mreinman wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:Reviewing the case something will have to give though. Rose and his defendants are stating how they had consensual sex in Rose's home before she left. With details on how she was willing to have sex one by one with different partners while using a dildo on herself. And that after she left they were looking for her to come back to Rose's house to have more intercourse. Rose wanted his guy to pick her up and bring her back to the house. She wanted Rose to come with him which lead to the event at the house which details are unclear on how they entered her house. From Rose's defendants side. The victim opened the door for them. While from the victims side she isn't clear how they entered her house. Things like if they had sex in Roses house first, and who opened the door for the them to enter is critical information. As if they had sex in Rose's house then the victims key witness would have been present. And if that didn't happen then that would destroy Rose's whole case.
One of the victims witnesses has claimed that she had to get the victim out of Roses house and back to her home because she was afraid that they would take advantage of her. One of the defendants is also claiming that he had sex with the victim the day prior to the party as well.
The text messages for when she said that Rose's boy is turning around to pick Rose up to come with him slightly overlaps with the unanswered phone calls from Rose to the woman. Her last 2 text were at 2:03 and 2:09. Which were around the first 2 unanswered calls at 2:05 and 2:12. He texted "we are on our way" at 2:17. At 2:50 he texted "we outside". The span of multiple missed calls from "we outside" is 3 minutes.
You have to put the text messages along side of that. 2:09 she replied that that car was turning around to pick Rose up. So Rose was still home around this time. At 2:17 he texted we on our way. And 2:50 he texted we outside. 2:53 is the last time shown on this image of him trying to call her. So why did he stop trying g to contact her 3 minutes after arrival?
And for someone who was roofied and so plastered that she had to be helped to get insider her home by the taxi. Non of her text to Rose at this time really display that. Not saying she was or wasn't. Just saying that its not on display in her text to Rose.
another thing that will be quite interesting is when did she file the police report. Was it now to protect her identity? Was it a long time ago? Was it recent?
This has not yet been disclosed and curious to see how this went down.
newyorknewyork wrote:Reviewing the case something will have to give though. Rose and his defendants are stating how they had consensual sex in Rose's home before she left. With details on how she was willing to have sex one by one with different partners while using a dildo on herself. And that after she left they were looking for her to come back to Rose's house to have more intercourse. Rose wanted his guy to pick her up and bring her back to the house. She wanted Rose to come with him which lead to the event at the house which details are unclear on how they entered her house. From Rose's defendants side. The victim opened the door for them. While from the victims side she isn't clear how they entered her house. Things like if they had sex in Roses house first, and who opened the door for the them to enter is critical information. As if they had sex in Rose's house then the victims key witness would have been present. And if that didn't happen then that would destroy Rose's whole case.
One of the victims witnesses has claimed that she had to get the victim out of Roses house and back to her home because she was afraid that they would take advantage of her. One of the defendants is also claiming that he had sex with the victim the day prior to the party as well.
The text messages for when she said that Rose's boy is turning around to pick Rose up to come with him slightly overlaps with the unanswered phone calls from Rose to the woman. Her last 2 text were at 2:03 and 2:09. Which were around the first 2 unanswered calls at 2:05 and 2:12. He texted "we are on our way" at 2:17. At 2:50 he texted "we outside". The span of multiple missed calls from "we outside" is 3 minutes.
can you point me to where your read that? Trying to pull it up to see the full text in regards to that.
mreinman wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:mreinman wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:Looks like the UK faithful mostly don't believe her and say that she looks bad.Maybe she looks bad especially with the slut shaming defense in full effect but DERRICK ROSE LOOKS PRETTY AWFUL TOO.
I think you're ignoring many of the obvious problems with how she went about handling this. It could be that Rose did do something wrong in this case but it doesn't help her case that she 1st tried to get money out of him. I think that there is enough evidence to cast doubt on her version of things as well.
Unfortunately that is often the case in a situation where there was an existing consensual relationship. It makes it harder to prosecute such a case. This isn't a simple case from what i've read so far. Until we see all of the evidence and testimony it's impossible to say for sure just what happened.
ok ... so you think that she has cast doubt on herself, got it. What do you think about him? What he did? How he looks? How this would look to you if you were not a big knick fan, and perhaps you were even a woman? Or a mother? Would you be singing the same tune?
