<p>
Certainly no reason to believe her either.</p>
<p>farawayplaces~</p>
<p>It’s rather amusing that you accuse us of displaying “puzzling hatred.” FEW people on this thread have spewed more hatred than you. You’re projecting.</p>
<p>~berurah</p>
<p>^^</p>
<p>"“Few people have spewed more hatred than you”</p>
<p>Glad you’re above personal attack, B.–I could almost read this as such! </p>
<p>–Good day!</p>
<p>P.S. And I am shocked that you say there’s “no reason to believe Kim.” Because she’s black? Because she’s not from the “right” family? She was not bringing any charges. She was just stating facts. Shame.</p>
<p>The email she sent to the NYC public relations firm trying to sell a package of “facts” torpedoes any credibility she might have had. Oh, and her “profession” is somewhat sketchy, too. </p>
<p>The young men, on the other hand, are respected enough to inspire the CEO of Morgan Stanley to extend a very prestigious job offer, right behind JP Morgan reinstating its offer of employment, right behind Brown recruiting one of them for next fall, right behind Duke inviting two of them back to school. And these are just the offers that have come to the attention of the press. Considering that tier one investment banking firms are flooded with far more resumes than open positions to fill, and considering Brown and Duke have many, many times more applicants for admission than seats to fill, that should tell you something about how these young men are perceived by people who really matter, farawayplaces.</p>
<p>faraway, I don’t get how you are insinuating that if anyone doubts Kim Roberts, it is due to her race or family background! The reason to doubt Ms. Roberts is because for one thing, she has a criminal record for stealing money from her job which is not an honest act. I believe her stories in this case had inconsistancies. Also, her initial calls to police from the car or street were not reporting exactly what happened, as she was hiding that she was hired by these folks to do a stripping job. Further, she tried to profit from this case by selling her story to a public relations firm. So, she is not the most credible witness. To infuse race as a reason and to ASSUME anyone here is motivated to judge her credibility due to her race is rather shameful. If she were white, I would have the exact same doubts as to what to believe that she has said. Credibility is judged upon what someone has already said, been truthful or not in the past, and so forth. </p>
<p>But back to some points you made earlier about the three accused Duke players. You describe quite negatively their behaviors that night (not the ones they were charged for). For one thing, you describe many details that I have never read before. I am wondering where you got all those sordid details. Are those factual?</p>
<p>But the main concern I have there is that these THREE GUYS are the scapegoats for anything wrong that SOME players may have done that night. For instance, they bear the brunt of saying “they were town drunks.” We don’t know if those particular young men were drunk. Racial epithets? As bad as those were, I believe it has come out many times that those were not said by THESE 3 men. Two were no longer present in fact. You bring up paying fines for past misdemeanors. Have all three of these guys had charges in the past? I recall reading SOME LAX players have had charges for open containers, noise violations, and so on. But was it any of these three who have had parents pay their fines as you assert? Did these three boys “put things up the womens’ vaginas”? Did these three boys order “the two women to grind their genitals together in mock sex ?” I don’t even know if ANY guys there did those last two things but even if anybody had, there are no accounts that these three men did! These are the three defendants. Are they to take the fall for actions that others may or may not have done? And then you say that they ordered strippers by their race. From what I have read, that is NOT the case and they wanted white strippers and were surprised by who showed up. And were these three boys the ones who did the hiring? It is not fair to accuse three named individuals for actions that perhaps others took and in some of the things you have mentioned, I haven’t heard any accounts that anyone took. Some, yes. </p>
<p>I think most have said that the rowdy drinking party was not good behavior. While I am not condoning it, it was hardly too different from many college parties or spring breaks. Many don’t do this stuff but many do. Doesn’t make it right but it ain’t too unusual. What was more questionnable to me was that the players didn’t have to behave within certain standards to remain on the team. </p>
<p>I am not into the idea of hiring strippers either. I didn’t realize this was common at college parties and had not heard of it, but when the story broke, apparently that happens a lot at some schools and even girls hire male strippers. It is not illegal. It may be immoral. But the boys who watch strippers are not worse than girls who CHOOSE to engage in stripping acts themselves. It is not “clean” behavior. Watching strippers is not the worst behavior I have ever heard of in college, however. (it is something that happens at many bachelor parties for young men about to be married) I think disciplinary consequences, particularly as varsity athletes, should have been in place and enforced. I don’t think their behaviors warranted THIS level of consequences. Some consequences, sure. Those should be in keeping with the level of “offense.” </p>
<p>In any case, I don’t think these three men should take the fall for everything you see as bad about the LAX players. Some have misdemeanors and some behaved badly that night. I’d rather accusations be based on facts and matched up with the names of who did those factual acts and not simply smear Reade, Dave, and Colin. From what it appears, they didn’t do anything more than others and in fact, may have done less…particuarly if two of them left the party soon after the strippers appeared. A lot of people watch porn. Some watch strippers. It ain’t for all folks. But it isn’t a crime. Underage drinking is not a good thing but it is very common for college aged kids. My own kids are in college and occasionally have a drink. They do not get drunk. I don’t have a problem with it. </p>
<p>You surely mentioned a lot of details of what the strippers did and were directed to do and everything. Where did you obtain that information? Were these three boys the ones who did what you are accusing them of? Or are they just lumped in?</p>
<p>Hi farawayplaces and gla.</p>
<p>Welcome Back.</p>
<p>Soozie:</p>
<p>I will admit that I can’t find news stories–so it may have been less reliable blogs–that talked about some of the more salacious sexual goings-on. But I stand by my story that the girls were threatened with a broomstick–Kim is on record in the police report as saying it before she decided to make any money off her plight. The attorney for the LAX boys never denied it. It’s despicable anyway you spin it.</p>
