Rose found not liable: Update pg. 62

[Adelheid]

Roses low IQ is making this extra unsettling. It actually makes it more difficult to parse out what happened. I mean who doesn't understand the meaning of the word "consent"? This is so messy and his stupidity is not only making it more difficult to establish intent, but could also result in criminal proceedings even if he didn't force himself on her.

Ignorant perhaps, not necessarily stupid. The word consent might not come up in his everyday conversation. And like many young people nowadays he might not be a big reader. But whatever you want to call it, It definitely makes him a target to be manipulated into a bad situation

Well there are street smart people who would not be called literate. But even if he is functionally illiterate his judgment still comes into play and it sounds like it is lacking.

Though I don't see how he could not have been prepared for the meaning of the word consent by his counsel considering it is probably the one word guaranteed to come up in proceedings. If they did not discuss it with him that is practically malpractice. It does sound like he has terrible representation for this case

But even counsel can't hide a client's ignorance when they say stuff like hey we're men. It is basically like putting your neck on the guillotine and saying off with my head please

The counsel still could have prepared Rose for the eventualities during cross-examination; after all, they are attorneys and would know how the line of questioning goes. Reeks of incompetence on Rose's legal team.

[CJackson]

Ignorant perhaps, not necessarily stupid. The word consent might not come up in his everyday conversation. And like many young people nowadays he might not be a big reader. But whatever you want to call it, It definitely makes him a target to be manipulated into a bad situation

Well there are street smart people who would not be called literate. But even if he is functionally illiterate his judgment still comes into play and it sounds like it is lacking.

Though I don't see how he could not have been prepared for the meaning of the word consent by his counsel considering it is probably the one word guaranteed to come up in proceedings. If they did not discuss it with him that is practically malpractice. It does sound like he has terrible representation for this case

But even counsel can't hide a client's ignorance when they say stuff like hey we're men. It is basically like putting your neck on the guillotine and saying off with my head please

The counsel still could have prepared Rose for the eventualities during cross-examination; after all, they are attorneys and would know how the line of questioning goes. Reeks of incompetence on Rose's legal team.

Sure. It would seem that way. Yet in spite of that I'm saying it may not matter if Rose's world view comes out as a crude version of masculine entitlement. It shows Rose thinks it is obvious when it is anything but, so I do think he may be short a few batteries upstairs if his natural instinct is to be so casual about his assumption of sexual prerogative. Even most people considered kind of dumb would have enough sense of self-preservation to not expose such a damning attitude in a rape investigation.

So if Rose is not completely dumb then he lives inside a bubble completely disconnected from most peoples' realities. He literally lacks any capacity to see another person's point of view is what it says to me. And that is not proof, but it sure doesn't help. And even counsel may not be able to sugarcoat that. That is why I'm concerned this will get worse even if he is innocent, because his self-portrayal is tailor made to convict him for rape. He's incriminating himself to some extent already. And if he is guilty, well screw him anyway.

[taikibansei]

Did she ever file a criminal complaint over this alleged incident?

Yes, two weeks ago:

http://www.complex.com/sports/2016/09/derrick-rose-accuser-criminal-charges-civil-case

This Cosby case is setting a precedent where women can come back years later and claim rape. Meanwhile, unless she went to a hospital after the incident, there will likely be no physical evidence available to convict beyond a reasonable doubt or to fully exonerate.

It's long been possible to charge people with rape/molestation for incidents that occurred years ago. Heck, even more than Cosby, look at the Penn State/Jerry Sandusky stuff. Some of those claims were from 10+ years back.

I go back and forth on this issue. On the one hand, yes, I agree with you that often there's insufficient evidence (physical or otherwise) either to convict beyond a reasonable doubt or to fully exonerate. Hence, it becomes at the same time difficult to prosecute and almost impossible to defend. E.g., the infamous Emma Sulkowicz—known mostly for carrying her mattress on campus as a symbol of her burden as a victim and a protest of Columbia’s failure to expel her "rapist"—who for four months after the ostensible rape kept writing the "rapist" to tell him what a great time she had, how much she "loved" him and how soon she wanted to hook up again. Literally, there are six pages of such messages referenced here:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/03/columbia-student-i-didn-t-rape-her.html

and additional discussion here:

http://www.cotwa.info/2015/02/is-mattress-toting-emma-sulkowicz-rape.html?m=1

I'm guessing most people have never heard of this evidence. And then almost eight months after the incident, Emma filed a claim of rape, but "lost" due to a lack of evidence. The system "failed" her, right? Note, though, that the emails and Facebook messages quoted above couldn't be used by the defendant at the university hearing. I.e., the defendant "won" without being allowed to use his most potent evidence--pages and pages of emails from the victim at least implying that the sex was not just consensual, but thoroughly enjoyed. Still, even though the defendant "won," his reputation has been destroyed, potentially forever. (I believe he's suing Columbia, and I hope he wins big time.)

