Friday, January 26, 2007

More State NAACP Hypocrisy

Rev. Curtis Gatewood served four terms as president of the Durham branch of the NAACP from 1994 until 2002, when he moved to Oxford, North Carolina. During that time, he distinguished himself with what the (pre-Bob Ashley) Herald-Sun termed “racist cant” on Durham issues and with extremist views on foreign policy. He urged black males serving in the Army to refuse to participate in the war in Afghanistan, bringing a rebuke from then-NAACP national president Kweisi Mfume.

Gatewood has resurfaced to denounce the North Carolina Bar Association for joining “the lynching mobs in Durham who have verbally lynched and sought to politically assassinate DA Mike Nifong” as part of a “conspiracy to disrupt justice in this Durham case should be obvious.” The media are participants in the conspiracy as well, since Gatewood contends that “it is unprecedented that the alleged criminals and/or their defense team will be given the luxury of such a high-media platform to repetitiously proclaim their ‘innocence’ and attack their prosecutor.”

The lesson of this case, in Gatewood’s words, is that “the racist media and NC Bar Association who wrongfully used their influence to attack the integrity of a prosecutor at the rare time he prosecutes a case which profoundly has the potential to challenge racism, classism, and sexism simultaneously.”

Former Nifong citizens’ committee co-chair Kim Brummell is also speaking out, claiming that “the allege [sic] victim” is receiving unfair treatment from the media, which needs to look harder at the accused players and their supporters, since “I bet plenty of skeletons would be falling out of their closets.”

Such views, no doubt, reflect NAACP legal redress committee chair Al McSurely’s claim that the state organization stands committed to fair treatment for “both sides.”

278 comments:

1 – 200 of 278   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

Yup, it would not matter if there was a videotape of the false accuser admitting that she made it up for money, a separate videotape of Nifong repenting, and every partygoer saying that nothing happened under oath, we would still hear about the "race" ramifications and the broader dimensions.

Anonymous said...

The law now is that jurors cannot be disqualified during jury selection solely for race. It is evident from the NAACP's grandstanding, and the performance of much of the Durham black community, that a lawyer would be a fool to overlook race during jury selection for a case such as this.

Anonymous said...

And with a flash and the smell of sulphur, Rev. Gatewood will disappear yet again.

Nut cases tend to do that.

-Esquire-
-Maryland-

Anonymous said...

Did someone say, "change of venue"?

Anonymous said...

Yup, the NAACP has
been very involved
in this case from
the beginning.

The very, very
beginning.

Anonymous said...

Why aren't these NAACP folks howling for the Durham police to track down the five men who left DNA on and in the accuser? If they really believe her story, then they must believe those unnamed people are rapists who have gotten away. If they think the five men were consensual sexual partners of the accuser, then they must believe she is a liar and a prostitute. If that's the case, why are they protecting her like she's the Virgin Mary?

In their pain and hatred they've lost all sense, if they ever had any.

Anonymous said...

I often wonder if we spend too much time worrying about the comments of people such as Gatewood, Holloway, Murphy, et al. Their statements are so profoundly blinded by their certainty in their convictions that only those few who share the same convictions can possibly take them seriously. They are "preaching to the choirs" because all others with any common sense have long since left the pews of their "churches."

Anonymous said...

This case for me has opened the door on the extent of black racism in this country. From the reactions of black leaders, the black press and the black community it appears distrust and outright hatred of whites is extensive and entrenched.

Anonymous said...

"Starting in grade school, a young male is thrust into a situation where classes are long, and they are lucky to get one recess a day. What happens? He performs terribly. Sit still? Are you serious? If he hugs another 6 year old girl, he's a molester. If he squirms, he's ADD, and if he rebels and refuses to be bored anymore, he gets shifted off to Special Education classes. These horrors are vastly more likely to happen to a male then a female student at a young age."

Esquire, you should consider posting less and thinking more. The logic you use here is of the same level as that of the NAACP. There may be a problem with educating young males in this country, but your observations aren't providing anything useful. It paints young males somehow having a squirming problem that society should address. What do suggest affirmative, action for those young males who have been subjected to (oh, horror) one recess a day?

Anonymous said...

10:03 - I agree with you. But their statements make me sad. To the extent they purport to represent people who are less fortunate, they are making the cause of those people infinitely worse. Why? Because if the bulk of the people, most of whom are fair and right minded (a characteristic of Americans often overlooked) tune out to these types as they trot out inarticulate rhetoric in furtherance of a yet another attempt at racial exortion or some other "ism" based extortion. It is no way forward fo the people they represent - being mired in hatred only leads to misery.

Vivian Thomas said...

So, what are the racism, sexism and class-ism issues that this case could solve? Are there people out there who don't believe that poor, black prostitute would falsely accuse 3 "upper-class", white college students of rape? This guy believes that this case will break down everyone's preconceptions by showing the world that a poor, black prostitute will actually falsely accuse 3 "upper-class", white college students of rape? Well, alright, dude. I'm glad that you're trying to break down those prejudices for your people.

Anonymous said...

These idiots are doubling down, so to speak. Instead of dropping Nifong like a hot potato and moving on to the next morality play, these dopes are sticking with him.

The problem, of course, is that there is more to come. At some point this woman is going to get on the stand, and then it is O-V-E-R. And no one will believe her. How is she going to keep all those stories straight on the stand? How is she going to face cross-examination?

Answer: she cannot.

Of course, it is unlikely that it will EVER get to that. Some probing from the DAGs who have taken over will bring the story down, and what are they gonna do, take on the NC Atty General?

Anonymous said...

We need to switch our cry from "Save the Three" to "Find the Five".

Can someone with more detail knowledge tell me - Does the DNA report identify any or all of the five?

Anonymous said...

And they expect us to give a tinker's damn about a case in another jurisdiction in which 'they' are at a disadvantage?

Anonymous said...

Others, no doubt, know more but it is my understanding that one of the five is contamination from Meehan and one is CGM's "boyfriend." Don't know if the driver is a third or not but that would still leave two unaccounted for.

Anonymous said...

10:08

You totally miss the point of the good Esquire MD's post.

I found Esquire's analysis on the money.

Anonymous said...

The woman will never get on the stand because the case will never make it to trial. The AG's office is not going to move forward with this case.

However, this will leave open for all eternity the black community to say and believe that racism denied her 'her day in court' and that it was money and power that prevent the downtrodden black woman from getting justice.

If I wasn't afraid of a racist Durham jury I would want this case to go to trial just for that reason, so no one case say 'we want to hear from her' or 'we haven't seen all the evidence yet' and even that wouldn't change the minds of some.

There are some people out there who think OJ Simpson really did not kill his wife. Those same people are always going to believe this woman was a true victim. They are just the opposite end of the spectrum from those who will always disbelieve a woman who says she was raped unless she has grievious injuries and witnesses and never took a drink in her life or had sex outside of marriage.

wayne fontes said...

I doubt Nifong and the feminist bloggers have left a stone unturned in their attempt to discredit the Duke 3 and their supporters. The distortions and outright lies about CF's Georgetown incident only confirms this. I admire the Nifongnista's single minded ability to ignore the facts and continue the fight. Pure stupidity can only account for part of this view the balance is child like uncritical belief.

Anonymous said...

The NAACP is a good organization and will remain so even though this one screwball once held a (minor) local office. After all, the NAACP national leader saw the same deficiences that are identified here, and removed the person from office.

It is not to the advantage of the case or the those accused to overgeneralize. Those accused need to be judged based on the (lack of) supporting facts of this case, not as representatives of some larger group, opposed by some other group, in some ill-defined cultural fashion. Gatewood is wrong to do that, but we are too if we do it in reverse.

duke09parent said...

The people who are clinging to this prosecution come to it with a firm fix on what Prof. Holloway terms "cultural facts", i.e that rich, white males exploit (which is equal to rape) poorer black women. All examples of the supremicists need to be destroyed whenever possible. Therefore, anyone who comes to their defense or dares to question the veracity of the black woman exploited/raped is by definition perpetuating the cultural facts of white supremecy and is also evil.

So for those folks who believe that way it doesn't matter what the "victim" says on the stand and it doesn't matter whether or not she was penetrated by a penis or anything else. She has been victimized and the defendants are her victimizers.

Anonymous said...

10:08 "Esquire, you should consider posting less and thinking more. The logic you use here is of the same level as that of the NAACP. There may be a problem with educating young males in this country, but your observations aren't providing anything useful. It paints young males somehow having a squirming problem that society should address. What do suggest affirmative, action for those young males who have been subjected to (oh, horror) one recess a day?"

Uh, no. The more obvious answer is more recess - a lot more. Like the rest of the world.

Anonymous said...

I've found there is a small subset of people who are enamoured of the idea that it's men who are victimized not women, either becuase they don't get enough recess, their wives are beating them up, but obviously not murdering them, or they are being falsely accused of rape by vindictive lying women. I'm not saying Esquire belongs to this subset but there are definitely some posters here who do, as I've seen the same studies, examples, etc. trotted out in this case as I have seen on other boards for other issues.

Ryan Frank said...

or they are being falsely accused of rape by vindictive lying women

Goodness knows noone here has EVER heard of this happening *rolls eyes*

nifong's hat trick said...

Is this a first for the NAACP coming to the aid of a white person? It must kill them to do so

Anonymous said...

10:09
I couldn't agree with you more.

The one thing that I have had crystalize in my mind during the past ten months is that there are people with whom one can not argue. (It makes me think back on the parenting "ah ha" moment of trying to "reason" with a two year old... it can't be done). It is a total waste of time and can also be a tremendous source of frustration when someone fails to acknowledge the FACTS in front of them. I am choosing to ignore those people for my own sanity. It also points out the incredible void of leadership among certain groups that prevents any progress from being made towards the groups goal due to the marginalization caused by the extreme posturing and blindness of what, I hope, is a vocal minority.

10:03

Anonymous said...

JLS says....

re: 10:07

That extent of black racism is hardly surprising. When the left says something really stupid like children never lie about being abused or women never lie about being raped or blacks can't be racists, it just creates an opportunity. As soon as people start saying such things, the opposite will happen.

And racism is so appealing. If you are black the reason "they" don't like, won't hire, etc. you is not because you are rude, smell, ugly, etc., it is because of your race. Forget all the mainstream black celebs in this country that rely on popularity among other races to to be so popular. No one wants to face the possibility they they need to change, so as I said racism is very appealing world view.

Phillip said...