<p>It is also on record that they phoned for strippers saying they were a small party of under 10. This was to avoid having a bodyguard present, required by the agency for over 10. I will always be suspicious that someone there was planning someone criminal–though it may not have been these boys. </p>
<p>1Sokkermom–I’ll take your welcome back. . . in the spirit in which I know it was intended! LOL! But I miss too much on this forum to be “welcomed back”–too busy.</p>
<p>yeah - reality check - the broomstick remark did happen, and all three of our guys were still there at the time. (Not sure what difference it makes, but at least keep your flames grounded in reality, OK?)</p>
<p>Newsweek has a long article on the description of the party, including their alcohol consumption that day, and a reference to the broomstick issue. This article anwers a lot of the questions posed here <a href=“http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18110003/site/newsweek/[/url]”>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18110003/site/newsweek/</a></p>
<p>Who is to say that these THREE boys did any of those things? These are three young men who were wrongly identified in a flawed line up and now they must take the fall for some behaviors possibly attributed to others? For instance, the racial slur about the shirt when she left. I don’t think it was one of these guys who said it based on reports. A poster here says they wanted to hire Black strippers and I believe that was not the case, nor do we know if these three guys had anything to do with hiring them. It is offensive to be accused on this forum of being racist if one doesn’t find Kim credible for valid reasons. The broomstick remark was very crude but the whole circumstance of these girls entertaining with sex toys in itself is rather crude. I think the whole stripping for hire thing is rather immoral and it invites immoral responses. It’s not the greatest on either end of that activity. In terms of drinking, the accuser wasn’t exactly sober herself. Her behaviors were not too good. For the young men who were drinking, their behaviors or language weren’t too good either. I don’t know that the three young men accused, from a very flawed line up and from a very uncredible witness should be the ones to take the fall for every bad thing said or bad behavior that perhaps some others chose to say or do.</p>
<p>EDIT: I cross posted with jym and have not yet read that article.</p>
<p>for example:
</p>
<p>At the risk of violating the copywrite laws, I won’t continue to post quotes fromthe article. But I encourage you all to read it, especially pgs 2-4, which describe the events of the evening, and then see what you think.</p>
<p>This has perhaps been stated before; I haven’t read every page . . .</p>
<p>I was quite impressed with one of the former defendants. Just a good manner and attitude. I recall thinking that his name was the least memorable of the three, just a very standard, common name. And now all I can come up with is . . . Evans. . . he acquitted himself very well on 60 Minutes, and despite his saying that when he dies people will remember this, I really think that his name will not stick in most people’s minds.</p>
<p>During Sunday’s program I thought, you guys, this is your chance to interview for the rest of your life: I hope you realize this. </p>
<p>And then I warned my 19-year-old college freshman son who has just joined a fraternity, as strongly as I could against getting into associations with sketchy people.</p>
<p>
Thank you, Susan. I had no intention of dignifying that unwarranted, erroneous, and pathetic accusation with a response of my own. ~b.</p>
<p>It also is erroneous to say that the LAX players asked for Black strippers. The article posted by jym explains that that is the opposite of the truth, though frankly, this is not new news.</p>
<p>This is playing out as many have speculated. There are some who will NEVER accept the fact that these men are INNOCENT. They have to be guilty of something!</p>
<p>They are horrible horrible men who deserve to be punished for the rest of their lives, period. </p>
<p>I can’t believe we are back on the broomstick theory. This has never been proven factual. We have no idea whether it was said or in what context. Are we to believe a documented liar and convicted criminal? Oh wait, if they said it in some news article, it must be true… :rolleyes:</p>
<p>This is like deja vue all over again.:eek:</p>
<p>I’m wondering if there is a way to improve the system - other than just putting more money into the public defenders office - something beyond the adversarial method. Maybe a second administrative level that keeps innocent people from being prosecuted. Currently it seems that all it takes is a bad investigator paired with a bad prosecutor.</p>
<p>Of course the Duke LAX players - or at least many of them - were not “choir boys.” As is often the case with those who turn out to have been erroneously accused (or convicted), the seductive “logic” of where-there’s-smoke-there’s-fire played a big role in helping to sustain this train wreck of a prosecution in the first place. I still recall the lengthy and thoughtful post by a Duke student in the old thread (bluedevilmike, maybe?) which said, in essence, that when he first heard about this rape allegation, he immediately assumed that it was true in light of the LAX players’ notorious reputation for drunkenness, debauchery, etc.</p>
<p>But at this late date, after these three young men (and their families) have suffered for over a year in ways that are virtually impossible for those of us not in their shoes to appreciate, doesn’t all of this other stuff - drinking, hiring strippers, racially charged taunts going back and forth, a crude and demeaning comment about a broomstick, etc. - seem more than just a little beside the point? If, on the basis of incontrovertible DNA evidence, someone had just been exonerated of a rape after serving several years in prison, would it seem right to ask him as he walked out of prison, “Well, sir, would you at least admit that on the night in question you exercised very poor judgment in drinking to excess and in shouting some very repugnant insults to women when they passed you by on the street?”</p>
<p>1sokkermom: If I read this right the captain’s statements include the broomstick incident.</p>
<p><a href=“http://kerryfoxlive.com/wordpress/?p=7644[/url]”>http://kerryfoxlive.com/wordpress/?p=7644</a></p>
<p>the media exaggerated or simply made up much of the hype on this case–in the process doing a high tech lynching of these men because of their race.</p>
<p>where is the media utrage about christopher newsom and channon christian? two kids murdered in Knoxville.</p>