OT: TMZ - Rose being sued/accused of drugging and gang raping former GF

[flat_eric]

For me consent is a key, key thing in rape cases. Or lack of it.

If somehow, Rose's lawyers are able to show that they were in an ONGOING relationship at the time of the alleged rape then that makes their work a little easier.

On the other hand, the plaintiff has to show that they were NOT in a relationship at the time. Which I think they are already setting up - at least that's the way I read that part of the lawsuit.

bull. Just because you are in a relationship with someone doesn't mean you automatically consent every time your partner engages in intercourse. It's called domestic violence.

What the plaintiff needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that she was drugged and raped. The fact she was in a relationship with Rose will only matter insofar as to whether it was evidently an abusive one.

All this is going to be extremely hard to prove. Rose can fight it tooth and nail to clear his name. But given the time and emotional toll that may take, it's more likely he will settle out of court for an undisclosed fee, which I believe is what she has set out to achieve. Whatever the result, there is no happy ending here for Rose.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[meekrab]

Again, it's a civil suit, "beyond a reasonable doubt" doesn't apply. Criminal law in this country is designed around the ideal that convicting an innocent person should never happen. Civil suits are held to a lower standard because they never result in locking someone up for the rest of their life.

[MAQ]

Btw, do you think Rose's people will have a written response to the complaint soon? I don't see how he can go into the season and expect support from fans without at least putting out his side of the story.

In California a defendant has 30 days to answer a complaint once it is served. Its been filed, but I don't know that its actually been served on Rose. Once he's served properly, he will have 30 days. Though its not uncommon to get an extension of time to respond.

Also, a response can be in the form of a motion to dismiss rather than as an answer to the individual allegations one by one. I don't see what basis there could be to move to dismiss rather than answer, but I'm just telling you the possible options.

I suspect they'll just answer and deny all of the allegations. I would be surprised if you saw detailed factual denials though. Again, as with the oddity of the plaintiff's complaint, it would be unusual to unnecessarily assert detailed facts at an early stage. You don't want to box yourself in. The typical strategy is to simply respond with, for example: "Defendant Rose denies the allegations contained in paragraph 15 of plaintiff's complaint." And just say it over and over and over again after each paragraph. They can always get their side out through the press, like they did already by calling it a false and blatant money grab.

But who knows? Maybe they'll respond in kind with detailed support for the denials. But I certainly wouldn't if it were my case.

I just think he needs to say something more than "I didn't do it" for fans like me to feel comfortable passionately rooting for him on the court again. As big of a fan as I am, I'm not going to believe on pure faith that he's innocent.

Honest question, what more could he do? He was admittedly involved with this woman. It's not like he can say he never had anything to do with her. Short of explaining the relationship and why it ended in some kind of public forum (and I think that's overkill), he really can't do much beyond saying I didn't do it.

[Shill]

back at you too bud. Try reading the full lawsuit. And just imagine if it's true. Think, that's how he was wasting his time when he could've actually been playing basketball for a potential contender.

If the allegations are true, that is the LAST thing that will cross my mind.

[Shill]

What the plaintiff needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that she was drugged and raped. The fact she was in a relationship with Rose will only matter insofar as to whether it was evidently an abusive one.

The standard in civil cases is a preponderance of the evidence, which is over 50%.

It's even more abstract than reasonable doubt. I don't know how she's going to prove that 51% of her rape allegations are true, but that's her cross to bear.

[Indomitable]

back at you too bud. Try reading the full lawsuit. And just imagine if it's true. Think, that's how he was wasting his time when he could've actually been playing basketball for a potential contender.

Done

[Indomitable]

back at you too bud. Try reading the full lawsuit. And just imagine if it's true. Think, that's how he was wasting his time when he could've actually been playing basketball for a potential contender.

If the allegations are true, that is the LAST thing that will cross my mind.

He is so oblivious to the real issue.

[bullsRlife]

In California a defendant has 30 days to answer a complaint once it is served. Its been filed, but I don't know that its actually been served on Rose. Once he's served properly, he will have 30 days. Though its not uncommon to get an extension of time to respond.

Also, a response can be in the form of a motion to dismiss rather than as an answer to the individual allegations one by one. I don't see what basis there could be to move to dismiss rather than answer, but I'm just telling you the possible options.