I am mistaken here but didn't the lax player ask for one white stripper and one Latino stripper. So why is this about racism what the hell does this case have to do with racism? Someone please tell me. Where was the NAACP racist police when the black football player at the Navy academy was acquitted of rape of a white woman there? TO me the NAACP now stand for the National African American Conspiracy Propoganda

Anonymous said...

Racism is an appealing world view if you, as the oppressed minority, give up on succeeding in mainstream society. Otherwise, hostility and distrust of other races will inevitably lead to failure. This is the problem with the cult of victimology, it perpetuates failure and not success. It has predisposed generations of black americans to expect to fail because white society is keeping them down.

No feminist but maybe Wendy Murhpy has ever said that women NEVER lie about rape, what advocates say is that it is rare, and the belief about how many women lie about rape is radically out of whack with the reality.

Anonymous said...

These folk are immitations of the orchestra on the Titanic! They are playing the same tune,will willingly expose the race divid in Durham and go down with SS Liefong!

Anonymous said...

Arrest warrant issued over false rape accusation in Connecticut

(Hartford, CT-AP) January 19, 2007

Authorities in Connecticut plan to file charges against a white woman who admitted making up a story about being raped by a black man in a Hartford park.

Police initially said they would not prosecute the woman. But after black leaders complained that she had perpetuated a dangerous stereotype, police changed their mind.

-snip-

http://www.wistv.com/Global/story.asp?S=5961542

Anonymous said...

10:24 Gatewood continues to hold office in the NC NAACP, 2nd VP.

M. Simon said...

I can just imagine the voices in the Rev.'s head:

With this case "I coulda been a contendah", the Rev. laments.

"I coulda been in the big money, like Rev. Al with his nice suits and Rev Jesse with a son in Congress".

He has a chance to get white folks on his side on the bigger issue of false accusations and DNA exoneration and he throws it all away in his angry rush to get whitey.

Here is a man sorely in need of good council.

M. Simon said...

anon. 10:07 AM,

You want to hear the really good stuff? Get them started on the joooos.

Anonymous said...

Here's an article written a couple of months ago that details the irrelevancy of the NAACP:


Johnsville News NAACP RIP

dl

Anonymous said...

I am mistaken here but didn't the lax player ask for one white stripper and one Latino stripper.




If, as has been reported, the lacrosse players specifically requested that the strippers NOT be African-American, then they are guilty of the worst sort of racism.

Anonymous said...

10:50

Are you being sarcastic with that? It's hard to tell.

Ros Allison, Detroit said...

Keep in mind, this is the statements of one man. There was even the following disclaimer under Gatewood's post on the website; "The words expressed are of the exclusive opinion of Curtis E. Gatewood."

It's true that this case has exposed a racist sentiment in the black community, and the only remaining support Nifong has left is among those who have this sentiment and allow it to shape their opinion on the case, but its hard to gauge how deep this sentiment is. You can't use Gatewood's comments as a gague.

Anonymous said...

The NAACP has lost all credibility with me. I'll never contribute to them again.

M. Simon said...

anon. 10:08 AM,

How about more recess and athletics for boys? Girls can join in too if they want.

How about scraping Title IX? Where boys and girls must have equal support for sports. Despite the fact that more men are interested in sport than women.

So how is balance kept? Boys sports are cut. And people wonder why it is hard to keep boys in school.

Anonymous said...

10:52
Why not?

He's a long-time black leader and office holder in the NAACP, isn't he? It would follow then, that having been a long time leader he is espousing the views of his constituency.

The ONLY blacks that have spoken out in support of the three players have been legal scholars, in you guessed it, the ivory tower world of academia, with one black journalist I can think of.

Every other statement by a local black leader, office holder, community leader, or member of the black press has sounded exactly the same tone: white power is preventing justice for the victim.

Why should I then assume that the silent majority of african americans think differently than their leaders?

Anonymous said...

M. simon.

Title XI is an example of how government programs produce unintended and stupid consequences. It started out to address a real issue...colleges wouldn't spend any money on women's athletic programs, wouldn't fund scholarships etc. and then it turned into an 800 pound gorilla where 'availability' a good thing was replaced with 'equality' which is a silly thing.

It's like mandating the NFL start a female football league, that would be all well and good but it would never have the same interest level as the NFL. Same with college sports, that's the society we live in. Girls should certainly have the chance to play college sports, but dollar for dollar is overkill.

M. Simon said...

Anon. 10:21AM,

That is why I believe the 'fong must do jail time.

Jailfong.

For the good of the community.

M. Simon said...

10:27 AM,

So should anything be done to redress the balance between men and women in college?

Or is turning our daughters into hookers (due to the M/F imbalance) OK?

Demographics

Girls go wild when there are not enough men. Fact of life. Supply and demand.

Anonymous said...

10:50 said: If, as has been reported, the lacrosse players specifically requested that the strippers NOT be African-American, then they are guilty of the worst sort of racism.

So, white men having black strippers over is racist, and white men requesting a white and a Hispanic stripper is racist because they didn't request blacks? I refuse argue with a two year old, now go to your room and stay there until you can come out and participate like a big girl.
MTU'76

Anonymous said...

What balance problem between men and women in college? My understanding is that women now outnumber men by a small percentage overall.

Your link seems to be off point.

GPrestonian said...

can't believe you left this out, KC - Gatewood's final sentences:

"Yes, we should demand justice in the courts. We should also remember Malcolm X’s point which says “black people can’t get justice in the courts , we have to demand justice in the streets .”

Anonymous said...

Oh my god he didn't really say that did he? Isn't that tantamount to threatening riots or some type of vigilante street justice? I guess the lynch mob rhetoric only goes one way.

M. Simon said...

I am mistaken here but didn't the lax player ask for one white stripper and one Latino stripper.

If, as has been reported, the lacrosse players specifically requested that the strippers NOT be African-American, then they are guilty of the worst sort of racism.

And the fact that they accepted the strippers sent proves they were not racists. Except fot the guy at the party who yelled some racial epithet.

He could have been mad at being ripped off and let his anger get the best of him. $200 a minute for two dancers seems excessive to me too.

Anonymous said...

What skeletons are in your closets mr Brummel, Mr. Gatewood?

Anonymous said...

Isn't that like saying if you are white and marry a white instead of a black or hispanic that you are racist?

So they wanted white strippers, so what? If I order red roses instead of yellow am I discriminating against yellow roses? What about peonies?

The boys will be condemned in some quarters for whatever strippers they ordered. When it was first reported they asked for black strippers, THAT was evidence of racism, their desire to degrade the black woman. When it was later reported they ordered white or latina strippers that then became racist, since they did NOT want black strippers.

Cedarford said...

anonymous - often wonder if we spend too much time worrying about the comments of people such as Gatewood, Holloway, Murphy, et al. Their statements are so profoundly blinded by their certainty in their convictions that only those few who share the same convictions can possibly take them seriously. They are "preaching to the choirs" because all others with any common sense have long since left the pews of their "churches."

10:03 AM


Fat, complacent & smug Americans just can't imagine any little old group of people with strange beliefs could possibly be a threat.

The Bolsheviks, the few, preached to the anti-choir and had ridiculous beliefs. And half of them were Jews who would never be given power under the Czar. So no one really worried.

Then there was this paperhanger and his band of odd fellows who staged a beer hall putsch, of all strange things and got locked up. Then some homosexual fracas and butchery the idiots called the Night of the Long Knives. As bizarre as old King Ludwig, probably just as threatening, corporatists and complacent burghers thought. Ridiculous. Lately there was this band of fanatical idiots holed up in caves somewhere in Asia threatening us. Us! As if they could ever take on our military or legal system!

Sorry to wake you up, but Wendy Murphy and her cabal are networked like you wouldn't believe and receive hundreds of millions to push misandry. Holloway and the Gang of 88 are symptomatic of over 10 million like-minded people in government, academia, teachers and government unions that set the rules and regulations that the rest of us have to live by from grade school onwards.
As for Gatewood and the NAACP, they get billions of dollars and have succeeded in establishing pervasive institutional discriminations and minority set asides that have enriched a whole new generation of minority and minority business and poverty pimp elites - solely dependent on the taxpayer dollar. They have also targeted whitey while at the same time - brilliantly - but failed to do anything for 90% of the rest of America's blacks.
*******************
The NAACP is a good organization and will remain so even though this one screwball once held a (minor) local office.

The NAACP was set up and run from 1909 to 1968 by a bunch of Marxist and Far Left Jews. It was only after 1968 that Jews were purged from leading black groups like the NAACP, minority school boards, black unions. But after blacks took control, they stayed infected with socialist thinking. America is divided into classes where color of skin is the main reason why you succeed or fail at anything. Class enemies exist. Wealth must be redistributed by government, and only government can solve black problems. Perpetual anger and grievance served to rally blacks to the cause. Better a big march demanding white people apologize and demanding new goodies than organize and become self-reliant.

The early days of the NAACP and its Marxist/Socialist orientation marked the end of Booker T Washington and the self reliance movement. A pity, because blacks did very impressive accomplishments in education and setting up flourishing black towns and urban ares...now seen as the decayed shells now housing the Underclass.

The NAACP is full of racists, poverty pimps, those sucking on the government teat. It stands for advancing black people, no one else, and if what they want comes at other's expense - too bad.

For almost 50 years, they have stagnated under the "old civil rights leadership" with no new ideas past, say, 1968.

Anonymous said...

I am sorry, but I have found minorities much greater purveyors or racism than caucasians whom they attack. They use it as an excuse for their own failures. In a true meritocracy you advance based upon performance. They don't want that. It is sad and pathetic. The evidence in this case overwhelming supports innocence but that affects their agenda. Win or lose, they will use this as meat to move their agendas forward.

Anonymous said...

And OJ was framed and is still diligently looking for the real killers

M. Simon said...

anon. 11:10AM,

The balance problem is not to bad among whites.

Hispanics have more of a problem.

For blacks it is 150 women for every 100 men. Which explains some of the misogyny of rap music. They are telling it like it is.

Anonymous said...

It's a vicious cycle, in order to advance based on performance in a meritocracy you have to have the basic tools..a semi functional family structure, involved parents and a high school education, lack of criminal record.

In order to effect those baseline elements, the black community would have to reject the gangsta culture and the culture of victimization and culture that rejects mainstream values such as a high school degree, working at a part time job, and so forth as 'acting white.'

Since this would involve a huge level of introspection and would necessetate condemning much that is common in the black community, teenage pregnancy, multiple children out of wedlock, failure to graduate high school, gang membership etc. it is not going to happen.

