 12 people concluded that the person raped the victim. But you yourself acknowledge that there are many he said/she said cases where a rape occurred, but it cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt or even with preponderance of evidence or clear and convincing evidence. For that reason, if a person is convicted in court of raping, I feel comfortable saying they are a rapist, but if they are not convicted in court, I can’t assert with confidence that they are not a rapist.
She carried it.
But didn’t she lose her case in the college tribunal? I mean, I agree that we can’t know for sure that she wasn’t raped, but she has an extremely weak (in my opinion) set of facts supporting her claims. I think what convinces people is that she is so adamant about it.
That’s a lot of cheering. She had some supporters there (as well as many detractors, no doubt). How funny that the pronouncer said her name wrong.
Her facts aren’t any weaker than his. She says he did it, he says he didn’t. I don’t find the texts and emails remotely probative in either direction. They do nothing to tell me whether he overpowered her and stuck his *** in her butt, which is what she alleges. I’m not saying the college tribunal should have convicted him, because they were right not to convict him, but his case that he didn’t do it is just as weak as her case that he did.
Didn’t she lie about what was in them?
Can we agree, based on the process and the evidence, that the preponderance of the evidence suggests that he didn’t rape her?
Glad my kid was not graduating from Columbia today. The whole thing leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Columbia obviously did not want her to carry it (hence the new rule against large objects) but at the same time were not willing to make a scene and enforce the policy.
Sounds like she got a lot of cheers, but I will guess there was also a contingent of the silent and ticked off.
Somebody in the comment section of the article I linked indicated she wasn’t even carrying it all the time on campus anymore (saw her twice outside without it).
A parent commented on the Spectator Twitter feed that he/she is angry–that this is Class Day, not Emma Day.
"I don’t find the texts and emails remotely probative in either direction. They do nothing to tell me whether he overpowered her and stuck his *** in her butt, which is what she alleges. "
I think most of us would conclude that a text inviting Paul to “**** me in the butt” is at least “remotely” probative…
Emma’s 15 minutes, thankfully, are almost up.
I wonder if Nungesser and his family even attended? No one is reporting on that other than the fact that his name is in the program.
This is confusing. Commencement is tomorrow. Thought this was Class Day just for students.
Or, maybe she didn’t remember… and I assume she didn’t, because deliberately lying would be a foolish thing to do when she knows he has the emails/texts. Haven’t you ever forgotten a conversation, text or email?
That mattress deserves its own diploma at this point.
Umm, I don’t know, maybe… I kinda think the evidence doesn’t lead us either way. I think you might be wanting to say that the preponderance of the evidence has to lean one way or the other, but I don’t agree with that. What if there were no evidence at all? Then there wouldn’t be any preponderance, right? That’s kind of what I’m seeing here. Basically, there’s no evidence, other than what he says and what she says.
It’s not fair, if he is innocent, that she is smearing him. And it’s not fair, if he is guilty, that he’s getting away with it. So we know that the situation is unfair. But what can we do?
I think what many of us fault Columbia for is not standing behind the results of its own disciplinary procedures. The college could have done that, at least.
Whether she was raped or not, the graduation festivities are not all about her. The fact that she is making it so tells everything anyone could ever need to know about this young woman. I hope her parents are wealthy enough to support her if she isn’t employable.
^^ A larger issue is why does the rape culture promoters attach themselves to such weird cases to advance their cause? First, it was Jackie at UVA, who is troubled and the allegation false. Then Emma, who cannot be on the up and up, and her allegation also seeming false. I just find who gets touted, as rather strange. Interesting people. You would think they could find lots more credible cases if there is so much rape culture going on on campus, as compared to the general population.