So, yes, the system is imperfect, with abuse possible. Enforcing a time limit for filing such complaints would potentially help put a halt to this. That said, if the victim was your (or my) sister or daughter, I think both you and I would feel far differently on the subject!

I guess the only fair thing to do is to allow for complaints (criminal and otherwise) to be filed even years later, but with the understanding that the evidence bar for these cases cannot/will not be lowered. (And to bring the subject back to Rose, please settle this civil case before your idiot ass goes up on the witness stand, as you're seemingly too much of a moron to be trusted giving evidence in an open court room....)

[gavran]

Why can a woman accuse a man of rape and be anonymus at the same time? Either both are anonymus, or neither. If the accusation turns out fake, Rose's reputation is gone, while she faces no scrutiny? Doesn't seem to equal to me.

perhaps she doesn't want her friends and family to know her temple was used by a group of men.

that happens in many rape cases, and why it takes awhile to just tell someone. its a humiliating act that just devalues you. many go into depression and pick up an addiction to cope with the pain.

Perhaps. Perhaps she just wants to save face because she knows her case is weak. Look, I don't care about Rose at all, he can kick rocks, but in cases like this, the accuser and the accused should be held to the same standards, especially if it is a he said/she said case like this. If Rose gets convicted, he should rot in jail, but if the accusation turns out to be false, she gets to walk away with anonymity? How is that a fair trial? False rape accusations should be punished by law.

[Juggynaut]

http://thewhitebronco.com/2016/09/the-derrick-rose-sexual-assault-trial-primer/

This is a great website for this case but I'm too lazy to read it all.

Text messages between Doe and her former roommate and coworker Keyana LeVergne:
Doe to LaVergne on October 10, 2015: [discussing joint payments] “Ok lets keep it at 90 then thats 6 months. Lol and i can even pay the whole couch off around xmas my dad gives me money not presents for xmas every year. then u just give me payment and since we finally filed against derrick we soon will be will be returning his tv and ill get us a Plasma.”
Doe to LaVergne on October 10, 2015: “I feel bad in many ways for myself and Thomas Brandon and you. I’m the one that kept this lawsuit going and dragged Brandon with me. When I look back at all our conversations via text I told you multiple times my financial situation and how I could not let this lawsuit go because of this.”

I guess that's the text messages Wingo mentioned.

[taikibansei]

http://thewhitebronco.com/2016/09/the-derrick-rose-sexual-assault-trial-primer/

This is a great website for this case but I'm too lazy to read it all.

Wow...that's a great find. Looks like a disaster to bring to trial, for both sides. Hope they settle soon.

[Guano]

[Adelheid]

Well there are street smart people who would not be called literate. But even if he is functionally illiterate his judgment still comes into play and it sounds like it is lacking.

Though I don't see how he could not have been prepared for the meaning of the word consent by his counsel considering it is probably the one word guaranteed to come up in proceedings. If they did not discuss it with him that is practically malpractice. It does sound like he has terrible representation for this case

But even counsel can't hide a client's ignorance when they say stuff like hey we're men. It is basically like putting your neck on the guillotine and saying off with my head please

The counsel still could have prepared Rose for the eventualities during cross-examination; after all, they are attorneys and would know how the line of questioning goes. Reeks of incompetence on Rose's legal team.

Sure. It would seem that way. Yet in spite of that I'm saying it may not matter if Rose's world view comes out as a crude version of masculine entitlement. It shows Rose thinks it is obvious when it is anything but, so I do think he may be short a few batteries upstairs if his natural instinct is to be so casual about his assumption of sexual prerogative. Even most people considered kind of dumb would have enough sense of self-preservation to not expose such a damning attitude in a rape investigation.

So if Rose is not completely dumb then he lives inside a bubble completely disconnected from most peoples' realities. He literally lacks any capacity to see another person's point of view is what it says to me. And that is not proof, but it sure doesn't help. And even counsel may not be able to sugarcoat that. That is why I'm concerned this will get worse even if he is innocent, because his self-portrayal is tailor made to convict him for rape. He's incriminating himself to some extent already. And if he is guilty, well screw him anyway.