Much, much easier to blame white society for all those ills of poverty and self inflicted violence than even change the rhetoric slighly to tilt toward personal responsibility.

M. Simon said...

11:10AM,

BTW it only takes an imbalance of 9 men for every 10 women to get the "girls gone wild" phenomenon.

So yeah we have a small imbalance overall. It is enough.

Anonymous said...

What 'girls gone wild' phenomenon is that?

PS, that is a pretty negative and pejorative term you are using.

T-web said...

I wonder if the NAACP realizes how much it's hurting its credibility with this case? So many people will find it much harder to take them seriously in the future since they are operating with willful naiveté or pure & simple bad faith.

Anonymous said...

t-web.

I don' think so. Most people are not following this case to the degree as those who read this blog. The NAACP is already irrelevant to most non black Americans. The country goes about it's business, trying both not to offend their african american colleagues, do anything that would be seen as 'racist' and at the same time moving to towns and neighborhoods that have low crime rates, and generally, a commensurately low minority population. Thus, perpetuating the divide between mainstream America and the african american community.

The NAACP, sadly, is irrelevant and unable to help blacks move toward its stated goals. It is stuck in rhetoric from 30 or 40 years ago, fighting wars that have already been won and ignore the war going on in its own back yard.

GPrestonian said...

11:13am Anon:

Here's a direct link to Gatewood's screed.

M. Simon said...

C4 11:19AM,

The divergence in '68 was due to differences over quotas. Blacks wanted them Jews didn't.

The Jews were content to have equal opportunity since they did well on a level playing field. The blacks wanted equality of result since they didn't do well on a level playing field.

BTW don't forget that Jews have been in the forefront of every political and social movement. (excepting National Socialism). A Leon Trotsky is balanced by a Milton Friedman.

Smart people rise to the top of any organization.

Anonymous said...

IF the dancer was in fact raped, the the alleged criminals are going free. No attempt has been made by the prosecutor's team to link the DNA found in and on the dancer to her child born after this event. The paternity test could be used to make this match. If the NCAAP cared about justice, they would care about this issue.

Anonymous said...

Not really.

I would say it is a safe bet that the alleged victim has admitted she lied about her consensual sexual activities the week prior to the 'attack'..I'd also say it's a safe bet that the baby daddy's DNA is not a match for anyone's DNA that was found in the rape kit, including her boyfriend.

If she knew who the father was there would be no need for a paternity test, now would there? It would have been a non issue from the start.

M. Simon said...

11:26AM,

WE are not helping black family structure by having 1/3 of black males in the criminal justice system.

Drug prohibition is differentially enforced against blacks - for good reason - they are easier to catch.

However, it is destroying the black family.

Demographics

It is in effect American policy to destroy the black family. Maybe the policy is not intentional. Perhaps it is just a side effect. None the less, you can't deny the effect.

Anonymous said...

M. Simon.

Isn't what is destroying the black family the fact that so many young black males engage in criminal activities?

Are you sure that drugs are the primary reason for incarceration and not violent crimes?

I think the war on drugs is pure idiocy, make them legal, tax them, control them, whatever. It is lunacy to put someone in prison and ruin their life for possession or sale of small amounts of any drug. Just not sure this the reason for the high incarceration rate of blacks.

What is ruining the black family unit is that there IS no unit. Nobody gets married these days, either before or after they have children. This can be traced back in large part to AFDC policies of the past, where the single mother was rewarded with more money than the married one, which accelerated and perpetuated the non married mommy factory.

Anonymous said...

here in Connecticut, the City of Hartford has had two recent cases of apparently false rape accusations --
http://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-ctnorape0126.artjan26,0,7902405.story?coll=hc-headlines-local

Unlike the Durham police, the Hartford police acted professionally -- they investigated both cases, found inconsistencies in the victims stories, and eventually, charged them with making false reports.

Perhaps Chief Chambers should send someone his men to Hartford for refresher training in basic police work.

M. Simon said...

11:29AM,

I have a daughter. I worry about her when she gets to college.

An imbalance in the M/F ratio in favor of females encourages females to give "samples" in the hopes of snagging a mate. The "hook up culture" if "girls gone wild" is too pejorative for you.

This is reality. I have never understood people who want to put skirts on piano legs.

Plain talk is better than genteel obfuscation.

Anonymous said...

Police: Abduction Was A Lie
Sorry, the Link Got Cut off

Police: Abduction Was A Lie

By TINA A. BROWN
Courant Staff Writer

January 26 2007

Hartford police late Thursday were considering charging a 16-year-old Weaver High School student who said she was raped but falsely reported she had been abducted from the school grounds at gunpoint by a stranger.

The girl's story had alarmed school officials, who were notified by police, and parents who had seen or heard reports of a student being kidnapped and raped.

Hartford Police Chief Daryl K. Roberts said six hours into the investigation that she had lied.

"She was not abducted," Roberts said. "There was no stranger. She knew the guy."

Roberts said her story began to unravel after police detained a man fitting her description of the assailant and learned that the girl had called him on his cellphone.

"She called him, and he picked her up from school. We are going to charge her tonight with making a false report," Roberts said.

Earlier this week, Rosemarie Clark, 28, of Waterbury, was arrested for falsely reporting that she had been sexually assaulted Nov. 14 by a stranger in Bushnell Park. Clark later recanted portions of her story, saying the incident did not occur in the park and didn't involve a heavyset black man as she had said.

On Thursday, police said, the girl from Weaver High told them about 3 p.m. that she had been kidnapped from school grounds at gunpoint about 11:15 a.m. by an older man with a beard who raped her and later released her on North Main Street.

The report was taken seriously. The girl was treated at a local hospital, and police detectives were assigned to the case. But detectives found problems with her story, Roberts said, when they detained a man fitting her description of the assailant, Roberts said.

"He said it was consensual," Roberts said. "She said it was not. She lied about the abduction. No gun was found. Somebody is going to get arrested tonight."

Contact Tina A. Brown at tabrown@courant.com.

Copyright 2007, Hartford Courant

Anonymous said...

Cedarford

Thanks for the wake up, although I think it unnecessary. I think that you will agree that listening to Osama and trying to establish a reasoned dialogue will accomplish nothing... will responding to his rantings enlighten us? Actions, however, are a different matter, and they demand attention.

I'm not suggesting that we ignore everyones comments with whom we disagree (surely danger grows from some of it) but how many times do you attempt to rationalize with your two year old until you recognize that an abstact argument is beyond them and just so many wasted words. Ossama isn't listening and never will be, nor is Gatewood. Wasted words.

10:03

Anonymous said...

Yes, the 'hook up culture' is much prefered since it is gender neutrual as it should be since both males and females participate in it. "Girls gone wild" ascribes the culture to, well, girls gone wild, as if the males had nothing at all to do with it, was just a phenomenon related to girls being more sexually aggressive, poor, poor boys.

I don't think the ratio of men to women has anything to do with it, though. It is the cultural messages about sex that have normalized the hook up culture and turned sex into a commodity, more akin to a drinking game than anything resembling a relationship. Unfortunately, its the 'girls gone wild' who are hurt by the hook up culture not the boys, since society still punishes women who are promiscuious more than men.

Anonymous said...

Just saw this on Instapundit and thought it curious:
"Virginia State University has agreed to pay $600,000 to Jean R. Cobbs, whom it fired as a tenured professor in 2005 and whose claims against the university have been backed by several academic groups.

Cobbs and her supporters have said that she was dismissed for her political views (she is an outspoken black Republican at a historically black college where her views place her in a distinct minority) and for backing other professors (of a range of political views) in disputes with the Virginia State administration. In announcing the settlement of her case, the Virginia Association of Scholars — one of the groups backing Cobbs — said that information obtained by Cobbs’s lawyer showed that the university’s provost, W. Eric Thomas, replaced Cobbs with a woman with whom he is living."

Anonymous said...

PS,

And, yes, language does matter.

When we don't call things by their accurate and factual name, all kind of strange things happen.

Once 'racial quotas' transformed into 'diversity programs' and 'affirmative action' it became much harder to dislodge them.

There is a difference between an 'unfounded' and a 'false' claim of rape, as there is a difference between a 'false' claim and one that is not provable in court.

Anonymous said...

“I bet plenty of skeletons would be falling out of their [the 3 players] closets"

Would gladly take the other side of that bet !

Anonymous said...

Nifong has had almost a year to find any 'skeletons' in their closets and all he came up with was playing loud music and drinking. Oh yes, the assault conviction for throwing air punches.

M. Simon said...

11:49AM,

Have another look at:

Demographics

Whites use drugs at a rate about 50% above blacks. They participate about equally in the drug trade. Blacks do more of the street trade. Thus they are easier to catch.

With white use 50% higher than black use why are black neighborhoods war zones and white neighborhoods untouched?

Maybe it was an accident of policy when it started. After 20 or 30 years it is no longer an accident. We know. To remain silent is a crime.

The war on drugs has turned into a war on black people. Perhaps that was not its intention - except that Nixon told Haldeman on the White House Tapes that he was cranking up the war on drugs to go after his political enemies - the left mainly, however, the blacks are mostly on the left.

In addition Drug Prohibition had its genesis in racism:

Drug War Racism

Read the history link at the bottom. It is an eye opener.

Anonymous said...

Regarding the good Rev. Gatewood;

a mind is a terrible thing to waste

Anonymous said...

m. simon

I still am not seeing any statistics that tell me that the majority of incarcerated blacks are there for drug crimes as opposed to violent crimes.

I already know that blacks are incarcerated at higher and longer rates than whites for the same crimes, that street dealers get arrestd more than white college kids dealing on campus and that the crack cocaine laws disproportionally affected inner city blacks.

I still do not see any data that say what the percentage of blacks in prison is for non violent drug offenses vs. violent crime.

M. Simon said...

11:55AM,

But it is caused by an excess of females. The "over sexualization" you see is an effect, not a cause.

Correlation is not causation.

Many of the ills caused by prohibition are ascribed to drugs.

BTW the "girls gone wild" phenomenon is well recorded as a result of war. Female promiscuity rises when men are in short supply. Just what you would expect from biology. Women want to have children. With fathers if they can, with out fathers if they can't. The urge to reproduce is strong.

You can't understand culture if you don't understand biology.

M. Simon said...

12:09PM,

OK let me give you a hint: a few years after alcohol prohibition ended the murder rate was cut in half.

Even if we are only incarcerating the violent ones, prohibition is producing extras.

