Exactly what is the difference between what happened at Hofstra and

[hedgehog]

what happened at Richmond? It's a serious question. I know the girl in the Hofstra case recanted, but I have to wonder about that. Confronted with testimony that she was a willing participant and cell phone video, she recanted. Did she recant because she lied or because she thought no one would believe her version of events? Her boy friend (in truth a recent casual acquaintance) described her as looking as if she'd had "hot sex". What does that mean? How does someone who has just had hot sex differ in appearance from someone who has just been raped? The cell phone video was described as looking like a porn movie. How could anyone look at the video and tell the difference between a scared woman and a willing woman?

How were the participants and the witnesses at Richmond to know that the girl was unwilling? Yes, she was so drunk as to be semi-comatose, but that also implies she wasn't objecting.

Apparently those involved in Richmond are perceived as gang members while the men at Hofstra were middle class students or had jobs. How much does that change people's perception of the events?

I am not excusing those involved in Richmond, just suggesting that those at Hofstra aren't exactly the innocents they claim to be. situation.

[TheWraith]

1. The girl at Hofstra ADMITTED SHE LIED.

She CONFESSED. The accusation was FALSE. Get over it.

[RaleighNCDUer]

3. Unless, of course, she was frightened into making a false admission.

Intimidation of victims and witnesses is not exactly unheard of.

Just throwing that out there.

[TheWraith]

6. That is bullshit.

Only in the land of people emotionally invested in believing that no one could EVER falsely claim rape could that fig leaf of rationalization. The reality is that it happens all the time. In the Hofstra case, the police had good evidence that she hadn't been raped, which was why they confronted her and why she confessed. Even her boyfriend didn't buy her story. And comparing total bullshit cases like Hofstra and Duke to legitimate cases like Richmond is insulting to real victims.

[Withywindle]

2. Someone who is so drunk they are semi-comatose CANNOT CONSENT

By definition, sex with someone in that state is rape. Some more differences: the girl in the Richmond case was 15 years old. She was also so severely injured she had to be AIRLIFTED in CRITICAL CONDITION. None of these things were true of the Hofstra woman.

The difference between someone who looks "like she's had hot sex" and someone who's been raped, might be, oh, I don't know, maybe looking HAPPY? Like she enjoyed it? Not traumatized in any way?


Why are you still so emotionally invested in needing to believe the Hofstra woman was raped?

[hedgehog]

4. I f you had witnessed these events, would you have been able to tell the difference?

[Withywindle]

8. Um....yes, I think so.

Because it sounds to me like the Hofstra girl was a conscious, active, aware participant who knew what she was doing and was into it! Also, it was only, what four or five guys? perfectly plausible.

That's what porn movies look like, you know. The woman appears to be INTO IT. So when the guy described it as "looking like a porn movie" that's almost certainly what he meant.

Big fucking difference with a train being pulled on an UNCONSCIOUS CHILD who probably needs medical treatment for ALCOHOL POISONING.

[lukasahero]

5. In the articles I have read, the police report the girl in Richmond was beaten

I have to assume that most people are not willing participants to beatings.

Edited to add: I don't know if the girl in the Hofstra situation was beaten.

[TheWraith]

7. The girl in the Hofstra situation was not beaten.

In fact her boyfriend described her after the fact as not looking unhappy at all, but rather looking like she'd just had "hot sex."