I suspect they'll just answer and deny all of the allegations. I would be surprised if you saw detailed factual denials though. Again, as with the oddity of the plaintiff's complaint, it would be unusual to unnecessarily assert detailed facts at an early stage. You don't want to box yourself in. The typical strategy is to simply respond with, for example: "Defendant Rose denies the allegations contained in paragraph 15 of plaintiff's complaint." And just say it over and over and over again after each paragraph. They can always get their side out through the press, like they did already by calling it a false and blatant money grab.

But who knows? Maybe they'll respond in kind with detailed support for the denials. But I certainly wouldn't if it were my case.

I just think he needs to say something more than "I didn't do it" for fans like me to feel comfortable passionately rooting for him on the court again. As big of a fan as I am, I'm not going to believe on pure faith that he's innocent.

Honest question, what more could he do? He was admittedly involved with this woman. It's not like he can say he never had anything to do with her. Short of explaining the relationship and why it ended in some kind of public forum (and I think that's overkill), he really can't do much beyond saying I didn't do it.

Seriously, what the hell do you expect from the guy? You're right, all he can do is say, I didn't do it, and the burdens on her to prove that he did do it. Why should Rose go out of his way to prove otherwise??? This was from 2 years ago. It's not like he remembers what the hell he was doing the night he didn't do it. What if was sleeping that night? Because he can't without a shadow of a doubt prove that he was just sleeping that night, you're not gonna support the man? Good for you. It really doesn't matter.

Oh, and this post wasn't directed towards you, MAQ. I'm just adding on to what you said in this post.

[musiqsoulchild]

If Rose wasn't there that night, it should be fairly easy to prove.

- Text messages he sent to friends
- Pics he may have taken that night ( or someone else) while partying somewhere else
- Credit cards used in places that put him geographically out of the range of the alleged crime

That should be fairly easy to prove.

[musiqsoulchild]

For me consent is a key, key thing in rape cases. Or lack of it.

If somehow, Rose's lawyers are able to show that they were in an ONGOING relationship at the time of the alleged rape then that makes their work a little easier.

On the other hand, the plaintiff has to show that they were NOT in a relationship at the time. Which I think they are already setting up - at least that's the way I read that part of the lawsuit.

bull. Just because you are in a relationship with someone doesn't mean you automatically consent every time your partner engages in intercourse. It's called domestic violence.

What the plaintiff needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that she was drugged and raped. The fact she was in a relationship with Rose will only matter insofar as to whether it was evidently an abusive one.

All this is going to be extremely hard to prove. Rose can fight it tooth and nail to clear his name. But given the time and emotional toll that may take, it's more likely he will settle out of court for an undisclosed fee, which I believe is what she has set out to achieve. Whatever the result, there is no happy ending here for Rose.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Rape can happen between any two humans. No question about it.

But, it's MUCH harder to prove that if you are already in the middle of a relationship. Unless there are extensive records of abuse.

[bullsRlife]

If Rose wasn't there that night, it should be fairly easy to prove.

- Text messages he sent to friends
- Pics he may have taken that night ( or someone else) while partying somewhere else
- Credit cards used in places that put him geographically out of the range of the alleged crime

That should be fairly easy to prove.

From 2 years ago? Are you kidding me? I haven't even saved the receipt I got this morning from purchasing gas, and you think Rose is gonna have all that?

And if I'm not mistaken, didn't this happen at night in the morning hours? Why would he have a credit card purchase at that time?

And who the hell still has text messages from 2 years ago? 2 years ago, he probably had an iPhone 5s. He has to have a new phone by now.

[musiqsoulchild]

If Rose wasn't there that night, it should be fairly easy to prove.

- Text messages he sent to friends
- Pics he may have taken that night ( or someone else) while partying somewhere else
- Credit cards used in places that put him geographically out of the range of the alleged crime

That should be fairly easy to prove.

From 2 years ago? Are you kidding me? I haven't even saved the receipt I got this morning from purchasing gas, and you think Rose is gonna have all that?

And if I'm not mistaken, didn't this happen at night in the morning hours? Why would he have a credit card purchase at that time?

And who the hell still has text messages from 2 years ago? 2 years ago, he probably had an iPhone 5s. He has to have a new phone by now.

If for example, his bank transactions show he was in a different state that night - there is NO case.

This is my point.

[bullsRlife]

If Rose wasn't there that night, it should be fairly easy to prove.