Wouldn't it be nice to cut the rate of violence in America by 50%? Just by recinding a law? We did it once. We can do it again.

Anonymous said...

msimon - your points about disparate outcomes in the drug war are well taken. But the real elephant in the room is the incredibly disproportionate rate at which black males commit violent crimes, including the crime of rape. Drug use and commerce is intertwined with the violence, but the fact remains that such violence is: 1) the reason why people fear many black neighborhoods - a fear that is unfortunately all too rational; and 2) the great cause of distress in the black community - no other factor destroys the quality of life like black on black violent crime. Take a look at our hard core prisons - Angola - in Louisiana, for one. Criminals with drug charges don't get sent to Angola - one has to have a murder or rape or armed robbery charge to get sent there. Yet its' inmate population is almost entirely black. One can point to disparities in the criminal justice system - and yes, they likely do exist, but they cannot explain the gross disproportionality in violent crime convictions among black men. No matter how one looks it, it is a social disaster of the highest order, with solutions in terms of culture and family change that most don't have courage to talk about (for fear of being deemed racist, of course).

This sad phenomena is one big reason certain elements of the black community such as the NAACP are so eager to hop on any claims of white on black crime - it is not just for its historical mplications - but it also a response (an emotional one, no doubt) to the holocaust of violence in their communities - they feel so burdened by the rate of violent crime any instance that makes them feel less isolated is grasped with redemptive zeal. Of course, the fact that this redemptive cause - tied up, inextricably and sadly, with a mentally troubled prostitute and scammer and a corrupt prosecutor aided and abetted by several agenda driven communities (a faction at Duke concluded) - will end up being completely immolated in a cauldron of fraud will make people in these communities feel no end of bitterness and anger.

Anonymous said...

m simon
You're ranting. Consider starting your own blog, Girls gone Wild, or something but you're getting far away from the issues of concern on this one.

GPrestonian said...

KC makes the cartoons ;>)

SteelTruth said...

leave m. simon alone...

his thoughts are interesting...

he provides great links to educate...

he is one of the consistently great thinkers here...

Anonymous said...

12:21

Well said. The statistics don't lie. The reasons for the hugely disproportionate rates of violent crimes commited by young black males can be debated forever. It doensn't change the facts on the ground.

M. Simon said...

Re: My 12:20PM,

Since the violence in America is in predominately black neighborhoods think of the boon cutting violence in America by 50% would be in those neighborhoods. It would mean a reduction of 5X or 10X.

It is hard to get people to invest in a war zone.

Black folks do have some real grievances in America. You have to look at that if you want to figure why some are so immune to reason. The difficulty is the analysis. They are fighting racism when they should be fighting prohibitiion.

Surprisingly the ACLU actually gets that one. Or at least they had it 6 or 8 years back.

Anonymous said...

You still haven't presented any evidence that links 'violence' to drug prohibition. You are simply taking it on faith that if the drug war was ended, which I agree, it should be ended, that violent crimes perpetrated by blacks would decline by 50%. I don't see any reason to believe that.

nofreelunch said...

By his statements Gatewood proves that he, not the NC Bar, is the racist.

As to the "racist" media, is he including Nifong sycophants such as the Durham Herald-Sun, the Wilmington Journal, and the New York Times in that group? They might be disappointed to learn that all of their Nifong cheerleading is thought to be "racist". Well, in fact it is. The same way Gatewood is a racist.

Anonymous said...

The job of the courts is to try and punish individuals for individual crimes, REGARDLESS of sex, race or class. This is why the symbol of justice is a blindfolded woman holding the scales (of justice). A prosector is never charged with tackling the problems of race, etc.; that falls, or should fall, to the legislature and governor.

M. Simon said...

12:21PM,

Actually overall rape rates are declining. For some reason we are getting more civilized. And yes, black males are disproportionately rapists. I don't know wat to do about that except to catch them and put the pepeaters away for a very long time.

If you want to do something about the black family you are going to have to figure out how to get more black males into jobs or college and fewer in jail.

Them is facts.

It is also a fact that prohibition increases violence rates.

Suppose only the violent go to prison. If prohibition produces violence then it is pretty obvious that one way to end a big chunk of violence is to end prohibition.

We did it once, we can do it again.

Anonymous said...

We're getting pretty far afield from the Duke case, but to my mind, 'race neutral' politics have been taken to a ridiculous extreme.

The black community objected to too many stories about blacks arrested for violent crimes, the solution: stop mentioning race at all. Now, the only time race is mentioned is if it may provide some benefit to the minority...either a white perpetrated a crime against a black person, or the 'race card' may benefit the black accused.

M. Simon said...

OK, economist Milton Friedman studied the issue here is an excerpt with a link to an interview that goes into much greater depth:

Milton Friedman

He studied violence rates vs changes in the law. Do a google on him drugs and the Wall Street Journal. He lays out his math. I'll see if I can find the article.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, I see it now, peaceful and legal crack houses in black communities, places for the whole family after work. It's simple.

M. Simon said...

From the above link:

Friedman: I'm an economist, but the economics problem is strictly tertiary. It's a moral problem. It's a problem of the harm which the government is doing.

I have estimated statistically that the prohibition of drugs produces, on the average, ten thousand homicides a year. It's a moral problem that the government is going around killing ten thousand people. It's a moral problem that the government is making into criminals people, who may be doing something you and I don't approve of, but who are doing something that hurts nobody else. Most of the arrests for drugs are for possession by casual users.

Now here's somebody who wants to smoke a marijuana cigarette. If he's caught, he goes to jail. Now is that moral? Is that proper? I think it's absolutely disgraceful that our government, supposed to be our government, should be in the position of converting people who are not harming others into criminals, of destroying their lives, putting them in jail. That's the issue to me. The economic issue comes in only for explaining why it has those effects. But the economic reasons are not the reasons.

M. Simon said...

In a Newsweek article Friedman authored dated May 1, 1972, he took a step outside his realm of monetary policy and free marketeering and laid out in clear, unequivocal terms what kind of social disaster we were buying with Nixon’s drug war. Thirty years later, we know he couldn’t have been more right.

Friedman’s views emanated from libertarianism. He resented the government’s interference in an adult’s free will. But the economist in him also recognized the inexorable market forces that drove the illicit drug trade. He understood that as long as there was demand there would be supply, and by making drugs illegal, those enriched by the drug trade would be a violent, corrupting element of society.

In 1989, in a famous exchange he had on the pages of the Wall Street Journal with then-drug czar William Bennett, Friedman told Bennett that the prohibitionist’s model was doomed to fail and would grind up freedom in the process.

“The path you propose of more police, more jails, use of the military in foreign countries, harsh penalties for drug users, and a whole panoply of repressive measures can only make a bad situation worse. The drug war cannot be won by those tactics without undermining the human liberty and individual freedom that you and I cherish.”

from: Milton Friedman dissects drug prohibition

Anonymous said...

The Gatewood article and a few other, similarly-worded missives are on the website of the Wilmington Journal.

Does anyone know if Cash Michaels is the only employee of this newspaper? I haven't seen any other bylines, and Cash seems to be involved with many stories and graphics.

Finally, the Duke mens 2007 lacrosse schedule is up at goduke.com. If I was HTML-savvy, I would include the link. Sorry.

Jim said...

NAACP / Council on American-Islamic relations comparison:

In the Guilford College "hate crime" case down the road from Durham, the Council on American-Islamic relations has displayed a more tempered tone than the NAACP in the Duke case, but still considerable presumption, including a leap from "all the facts are not in" to fait accomplis in a matter of paragraphs: "outrage at this unprecedented attack of over a dozen members of the GC football team - large, physically fit, highly trained athletes - against three young men who have spent the better parts of their lives in conditions of poverty and oppression in Palestinian refugee camps..."

There are demonstrations on campus, declarations of outrage for a "hate crime", and a lot of confusion among the college's administration and local police as to what actually happened.

In fact, the Greensboro police department released this statement castigating the ALLEGED VICTIMS for not cooperating in the investigation, showing a stark contrast between the way the GPD and the Durham PD handle such matters.

The family of one of the accused football players chimed in, refuting everything, saying their son and two other players charged were the real victims and sounding every bit as indignant as the Duke players' families.

Meanwhile, according to the families' statement, Guilford College's administation appears to be taking some of the same missteps Brodhead has taken.

Anonymous said...

Like the 88, the NAACP feels it needs this one really badly to support the race/gender/class metanarrative that explains the whole world.

Question is . . . if they are so certain of their world view, why cling so desperately to this case when it is pretty clear that it will not pan out for them and will only make them look stupid? If the demons they fight are so real and so numerous and so omnipresent throughout society, they should be able to find a real victim and real perps who will support their paradigm.

SAVANT

M. Simon said...

Here is a link to a WSJ article with charts.

Anonymous said...

They are afraid to admit this case is fraud because it re inforces all those other, older racial stereotypes of unreliable blacks and promiscuous black women.

The fact is, though, that blacks rape whites at a higher rate that vice versa, so they are going to have a relatively tough time finding the black rape victim of privileged white boys poster child.

What they are doing in reality is of course, counter productive because it supports the belief that the black community is not rational and sees racism in everything from an obviously false rape claim to getting the wrong order at Wendy's.

Anonymous said...

To Simon at 12:06 PM

Whites use drugs at a rate about 50% above blacks.

No where in the citation provided, is that statement made, nor is there any data in the article which supports that statement.

What are you talking about?

Michael said...

re: 10:54

College presidents at small schools are finding that implementing football programs is a good way to get paying students and more males on campus. From the stats that I see, getting males to go to college is a real problem.

When I was in elementary school, the rooms were geared to more activity. We didn't have rows of chairs; we had open rooms so that kids could move around and teachers generally didn't mind the buzz of activity.

I haven't been in an elementary classroom in ages. I'd personally love to teach at the high-school level but I'd probably have to take an 80% cut in income.

Anonymous said...

"You want to hear the really good stuff? Get them started on the joooos."

Spot on M. Simon

Anonymous said...

The 2005 National Survey on Drug Use and Health showed that the highest rate of current (past month) illicit drug use was among American Indian/Alaska Natives (12.8%), followed by persons reporting two or more races (12.2%), blacks/African Americans (9.7%), Native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islander (8.7%), whites (8.1%) and Hispanics (7.6%). The lowest rate of current illicit drug use was among Asians (3.1%).

Victim in Massachusetts said...

KC another great piece. The NAACP has shot there own cause in the foot if they still stand behind Nifong.

Anonymous said...