Remember, it took 80 woman to bring down Bill Cosby. Why do you think that is/was?
The allegations against Rose sound bad. I'm merely stating the information from both sides, whereas you seem to keep focus on things from her side. If you RE READ what I wrote you may notice that i've never said anything about Rose being guilty or innocent of anything and i've also written my personal disgust for what is reported to have happened in other threads. However, i'm not in a position to say how much is true or false from either side. What I posted above was FACT, that nothing has changed. The investigation was ongoing but no charges had been made. Doe first filed the Civil Suit then later filed the Police Report.
you seem to continuously try to poke holes in her story. That is not a good look and I don't see you doing that with him. Not sure that you even see your own bias.
I don't know if it was full fledged gang rape because I have no idea how drunk she was and if it was too drunk to consent. I have read s lot about this grey area and it is very complicated.
No matter what, I think that what he did that we do know as fact is in itself abominable. Slut shaming her will not help that. Every one of these accusers get slut shamed which is probable why they are so underreported.
Please read this excellent article: https://theringer.com/derrick-rose-rape-...
This part really explains a lot about what is going on here on this board:
Sports are an escape from life’s quotidian problems, so it’s not surprising that fans react with vexation when those problems — representing the real world — intrude. We treat athletes as characters in a story. Market forces turn those characters into brands. When those athletes do something delightful and on-brand — J.R. Smith strutting around shirtless, for example — we’re only too eager to highlight it. When they do something outside of that box, we become annoyed — stick to sports! If they do something bad, more often than not we simply ignore it.
In your many world travels, have you ever met a money grubbing slut? Because they do exist. Not that it has been proven that this girl is one but stop being so naive to think they don't exist. Btw, There is a big difference in not agreeing with ones private lifestyle and saying that person is a rapist. You can't seem to see the difference and quick to do the latter. And again, we live in a country where you are innocent until proven guilty. Which is a good thing, as many years ago, people would be hanging the innocent based on personal beliefs and public opinion.
Yes ... I am sure that there are "money grubbing sluts". Most are not but most who file civil rape charges are accused of this.
I never said that he raped her. I said that what he did was disgusting and he might at best being in a dark grey area of the law in regards to to what is consent (which he did not have any idea about) and what/who is considered clear minded enough to consent.
Many who are quick to defend Rose as knicks fans are quick to put words in my mouth they I never said or wrote.
Also, he may end up not being liable, however, going over to her house with your dudes to do your ex girl when she is slammed, while she again again refused this request is at best despicable/disgusting behavior.
Dunno ... maybe it just that she is a big time slut and she either wanted this finally or she gave of that ... you know ... vibe.
Or perhaps Rose is a gang raping man slut with no respect for women?? Who knows ... right? All possible scenarios.
True that most women that brimg charges of rape are often accused of being too provocative or loose. But we have to treat every case separately. And in this case, her texts are not helping. We also have to keep in mind, most false accusations are money driven. And for the record, I am not defending his actions but rather his right to his day in court and his innocence of her charges until proven guilty.
Innocent of what? Even if he is found not guilty, how about getting a slammed drunk girl to consent to having sex with you and your boys while a this same girl when clear headed, refused again and again and again to have 3 guys bang her?
How come you never mention this? Does it not bother you are cause you to question him and/or his actions?
Innocent of rape!? I have said several times, I don't agree with the behavior. Far cry from I think "they forcefully banged a slammed drunk girl". My point has always been, Let's wait for the facts. Yours seems to be he is guilty based on one persons claim and a questionable sex life. I also point out that the persons making the claim has 21 million reasons to possibly lie.
Fyi
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/17661...
Did these Rose threads get moved to the OT Forum?
Interesting stuff from the Post.
according to a trial brief filed late Tuesday.Former pal Gabriela Chavez will testify that the accuser partied with her in Las Vegas just weeks after the alleged rape, and even said she had consensual group sex with Rose and two friends on Aug. 27, 2013, according to the brief.