- Text messages he sent to friends
- Pics he may have taken that night ( or someone else) while partying somewhere else
- Credit cards used in places that put him geographically out of the range of the alleged crime

That should be fairly easy to prove.

From 2 years ago? Are you kidding me? I haven't even saved the receipt I got this morning from purchasing gas, and you think Rose is gonna have all that?

And if I'm not mistaken, didn't this happen at night in the morning hours? Why would he have a credit card purchase at that time?

And who the hell still has text messages from 2 years ago? 2 years ago, he probably had an iPhone 5s. He has to have a new phone by now.

If for example, his bank transactions show he was in a different state that night - there is NO case.

This is my point.

If that were the case, we wouldn't even be talking about this anymore.

[almanbulls]

If Rose wasn't there that night, it should be fairly easy to prove.

- Text messages he sent to friends
- Pics he may have taken that night ( or someone else) while partying somewhere else
- Credit cards used in places that put him geographically out of the range of the alleged crime

That should be fairly easy to prove.

From 2 years ago? Are you kidding me? I haven't even saved the receipt I got this morning from purchasing gas, and you think Rose is gonna have all that?

And if I'm not mistaken, didn't this happen at night in the morning hours? Why would he have a credit card purchase at that time?

And who the hell still has text messages from 2 years ago? 2 years ago, he probably had an iPhone 5s. He has to have a new phone by now.

You don't need a receipt. If he used a credit card it would show up in bank records. He might have been in Beverly Hills, he works out in Cali. So no way for sure to know what happened unless he happened to be in Chicago that day

[almanbulls]

Actually since this is a lawsuit and not a criminal investigation, no one has looked yet. Beverly Hills Police Department says they are NOT going to launch an investigation. The po-po ain't taking this seriously. That gotta mean something.

[bullsRlife]

If Rose wasn't there that night, it should be fairly easy to prove.

- Text messages he sent to friends
- Pics he may have taken that night ( or someone else) while partying somewhere else
- Credit cards used in places that put him geographically out of the range of the alleged crime

That should be fairly easy to prove.

From 2 years ago? Are you kidding me? I haven't even saved the receipt I got this morning from purchasing gas, and you think Rose is gonna have all that?

And if I'm not mistaken, didn't this happen at night in the morning hours? Why would he have a credit card purchase at that time?

And who the hell still has text messages from 2 years ago? 2 years ago, he probably had an iPhone 5s. He has to have a new phone by now.

You don't need a receipt. If he used a credit card it would show up in bank records. He might have been in Beverly Hills, he works out in Cali. So no way for sure to know what happened unless he happened to be in Chicago that day

Yeah, I know, but if that was the case, we wouldn't even be talking about this anymore.

And I'm sure he was actually around her, or with her at the time she claimed this happened, and that's it. She probably just came up with a day that they were together at a party or something.

[GimmeDat]

I don't know if this has any relevance, but Jo scarcely posts on twitter, and on the 27th when this broke he posted this tweet -

[tweet]https://twitter.com/JoakimNoah/status/636997470103437312[/tweet]

Ambigious enough to be related to anything but one could perhaps presume he's referring to the whole D-Rose situation.

[GetBuLLish]

It's gonna be fun watching this absurd lawsuit get blown to pieces. If I was Rose's attorney, I'd be chomping at the bit to get discovery started. Have an answer filed by Monday and send out discovery requests and subpoenas on Tuesday.

[RedBulls23]

If Rose wasn't there that night, it should be fairly easy to prove.

- Text messages he sent to friends
- Pics he may have taken that night ( or someone else) while partying somewhere else
- Credit cards used in places that put him geographically out of the range of the alleged crime

That should be fairly easy to prove.

From 2 years ago? Are you kidding me? I haven't even saved the receipt I got this morning from purchasing gas, and you think Rose is gonna have all that?

And if I'm not mistaken, didn't this happen at night in the morning hours? Why would he have a credit card purchase at that time?

And who the hell still has text messages from 2 years ago? 2 years ago, he probably had an iPhone 5s. He has to have a new phone by now.

Banks save 7 years of statements. They are required to by law. If there is something on those statements he could pull them up.

I'm sure the phone carrier can go back and look up info on if he made made a call or text around that time and what his location was at the time.

[Vintage]

What -gate are we calling this?

Skypegate?
Traingate?
Rapegate?

I'm not creative enough