The NAACP doesn't care about the truth. All they care about is playing to their base, and this is what the base wants to hear.

There are plenty of non white Americans that are still happy to accede to racial politics, apologizing for a host of problems that for the most part have been created by the black community, itself and whose solutions likewise lie with the black commnity only.

Anonymous said...

KC,

I don't understand the NAACP's positions to be hypocritical.

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

Get it?

RP

bill anderson said...

Last October, I wrote this about the NAACP in this case:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/anderson/
anderson145.html

Indeed, it is sad to see the NAACP going all out here to promote a hoax. Of course, my sense is that the leaders figure that they ultimately can "trade" the dropping of charges for other concessions from the state. Also, the NAACP will openly oppose any federal investigation of Nifong and the whole process, as that would consist of "racism" on the part of the Bush Administration.

SteelTruth said...

the NAACP is useless and archaic...

there are reasons for blacks to be angry at certain injustices they face...

but the NAACP has the wrong strategy...

it is foolishly based in victimhood...

a new message is needed...

one of overcoming injustice not wallowing deeply within it...

challenge..work harder..be better...overcome...

and then fight like hell about things that could help...

such as an end to the prohibition of drugs...

get non-violent drug offenders OUT of our jails NOW...

IMMEDIATELY...

then change the laws and treat drug use as a personal choice matter...

MILTON FRIEDMAN is smarter than all of us...

even kc...

Anonymous said...

I may be dense but I don't see the correlation between changing the drug laws and improving the overall fortunes of black americans.

Decriminalizing drugs, which I support 100%, is not going to improve black high school graduation rates, reduce teen pregancy rates among blacks, improve the employment rate or get more blacks into college.

Anonymous said...

Simon, "black oversexualization is an effect, not a cause"?

"Reckless" (it's only reckless to Asians and whites, not to blacks) black-male sexuality is found wherever you find black males. It's genetic.

RP

Kevin said...

The energy shown by Nifong/AV defenders in the face of what seems to be insurmountable evidence of lying and ethical wrongdoing just amazes me. Race really does seem outweigh all rational thought. I'm a 45 year old white guy, and Duke alum. When I read words such as those from Gatewood, I wonder how I'd feel if, hypothetically, a white female Duke undergrad, or even a white male Duke undergrad (with whom I'd even more closely identify), made an obviously false claim that was victimizing men or women of a different race, class, educational level -- whatever -- the point is that the victims of the lie are people with whom I don't really identify. I really think I'd give the benefit of the doubt to the accuser initially, as I did the AV. But when the evidence was clearly against the accuser, my sympathies would shift to the victims of the lie. At least I think so.

SteelTruth said...

1:42

it won't accomplish these goals immediately...

but it will allow for children to get their fathers back...

and allow black women to have more of a chance at an equal marriage...

then on a whole marriage rates may rise...

and then it's more likely the children of these marriages will graduate high school and college...

it's all about family...these kids lose hope early and often in the tough urban enviornment...

and without a strong family structure, they HAVE NO CHANCE

Anonymous said...

1:42 Thanks.

Steeltruth, Friedman was smart, but you are the Ellipsis King.

Anonymous said...

Denying a person employment soley on the basis of their race is not only wrong but also illegal and, even worse, racist.

The lacrosse players' racist attempt to deny employment to Ms. Mangum was based entirely on her ethnicity.

And should therefore be punished.

Anonymous said...

10:24 AM said

The NAACP is a good organization and will remain so ...

Not true. The NAACP perpetuates the victim mentality among blacks and is staffed to the gills with racist losers like Gatewood.

Until the NAACP recognizes the contributions to society by those such as Clarence Thomas, Thomas Sowell, and Condoleeza Rice, rather than denigrating them as Uncle Toms or Oreos, and stops glorifying race pimps like Jackson and Sharpton, they have a biased message that is not worth listening to.

Anonymous said...

1: 54, I know you are a troll, but let me try to educate you.

No. It would be racist and illegal if the escort service strip club refused to hire black strippers based on their race.

The consumer is not the same as the employer.

It is also true that say, a 60 year old fat woman, would have a hard time saying she was denied fair employment as a stripper based on age discrimination since part of the 'job description' is being young with a good body.



The consumer, in America, can buy whatever he or she wants, black porn, white porn, asian strippers, black strippers, latina strippers or white ones.

Anonymous said...

My firm routinely hires temporary clerical staff and uses a local employment agency to supply the workers on an as-needed basis.

When I call the employment agency and request two workers, I can not ask that one be a white and one be a Hispanic.

That would be illegal.

That would also be exactly analagous to the actions of the racist lacrosse players.

Anonymous said...

One more time, the EMPLOYER of the strippers was the escort service.

The lacrosse player were the CONSUMERS.

In America we do not force consumers to 'purchase' services other than those they desire,let alone force people to purchase services based on race.

What's next, forced interracial marriage?

SteelTruth said...

here is something interesting that has occurred to me during this case...

ok we all know that according to women's groups, rape is completely an act of 'power'..not sex

this is everywhere in their literature...

so why if it's about power would we not see any examples of white men raping black women...

the FBI DOJ stats are very clear in this regard...

0.7%...yes less than 1% of rapes of black women are by white men...whereas, about 34% of rapes of white women are by black men..

but if white male rapists are raping for power and not for sex, why are black women almost NEVER their targets...

shouldn't the % be commensurate with the overall black population...

in other words, if rape is completely about POWER, then race shouldn't matter to the rapist...

but evidence shows this not to be the case...0.7% victims versus being almost 12% of the overall female population...

so further examination into the cause of rape is needed...

i never bought into the power argument myself...

Anonymous said...

The local branch of the NAACP can be summarized as Black Good, White Bad, think short term.

Anonymous said...

The NAACP is purely a tool for the black community to help black criminals get off the hook and persecute white people who have been falsely accused by blacks. They would never stop and say," what a minute, this black man or women lied or is guilty of this crime. It never was or is about right and wrong or legal or illegal. It's about getting the blacks off the hook. They think they deserve it and are owed it by the white race. The NAACP is a government funded program that promotes and grows black racism against whites like a fungus. They use their power and false entitlement to push their cause. Why is there even a NAACP. There is no National Association for the advancement of white people or single mothers or handicapped people. Why do blacks think they are just entitled to special treatment because they are black. Slavery ended along time ago. Yet they keep falling back on that excuses for their criminal behaviour, laziness and plain stupidity.

SteelTruth said...

for clarity purposes...

white males make up about 65% of the overall male population in this country...

so one would think, if rape were colorblind and completely about POWER as we are taught, then the white rapists should account for roughly 65% of all rapes against black women...

yet the % is less than 1%...

what gives...

Anonymous said...

Me neither. The feminists thought making rape about 'power' not 'sex' would help stop the blame the victim attitude that is so prevalent in society. They thought it would eliminate making judgements about a rape claim based on the woman's past sexual history, number of partners, what she was wearing, etc.

But what it really did was divorce things from reality. Rape is sometimes just about power, or just about humiliating the other person via sexual assault. Most times, most rape, which occurs between people who know each other it is about sex. It might also always be about 'power' since forcing someone to do something they don't want to is inherently a power trip no matter what it is you're forcing them to do. But most rape victims are young women in their teens and twenties, raped by young men in their teens and twenties. Divorcing the desire for sex, even if forced, from the act of rape is illogical.

duke09parent said...

I find the disussion over the attempted choice of race of the dancers amusing. One could speculate that the hosts either were not attracted to black women, were so enthralled with black women's sexuality that they didn't trust themselves to see them in provacative dances, or were conscious of what their non-attending classmates might think about them if word got out black strippers attended to the predominantly white team.

Over at Yolanda's blog (www.genderracepower) it was asserted that the players asked for black strippers and that proved they were white supremicists because they were following in the footsteps of their great-grandaddy slave owners, lusting after and taking black women sexually. When someone pointed out that the players asked for non-black dancers, another poster said THAT proved they were racists because they were repelled by black women. It was a great example of what we have seen as the true believers in CGM's rape--- the conclusion (rape, racist whites) dictates the interpretation of the facts, no matter how diametrically opposed versions are.

Anonymous said...

2:32

A fair reading of the crime stats broken down by race would have to lead one to seriously question whether non whites were not being targeted by their race by blacks.

The disparity of black on white crime vs. white on black crime is too great.

But this discussion is verboten. You won't read it in the media and you won't hear it from the government or the police, the closest the police will ever come is 'high crime area' which is the new code for 'minority neighborhood'. Indeed, you have to work pretty hard to get the DOJ stats broken down by race.

The refusal to admit the how far the black community has broken down, and how rampant violent crime and racism are is the key reason why it isn't going to change. We can poor billions more money into the black community and it isn't going to change the dynamic that is at play.

Anonymous said...

Any group which thinks that the path to success in America is to get the federal government to take care of you should check out the American Indian.

Anonymous said...

10:08 says:

"Esquire, you should consider posting less and thinking more."

A post without thought tends to be an ad hominum.

"What do suggest affirmative, action for those young males who have been subjected to (oh, horror) one recess a day?"

Thanks for the suggestion, but I'll pass. The answer is that boys at a younger age need three recesses a day, and their learning style is by doing, not sitting around. That's great for girls, terrible for boys. There are volumes of material written on the subject, but because they do not reflect affirmative action for girls and cater to their learning style, they have been ignored.

-Esquire-
-Maryland-

Anonymous said...

m.simon sez ...


Whites use drugs at a rate about 50% above blacks. They participate about equally in the drug trade. Blacks do more of the street trade. Thus they are easier to catch.

With white use 50% higher than black use why are black neighborhoods war zones and white neighborhoods untouched?


The frequency of the allele for the higher rate metabolism of alcohol in the white population is much higher than in the black population. This same allele also affects the metabolism of some other addictive drugs.

So, alcohol and some drugs stay in the system for far longer for many more blacks that whites, thus affecting behavior in blacks much more than in whites.

Anonymous said...

Oh please, the reason nobody gets recess anymore is because teachers can no longer teach the same amount of material in the same timeframe as they could 30 years ago. So, we need fewer recesses, art classes, longer school days and longer school years.

It has nothing to do with girls vs. boys, but everything to do with wrongheaded attempts by the educational bureaucracy to improve test scores.

The idea that recess was cut as affirmative action for girls is just as ridiculous as thinking anybody raped our favorite Durham stripper.

Anonymous said...

Rent a film. Sad tp see the NAACP reduced to this. The current black leadership has failed the black community. When people like Bill Cosby and Rev. Jesse P. try to talk, they are shouted down.