Her co-worker Keyana LaVergne will say that the accuser put in a full day of work just hours after she was allegedly assaulted, and showed her colleague photos of sex toys on her computer, Rose’ lawyer Mark Baute says in the brief.
Finally ex-roommate Claudia Carleo will say that she heard no commotion the night of the alleged gang rape and the woman was “smiling” and “happy” the next morning.
An attorney for the woman, who by court order is only named as Jane Doe until the Oct. 4 trial, said the statements in the trial brief are unfair.
http://nypost.com/2016/09/28/derrick-ros...I haven't seen this any place else but I will check the white bronco site.
This case is going to be ugly. Looks like alot of heresay, but Doe's Vegas friend's testimony and Jane Doe's relationship/statements about her attorney don't bode well.
jrodmc wrote:This case is going to be ugly. Looks like alot of heresay, but Doe's Vegas friend's testimony and Jane Doe's relationship/statements about her attorney don't bode well.
It will only get ugly because Rose won't settle. He will want to be cleared entirely and judging on Doe's rep, which will get exposed, he probably will get out of it. While i think it was idiotic for Rose to put himself if this situation in the first place, everything about this case seems like the accuser is just trying to get money from the rich athlete. No matter who is right, wrong, or more wrong, her need to go around interviewing but wanting to remain anonymous at the same time really does not look good at all for her. I think we see this thing slowly unravel for her as her identity and background get brought to light.
Some updates posted on the judge's ruling available on the white bronco site.
Doe’s seeks to prevent Rose from introducing evidence of Doe’s prior relationships or alleged sexual behavior. Rose plans to introduce evidence that Doe previously “required surgery and a four-day hospital stay to remove her tubal pregnancy” that caused the breakup of a previous relationship and that Doe had sexual relationships with at least two other NBA players. Doe argues that these allegations have no relevance and improperly attempt to “assassinate” her character. Rose argues that Doe’s sexual behavior is relevant to her credibility and financial motivations for the lawsuit.[UPDATE: The judge partially granted and partially denied Doe’s request. The judge filed his order under seal so it is unclear what evidence will be allowed and what evidence will be kept out.]
Rose seeks to prevent any references to Doe’s claim that she was drugged on August 26-27, 2013: In the complaint, Doe alleges that “an unknown drug” was placed in Doe’s drink for the purpose of carrying out Defendants scheme to each have sex with Doe. Rose seeks to exclude any reference to possible date rape drugs, arguing that both experts have admitted that there is no evidence that Doe ingested drugs. Doe response accuses Rose’s attorneys of wanting to “take a mulligan” in an attempt to withhold their own expert because he testified that Doe was severely intoxicated the night she was allegedly assaulted by Defendants.[UPDATE: Doe can testify that she felt drugged while testifying at trial.]
Rose seeks to exclude a number of Doe’s exhibits, including the Lady Gaga video: Doe plans on introducing a number of videos, including one of her attending a “Consent is Mandatory” event, one of her watching Lady Gaga’s “Till it Happens to You” Oscar Performance, and one of her acne symptoms. Rose argues that the videos – which were not produced during discovery – are highly prejudicial to him and are “lawyer-manufactured evidence.” Doe responds that the videos are relevant to her emotional state and symptoms after the alleged sexual assault.[UPDATE: The Lady Gag video cannot be shown at trial.]
Doe seeks to prevent Rose from introducing photos of Doe partying in Las Vegas a two weeks after the alleged sexual assault: Rose plans on introducing 35 pictures of Doe partying in Vegas two weeks after the alleged sexual assault. Doe argues that these pictures are irrelevant to whether Defendants “conspired to and committed sexual batter” and that, if allowed to be shown to the jury, the pictures would unfairly prejudice the jury’s view of Doe. Rose responds that the photos are relevant because it shows that Doe “was not too ‘terribly ashamed and embarrassed’ by the events of August 26-27, 2013 to prevent her from partying with her friend in Las Vegas two weeks later.”[UPDATE: Rose may use five photos at trial.]
http://thewhitebronco.com/2016/09/the-de...