Anonymous said...

10:27: Actually I'm part of the group that figures men are just getting screwed by a society that caters to women and forces them to prove their innocense if accused of rape. I also think society wants women to succeed, pushes it as a point, but does so at the expense of male students.

Now, I find that there is small portion of women called "femi-nazis" that want to become a force of oppression.

Some of them teach at Duke.

-Esquire-
-Maryland-

Anonymous said...

2:52 - Wrong. The reason recess has been cut is because of liability issues, coupled with a wish to keep children in their seats.

Great for little girls, terrible for little boys.

-Esquire-
-Maryland

Anonymous said...

msimon - you are taking a libertarian view on the drug problem that has some attractive angles, but these views just don't fit on this board. The prohibition problem is a complex one that well transcends race. And it doesn't further probative notion to refer to matters just as the "drug" problem. Clearly, even if prohibition minded, we would not want to treat PCP users and distributors like pot users and dealers (or even heroin users) - PCP users can go stark raving mad and out of control - making others in their way victims of their violent behavior as well as themselves. Look, a regulated "illegal" drug market may have its benefits - the jury is out on jurisdictions that have tried it - some in Europe found the negative externalities posed as many, as not more costs as those incurred with prohibition. In sum, its a topic, although not without merit, that is pretty far afield from the topic of how deal with an obvious incident of extortion and delusion by racial opportunists.

Anonymous said...

2:52 - Wrong. The reason recess has been cut is because of liability issues, coupled with a wish to keep children in their seats.

Great for little girls, terrible for little boys.

-Esquire-
-Maryland

Years ago when we boys all had pocket knives and played rough games during recess, there were no liability issues, counselor. :-)

Anonymous said...

Sorry, Esquire, I do not believe that men in our society are 'oppressed' by women any more than I believe that blacks in our society are failing because of white racism.

Anonymous said...

3:06 - There weren't waivers for liability either. Seems a pretty simple thing to preserve recess, yet the lazy beaurocrats won't do it.

Might be a good time to start really examining single sex education again. That's one possible answer.

-Esquire-
-Maryland-

Anonymous said...

3:09 - Then you haven't been reading the facts of this case very closely. If these guys were normal joes, they would already be sentences for a crime they did not commit. Take a good look at the Innocense Project's stats for more information.

And the femi-nazi cadre of Karla Holloway wannabes would be beaming with joy.

-Esquire-
-Maryland-

Anonymous said...

I'm all for that, bring back single sex education and school uniforms!

I do agree w/you that boys and girls learn differently, socialize differently and mature and different rates.

Just don't see any 'oppression' of boys at the expense of girls as part of the feminist conspiracy

M. Simon said...

anon: 2:59PM,

William L. Anderson, has discussed this very aspect of the case on this board and agrees with me. Because of drug prohibition's focus on blacks vs whites (blacks are easier to catch) they feel picked on. Bill and I both think that ending prohibition will do a lot to improve race relations.

This case is a nexus of a bunch of severe institutional problems. If we don't get to the bottom of ALL of them they will come back to bite us again and again.

=========

You know it never occured to me that FDR and the wets who won election under the Democrat banner in Nov 1932 were libertarians.

Thanks for clueing me in.

====================

Speaking of clues:

The NIDA says Addiction Is A Genetic Disease.

I have been unaware of the ability of police to cure or ameliorate genetic diseases. Perhaps you have a link?

Anonymous said...

The Innocence Project has nothing to do with this case, since every exoneration by the group has been as a result of DNA...not 'no DNA' as we have here, but 'DNA from someone other than the convicted person' and those convictions all came from an era when either there was no DNA testing or it was so crude that it couldn't be done on the small samples or wasn't able to isolate specific profiles.

The only reason this case didn't die in April is because the alleged victim was black and she accused white guys. Any other combination of races and ethnicities would have resulted in no prosecution.

Anonymous said...

3:15 - Oppression of boys for the betterment of girls would be a bit more to the point. How about the neglect of boys in favor of girls, is that better?

-Esquire-
-Maryland-

Anonymous said...

Esquire

No. I think what you have is an overall trend toward longer hours, more structured time overall because in my humble opinion the schools are now trying to compensate for the parents, who used to check homework, know teacher's names, etc. etc. That level of interest and knowledge no longer exists in many households.

The result has been more structure. The fact that structure is easier for girls to deal wtih than boys is a by product. The structure has been imposed to improve test scores, not to make life better and easier for girls or improve girls scores.

Anonymous said...

3:18 - Wrong again. Many are based upon false confessions in cases which totally lacked physical evidence. Others are based on false reports of rape in the first place. The DNA merely reaffirmed that the man accused was known to the accuser, but his DNA was not present.

-Esquire-
-Maryland-

M. Simon said...

Anon 3:18PM says:

The Innocence Project has nothing to do with this case, since every exoneration by the group has been as a result of DNA...not 'no DNA' as we have here, but 'DNA from someone other than the convicted person' and those convictions all came from an era when either there was no DNA testing or it was so crude that it couldn't be done on the small samples or wasn't able to isolate specific profiles.

But wait weren't 5 other men's deposits found in or on the clothing of the alleged victim?

Maybe they have the wrong guys. Oh. Wait. I remember. Shortly after this fact was announced rape charges were dropped. Coincidence you ask? Well maybe.

Anonymous said...

3:21 - The result is still the same under either analysis. Boys are being left behind. With structure come rules, often absurd in their application. A six year old gets accused of sexual harassment. The hobgoblin of little minds rears its head. Such "structure" is based on a worldview that women require formal protection from men, even 6 year olds from other 6 year olds.

Boys profit from structure in a different way. The structure involves how they learn at a younger age. Boys learn best by doing. Want to teach a boy structural engineering? Give him building blocks and teach him while he visualizes it as he does it, in a group. Throw in rough play, and you have created a perfectly structured male-friendly learning environment.

Of course, you can't have that with girls, because the nasty little boy might whack her in the head with the building block, and hug her during recess.

-Esquire-
-Maryland-

Anonymous said...

The DNA merely reaffirmed that the man accused was known to the accuser, but his DNA was not present.
--------------

What? How could DNA testing 'reaffirm' the man was known to the accuser if his DNA was not present????

I've read a lot about The Innocence Project exonerations and you are simply misrepresenting the facts to fit your agenda that false rape reports are common.

In almost all if not ALL of the cases of rape, the rape reports were those of STRANGER RAPES, where the woman did not know the rapist, and the wrong man was convicted. The man never used the consent defense, or the 'she's lying about me' defense because he was the wrong man, not the man who did rape the victim.

The DNA testing proved that the DNA found from the rape kit did not match that of the man convicted and that he was not the rapist. If that's what you call a false rape report no wonder you think they're rampant.

In fact, in some of The Innocence Project exonerations the DNA did not match the man convicted but did match someone else, usually another convicted felon serving time for, yep, rape.

Anonymous said...

3:29

You are presupposing the woman doesn't have another explanation for the other DNA found on and in her. I believe she does, they were her customers.

This is very different from a DNA exoneration where semen was found in a rape victim. A man was arrested based on either looking like the real perp or being in neighborhood. He was wrongly convicted.

New DNA testing shows that the semen found in the rape victim was not from him, he is not the rapist. That doesn't equate to there was no rape.

M. Simon said...

3:34PM,

Uh, you mean the alleged victim was a ho? She has never admitted to that and your jumping to conclusions is presumptuous. She could have been at a swingers party.

Well any way thank the maker she wasn't raped. By any one.

Anonymous said...

3:31 - Are yoy actually trying to argue that false claims of rape are rare? False reports of rapes go from 8% as reported by the FBI, to as high as 41% in another study I saw. It is not uncommon at all, and rape is by far the greatest, most lied about crime in existance.

I can show you one case that is definitely false, in any event.

As for the Innocence Project, you have read, I have litigated. For false claims that lead to rape conviction:

http://cc.msnscache.com/cache.aspx?q=5826453439918&lang=en-US&mkt=en-US&FORM=CVRE

It happens all the time.

-Esquire-
-Maryland-

Anonymous said...

m. simon

There are only two choices for the other DNA.

A) It came from consensual sex that she has explained to the police.

B) It came from the 'real' rapists and the police have failed miserably in their investigation by not seeking out the identity of the 'real' rapists.

But you are correct, I stand corrected, she may have been having sex for fun with many partners rather than for money. My bad.

Anonymous said...

3:43 - She told the police she had no sexual relations for a period prior to the March false event.

The DNA shows not only that no DNA was present from the accused, or anyone else on the Lacrosse Team, but that she also lied to the police.

Get the following through your head - She was never raped.

-Esquire-
-Maryland-

Anonymous said...

Esquire,

The FBI and the Department of Justice list "unfounded' rape claims at 8 percent, this includes rape claims that were false AS WELL AS that were not pursued for other reaons. It is not accurate to say that all 8% are false.

There is one study from approximately 20 years ago, the Kamen study that you cite. The result have never been replicated, the study sample was 109, which is below the threshold [300] for application/generalization to the wider population.

There are also old military reports that are used, but since the military has been hauled before Congress for its pathetic and hostile treatment of rape victims and the most recent annual surveys of military personnel show the same rate of rape 20-25% as similar aged civilian populations.

Therefore, there is NO EMPERICAL evidence that supports the idea that false rape is common, epidemic or that anything but a small, small minority of rape claims are false.

I am not saying women never lie, of course they do, but false rape is not the huge problem you make it out to be.

I understand that you are well respected on this blog. I think you have some seriously problematic and negative attitudes toward girls and women overall, but I will bow out here.

You are distorting The Innocence Project exonerations related to rape and you are talking about false rape as 'common' but you have no data that backs it up except one very small and very old study.

I have cited on this blog numerous other studies that ALL show approximately the same range 3-6% of false rape claims.

Even at 20%, which is ridiculously high, it would mean that 80% of rape claims are true and the prosecution and conviction rate is nowhere close to 80%. Obviously then, the reality is that guilty men are getting away with rape every day.

Anonymous said...

Um, I am 3:34 and I know she was never raped. My point was explaining that it may feel good to say 'look for the five other guys' but that in reality, though she did lie it is most likely that she has since explained where the other male DNA came from and her explanation has been consensual sex, which is why the police are not looking for the DNA donors.

Please don't confuse an ability to empathize and understand the significant problem of rape with a belief in this false accuser.

Anonymous said...


There are also old military reports that are used, but since the military has been hauled before Congress for its pathetic and hostile treatment of rape victims and the most recent annual surveys of military personnel show the same rate of rape 20-25% as similar aged civilian populations.


Are you saying that one fifth to one quarter of all women I meet have been raped?

I know a lot of females, and have plenty of female relatives (indeed, there are three females in my immediate family and only one male) and I do not know one female who has given any indication that she has been raped.

I find the numbers you quote very hard to believe.

Anonymous said...

4:04

Ask them, you might be surprised what you find out.

Multiple college surveys and the military's surveys over the past 2-3 years all show the same rate, betwen 20-25% for women are the victims of attempted or completed rape.

It doesn't translate into 20-25% of the population as a whole since most rape victims are under 25, almost half of victims are under 18...so if you make it out of college without being raped, then the chances of a rape happening go down dramatically.

I'm only aware of one state survey and that was Utah or Nevada and they found that 1 in 8 women residing in their state had been victims of completed or attempted rape.

Anonymous said...

Dukeparent09 You need to remember that you cannot pick on Prof. Holloway, if offends her colleague, Prof Gustafson. She is a study all by herself for reverse racism.

Anonymous said...

Here are the links

Survey of sexual assault in military academies

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/annearundel/bal-md.ar.assault17jan17,0,6978178.story?coll=bal-local-headlines
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48335-2005Mar18.html

Active duty military and veteran victims of sexual assault

http://www.ncdsv.org/images/House%20Subcommittee%20Examines%20Sex%20Assault%20in%20the%20Military.pdf

College sexual assaults

http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/182369.pdf

huesofblue said...

4:09 –

I agree that the number of rapes and sexual assaults in applingly high and that a substantial number go unreported. But I’m also very skeptical of the surveys that show 1 in 4 or 1 in 3 woman as victims. One of the reasons these numbers are so high has to do with the way the information is gathered and the way these surveys define rape.. I have a vague recollection of reading that the question “Have you ever been raped?” yields a significantly smaller percentage of yes answers than questions like “Have you ever been pressured into having sex when you did not want to?” or “Have you ever had sex when you were too intoxicated to refuse consent?” ect. Those aren’t the actual questions, but I think a lot of the questions that yield the 30% figures are along those lines.

hman said...

I think that the "girls gone wild " scene, where girls offer sex in order to get a date, is a relevant part of the Duke Lax story.
And it is indeed driven by a certain type of demographic imbalance, but it is not just about numbers. Women, young ones especially, want to date a guy with more success and mastery than themselves. Colleges these days are packed with young women with a lot of success in their background and fewer and fewer young men with the same. Indeed, this has been the outcome eagerly sought by the feministic educational gulag.
High profile sports heroes like Lax team members are therefore among the blessed. However, the average freshman geek tends to be invisible to most women in this setting. If that geek never gets his own good times later on, he can turn bitter and the temptation to get "even" in later life might be overwhelming.
That is a vibe I hear in the comments of the male gang of 88ers.

AMac said...

anon 3:51pm --

Perhaps you are not the "anonymous" who was discussing false rape stats on the Duke Law School Panel thread. The two conversations (there and here, above) don't exactly match.

Here's my 1:44pm comment from that thread (edited), as it is relevant here.

Anon 12:31, you linked a 136-page study from the UK Home Office in support of the idea that false charges of rape are a miniscule problem, perhaps 3% of the total. The relevant material is Table 4.2 (pg. 56 by PDF numbering) and pages 62-69.

Of 2,284 rapes, police recorded 216 "false charges," or 8%. These authors re-evaluated the reports and shrunk that to 67 cases, or 3%.

I think you have mixed up two concepts:

1. What percentage of cases can be known to meet a rigorous, positive definition of "false accusation"?

2. What percentage of cases are due to false accusations?

#1 can be answered; here it is between 3% and 8%. #2 can only be guessed at, unless you insist that absence of evidence means evidence of absence--at least when it comes to rape charges.

The concern of these authors is with the victims of rape, and with the failure of the criminal justice system to convict most rapists. That some small number of men might end up in prison on the basis of false charges is of no great import to them.

Perhaps this is an appropriate stance. In any event, we know that the crime of rape encompasses a range of circumstances. In most cases, it is obvious that the victim indeed was coerced into involuntary sex acts. But in a sizeable minority of cases, it is not so clear.

However, the Home Office authors imply that the 92% (or 97%) of rape reports that cannot be rigorously placed into the "false accusations" category therefore cannot be false accusations.

My own interpretation would be that the report's lower bound for false accusations is somewhere between 3% and 8% of police reports. To that must be added some of the cases in other categories: some proportion of the subset of those cases that lack all of the following: confession, evidence of violence, evidence of coercion or threat or drugging, compelling testimony by the victim or third parties.

I don't know what that number is; this Home Office study made no effort to explore the subject. An estimate that 6% to 12% of rape claims are false strikes me as consistent with the data that it presents.

Michael said...

> The FBI and the Department of Justice list "unfounded' rape claims at
> 8 percent, this includes rape claims that were false AS WELL AS that
> were not pursued for other reaons. It is not accurate to say that all
> 8% are false.

The FBI aggregates information. If you've ever managed a data
warehouse, you'd know that a big problem is consistency and quality of
the data feeds that you get. You have people doing data entry around
the country with varying levels of training on how to do it or you may
have automated feeds from local systems that convert their data to a
format that the data warehouse requires.

At any rate, the FBI's 8% quote is an aggregation of data without
research-quality methodologies provided.

The other issue with the FBI is that their own DNA data suggests that
far more are innocent. There were links in last night's blog entry
that you would do well to go through.

And I didn't see any data on the conviction rates from the FBI report.

> There is one study from approximately 20 years ago, the Kamen study
> that you cite. The result have never been replicated, the study sample
> was 109, which is below the threshold [300] for
> application/generalization to the wider population.

Yet the quality and documentation of the research is unmatched by what
the FBI has put out.

> There are also old military reports that are used, but since the
> military has been hauled before Congress for its pathetic and hostile
> treatment of rape victims and the most recent annual surveys of
> military personnel show the same rate of rape 20-25% as similar aged
> civilian populations.

> Therefore, there is NO EMPERICAL evidence that supports the idea that
> false rape is common, epidemic or that anything but a small, small
> minority of rape claims are false.

I would suggest you review the posts from last night. Esquire may have
the patience to spoonfeed but I don't.

> I am not saying women never lie, of course they do, but false rape is
> not the huge problem you make it out to be.

You just stated that there is NO EMPIRICAL evidence to support the
idea that false rape is common (which I disagree with) and then you
just state your personal opinion as fact with nothing to back it up.

> I understand that you are well respected on this blog. I think you
> have some seriously problematic and negative attitudes toward girls
> and women overall, but I will bow out here.

He's well respected as he presents clear ideas with compelling
arguments. The rest of your paragraph is ad hominem.

> You are distorting The Innocence Project exonerations related to rape
> and you are talking about false rape as 'common' but you have no data
> that backs it up except one very small and very old study.

1) "I will bow out here"
2) Review the posts on the topic from last night

> I have cited on this blog numerous other studies that ALL show
> approximately the same range 3-6% of false rape claims.

Read the posts last night for the sources of those studies.

> Even at 20%, which is ridiculously high, it would mean that 80% of
> rape claims are true and the prosecution and conviction rate is
> nowhere close to 80%. Obviously then, the reality is that guilty men
> are getting away with rape every day.

The FBI data on false claims are those that are obviously false.

You can have a claim that is false that isn't reflected in this
category.

And no, it would not mean that 80% of rape claims are true. Examine
closely what the statistics are saying and then try to determine
what they don't say.

huesofblue said...

i just took a quick look at the College sexual assaults survey that 4:27 posted. Most of the questions seem to be legitimate, but some of them just aren't:

"Since school began in fall 1996, as anyone made or tried to make you have sexual intercourse or sexual contact when you did not want to by simply being overwhelmed by someone’s continual pestering and verbal pressure?"

or this one:

"Since school began in fall 1996, as anyone made or tried to make you have sexual intercourse or sexual contact when you did not want to by making promises of rewards, such as raising a grade, being hired or promoted, being given a ride or class notes, or getting help with coursework from a fellow student if you complied sexually?"



I'm sorry, but blowing someone for a ride or class notes doesn't make you rape victim, it makes you a whore. In my mind questions like these two really undermine the validity

M. Simon said...

4:09PM,

If you accept that there are about 200K rapes a year and the target population is 15 to 19 year old females. There are 20 million in that category. That means a 1% chance if rape per year that gives a total of 5% chance (if no woman gets raped twice). The 20 - 25% figure was correct a number of years ago, but the incidence of raped has dropped by a factor of 4 since then.

bill anderson said...

Simon is right. I have written about the Drug War, including a piece with Gene Callahan on the Drug War and racial profiling in Reason Magazine in 2001:

http://www.reason.com/news/show
/28138.html

I am not someone who recommends people take drugs, but I also believe that this war, like Prohibition, ultimately creates far worse results than anything that would come from legalized drugs. It has been a while since drivers of beer trucks shot at each other.

Anonymous said...

So.

The FBI says 8%, including non false but unfounded cases, so 8% would be the highest possible rate.

The UK study says 3-8% of reports are false.

The majority of The Innocence Project exonerations are about identity not about whether or not a crime occured, so it doesn't belong in this discusion.

That leaves us with a high of 8% false rape reports, and 92% rape reports that are true.

Is 8% what you call comon. Or is the FBI and the British government not considered a viable source for data on rape?

Anonymous said...

4:43

You're right, it looks like the 20-25% rates for college students may be from older studies, also looks like the military and military academy rates have dropped in the last 2-3 years.

M. Simon said...

Here are some incidence of rape stats showing rape incidence declining by a factor of 4 or 5 since 1973.

Anonymous said...

re race of strippers

Asian and Caucasian man have been phsically repulsed by African women dating at least to the days of Herodotus, probably before that.

I could tell you tales of directors, choreographers, photographers, lingerie designers...Anyone getting a woody looking at Trra Banks?

Just curious.

The lacrosse players' desires were based in biology and aesthetics.

RP

Anonymous said...

Oh I don't know, I don't think most white guys would kick Halle Berry out of bed.

It's an irrelevant detail, no matter what strippers the boys ordered they would be accused of racism. When it was believed they ordered blacks, that was racist. When its now believed they wanted a white and a latina, that's racist.

I would say ordering strippers is sexist and immature, but has nothing to do with racism.

Anonymous said...

Esquire - your bizarre ideas on the education of children are as goofy as Karla Holloway's ideas of race. You have no evidence whatsoever on which to base those statements. Where do you get this that boys need to fidget more than girls? On your theory it's a miracle that a young man makes it through school successfully. There are a lot of important issues to address in education - innate intellectual differences, the demise of vocational training, over exposure to TV, cultural laziness, shameful educational theories from university education departments, the overemphasis of low end college degrees, to list a few. Your conspiracy theory isn't going to make the list. You're a lawyer? How did you sit still long enough?

Anonymous said...

Unfortunately the drug prohibition is not going to go away, not in our lifetime or our children's lifetime, maybe never.

Hopefully, the results of the 80s and 90s drug laws that filled prisons full of non violent offenders has, is and will continue to mitigate the damage by moving toward treatment not incarceration.

That is the best we can hope for, given the state of the 'culture wars' at present.

M. Simon said...

4:56PM,

I just hate those strippers for exploiting those sexist immature boys.

It is a disgrace.

They should be exploiting sexist mature men.

AMac said...

anonymous 4:46pm wrote:

> The UK study says 3-8% of reports are false.

Anon chooses not to address what I wrote at 4:36pm. Or what others have written on this thread on the other sources of data and analysis.

Stubbornness or comprehension may be an issue. With so many anonymouses commenting, I can't even figure out who's on first any more.

nifong's hat trick said...

In regard to Addiction being genetic:
If there is a gene that makes someone lift a drink to their mouth or inject drugs into their veins, then would there also be a gene that could make a woman addicted to falsely accusing men of rape? Blaming "behaviors" on genetics is just a way of not taking responsibility for one's actions

Anonymous said...

M. Simon

Please don't twist my words. Yes, I think hiring strippers is sexist. I think stripping, watching strippers, hiring strippers getting and lap dadnces and giving lap dances degrades women and is sexist.

Nowhere in that sentiment is the idea that the strippers were exploiting the boys. But, matter of fact, they DID exploit them since they took their money and didn't perform the service they were paid for, instead, they got mad, created a sign, started a fight, called the cops and to top it off, one of them made a false claim of rape.

Michael said...

re: 4:46

> The FBI says 8%, including non false but unfounded cases, so 8% would
> be the highest possible rate.

1) The FBI is aggregating data collected from other agencies.
2) The 8% is stuff that they could determine was false.
3) That they could only determine 8% doesn't imply that the false
rate isn't much higher. But only what they could determine.
4) The FBI's own DNA data indicate a much higher rate of false
accusations.
5) Try to understand the data you look at.

> The UK study says 3-8% of reports are false.

Please post a link to the UK study.

> That leaves us with a high of 8% false rape reports, and 92% rape
> reports that are true.

If you keep repeating it, that doesn't make it true.

> Is 8% what you call comon. Or is the FBI and the British government
> not considered a viable source for data on rape?

In the case of the FBI, you are misusing the data.

M. Simon said...

4:59PM,

Treatment is better than prison. However, treatment is a sham.

Click on the bit on the CB1 receptor at this page to find out why:

PTSD and the Endocannabinoid System

Pain memories (which cause people to take pain relievers) decay at a rate determined by genetics. There is nothing that can be done about it as far as we know.

Best bet: put chronic useers under a doctor's supervisioin and see that they get the pain relief they need.

Anonymous said...

5:02

I already answered you on the other thread, and I have no reason to re answer you here since nothing you say do I disagree with.

Even if I agree with your extrapolation of false rape up to 12%, that hardly qualifies as common, since it still leaves 88%, even by your standard, as legitimate rape claims.

What I find stubborn is a refusal to credit the FBI and UK studies as authoritative, since they do not support the idea of rampant false rape complaints, but rather resort to other, smaller, much more dubious 'studies' that tell you what you want to hear.

The refusal to believe legitimate government numbers because they don't show a high enough false rape rape is NO DIFFERENT than the people who refuse to believe this woman is a false accuser becuase they want her claim to be true.

Anonymous said...

Michael,

DNA exonerations are not evidence of false rape complaints they are evidence of convicting the wrong person for a crime that did occur.

You are the one that doesn't seem to understand the data.

If you want to disbelieve the FBI's 8% rate and simply believe that there are more false rape rates out there that weren't included or can't be proven, hey have at it. It isn't in the data, though. It is what YOU think.

I think that false rape is not common and there is tons of data that back me up.

You think false rape reports are common and all you can do is say that 'it isn't in the data'

M. Simon said...

Anon 5:03 PM,

My point was rather subtle so I'm not surprised it passed over you.

You are not going to fix biology. Men and women have been exploiting each other over biology since - well a very long time.

I condemn neither the boys nor the strippers (as a class - I see no sexism - I see the interplay of biology).

However, your second paragraph is spot on.

Anonymous said...

I happen to like strippers. They are very hard working and not well compensated. Some are extremely intelligent but were usually not well directed in their formative years.

They satisfy basic erotic needs which are biologically embedded in our brains.

All this feminist whooey is an attempt to deny the reality of sexuality and substitute something a lot less pleasant.

M. Simon said...

nifong's hat trick,

The genetic part is only half. The other part is trauma like being raped as a child. Here is a bit about a doctor who looked at female heroin users to see if he could find something in common about them.

Heroin

Basically the drug war is a persecution of the traumatized.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, I find stripping degrading. We should legalize prostituion and be done with it. That way 'biological' needs can be satisfied, economic needs can be satisfied and no one has to be publicly degraded.

M. Simon said...

5:17PM,

Richard Feynman liked strippers.

I do to. If you don't come on to them like a "John" they can be very interesting to talk to.

Michael said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Stripping is a form of prostitution. So I fail to see your point.

Anonymous said...

Years ago, the people in the condo above us in Vegas were having a female pre wedding party. They had a male stripper - gotta tell you, it was a lot of fun. We were watching through the windows. Not clear to me that it was degrading. This guy stripper was a lot cuter than Crystal.

Anonymous said...

Stripping, like pornography is publicly displayed sexuality for the gratification of an audience.

Prostitution is the buying and selling of sex between two people, with the 'transaction' usually occuring in private. Thus, prostitution doesn't publicly degrade women or contribute to the idea that women are sex objects and closet sluts.

Michael said...

> If you want to disbelieve
> the FBI's 8% rate and simply
> believe that there are more
> false rape rates out there
> that weren't included or
> can't be proven, hey have at
> it. It isn't in the data,
> though. It is what YOU
> think.

The burden of proof is to prove that a rape occurred. The statistics presented do not do that. The FBI 8% number is a statistic. If you have research, that's another story.

The DNA numbers are high enough that they should affect false claims rates unless you believe that the police deliberately try to convict the wrong person on a consistent basis.

Anonymous said...

I was a student of Mr Feynman and am not surprised in the least. He was a great man and some strippers are great friends of mine.

Michael said...

> What I find stubborn is a
> refusal to credit the FBI
> and UK studies as

The FBI numbers aren't studies. They are simply statistics. Rolled-up aggregate data. With all of the data that this entails.

Anonymous said...

5 27
puh-leeze
That is just silly. Get some stripper friends. You may find you like them

Anonymous said...

m simon

"Richard Feynman liked strippers."

You have a neurotic attachment to links. You should try calming down and reading a book. So what if Richard Feynman liked strippers. What do you do, follow important people around to see what they like and dislike, and then jump on board.

Anonymous said...

The burden of proof is to prove that a rape occurred.
--------------

Are you really arguing that every rape that is reported which doesn't end in a guilty verdict was "false"? I can't believe you actually think that.

Burden of proof is not the same as being 'true' they are separate issues, since many crimes occur but cannot be proven. I think Robert Blake shot his wife, but he was acquitted because the case did not meet the burden of proof. I also think OJ Simpson killed his wife and that Mark Chmura was guilty of rape, both were acquitted. I further think that Avila was guilty of molesting the two girls, even though he was acquitted of this crime, prior to going on to rape and kill a younger girl.

You are playing games about DNA exonerations. If they arrested and convicted the wrong guy for a legitimate crime that occured...a rape...getting the wrong person does not obviate the fact that a crime did occur, it means the wrong person was charged and convicted. That may count as a false CONVICTION but it cannot count as a false claim of rape.

Anonymous said...

Thanks Bill A - agree with you totally about drugs. To many people in Congress are being paid off to keep the "drug war" going. Get the illegal money out of drugs. They should be paying taxes on their vices like everyone else -look at the nontaxed income on marijunia in the southern states and California. They can have their noses fall off for all I care.

Michael said...

> The refusal to believe
> legitimate government
> numbers because they don't
> show a high enough false
> rape rape is NO DIFFERENT
> than the people who refuse
> to believe this woman is a
> false accuser becuase they
> want her claim to be true.

I'm a trader. You'd have to be stark raving nuts to believe that what passes for government economic numbers bears much relation to reality. Biggest case in point is the CPI. Housing prices, energy prices, medical care prices and education prices have been going through the roof. But we have no inflation.

And how about those NCLB metrics?

If you work in a big company and your boss tells you that your bonus, raise and stock options are dependent on meeting metric A, what are you going to work on? The best interests of the company or metric A?

Anonymous said...

I'm sorry, but blowing someone for a ride or class notes doesn't make you rape victim, it makes you a whore.

Just figured out my second career path - Lewinsky's Cab & Scribe Service Inc.

Michael said...

[If they arrested and convicted the wrong guy for a legitimate crime that occured...a rape...getting the wrong person does not obviate the fact that a crime did occur, it means the wrong person was charged and convicted. That may count as a false CONVICTION but it cannot count as a false claim of rape.]

You are assuming that a crime did occur. And yes, it can count as a false claim of rape if it indeed was a false claim of rape.

Anonymous said...

Oh for the love of god.

Crime statistics are based on crimes reported and adjudicated. They bear little resemblance to ecnomic forecasts.

Surveys are conducted using SOP's designed to get as clean and unbiased a data set as possible. They are 'surveying' real people telling them real facts about their real experiences.

The only alternative would be that we all just believe whatever we want to.

Facts, surveys, data and statistics are all we can rely on in making judgements and predictions.

And, the facts, surveys, statistics and data overwhelmingly correlate with the idea that false rape complaints are rare, not common. You choose to ignore the facts, surveys, data and statistics because that is not the narrative you want to hear. You are no different than Cash Michaels.

Anonymous said...

Whores are also pretty nice I think. It is lawyers who have a bad reputation.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 278   Newer› Newest»