At this point, however how much dumb he is, Rose probably is realizing little by little that he is digging a deep hole for himself. He might as well go for a settlement before he furthur does more damage to himself.

[gavran]

Greatest movie ever.

[CJackson]

The counsel still could have prepared Rose for the eventualities during cross-examination; after all, they are attorneys and would know how the line of questioning goes. Reeks of incompetence on Rose's legal team.

Sure. It would seem that way. Yet in spite of that I'm saying it may not matter if Rose's world view comes out as a crude version of masculine entitlement. It shows Rose thinks it is obvious when it is anything but, so I do think he may be short a few batteries upstairs if his natural instinct is to be so casual about his assumption of sexual prerogative. Even most people considered kind of dumb would have enough sense of self-preservation to not expose such a damning attitude in a rape investigation.

So if Rose is not completely dumb then he lives inside a bubble completely disconnected from most peoples' realities. He literally lacks any capacity to see another person's point of view is what it says to me. And that is not proof, but it sure doesn't help. And even counsel may not be able to sugarcoat that. That is why I'm concerned this will get worse even if he is innocent, because his self-portrayal is tailor made to convict him for rape. He's incriminating himself to some extent already. And if he is guilty, well screw him anyway.

At this point, however how much dumb he is, Rose probably is realizing little by little that he is digging a deep hole for himself. He might as well go for a settlement before he furthur does more damage to himself.

You're probably right. Just the feedback he is probably getting from those close to him should push him into that direction. He really can't help himself with further testimony, that much seems clear

[Yankeeknickfan]

Why the fuq did he not settle? I just hope that rose gets whey deserves. Nobody is even going to know what that is, but I hope that he gets not guilty if he didn't do it, or guilty if he did

[moocow007]

And that is why nyk fans should have zero apprehension about this season. I'm ready for any outcome. The only reason I want a great season, besides the obvious, is to ram this down the throat of all the media "experts" and morons who come on this board trashing the team with hot takes they didn't come up with.

Yep, I'm going in there with the notion that I'm heading into a nudist colony filled with beautiful women as far as the eye can see. If they first one isn't impressed with my package, chances are someone will and moo's gonna score!

NSFW Spoilers

Moo Lounging for the Bovine Ladies

Spoiler:

Moo Working It

Spoiler:

[BKlutch]

We've all said that Rose is not very bright and worried that his own words would implicate him even if the facts do not. Few of us approve of his relationships, even if they were consensual. We've had a lot of reason to doubt if he's smart enough to adjust to the Knicks and play well with Hornacek's offense. So I was surprised to read this from, of all people, Mark Berman in the Post. Quoting Rose, he wrote:

This year, it’s different. I have a lot more options. I have shooters and can play through someone an entire game if that’s Melo [Carmelo Anthony] or KP [Kristaps Porzingis]. Just having so many options, I’m able to play the way I know and really can be a point guard first. This whole time playing pickup, they want me to attack, and it opens up everyone on the floor.

I've heard worse.

[Adelheid]

There are a lot of words in the english dictionary and the word "consent" isnt exactly the most common word to use when implying agreement or permission. If the cross-examiner used something like " Did [accuser] AGREE on having sexual activity with you and your friends on that particular time?" then Rose would have probably understood the q.

[Johnny Hoops]

http://thewhitebronco.com/2016/09/the-derrick-rose-sexual-assault-trial-primer/

This is a great website for this case but I'm too lazy to read it all.

Wow...that's a great find. Looks like a disaster to bring to trial, for both sides. Hope they settle soon.

Yeah - thought is that Rose will settle without admitting guilt prior to trial -- per what Kobe did years ago.

That would be the smart move here but Rose doesn't seem to be normal guy and could use bad judgement and push the process too far.

[HarthorneWingo]

Roses low IQ is making this extra unsettling. It actually makes it more difficult to parse out what happened. I mean who doesn't understand the meaning of the word "consent"? This is so messy and his stupidity is not only making it more difficult to establish intent, but could also result in criminal proceedings even if he didn't force himself on her.

That's where his attorney comes in and files and bunch of pretrial motions to exclude certain evidence that surfaced in discovery which is not relevant or material to the issues in the case.

For example, Rose's definition of "consent" is a legal conclusion and would probably be excluded from from the trial by the judge. The judge will give the jury the definition of "consent" during the reading of the jury instructions at the end of the trial before they deliberate. Rose's definition is irrelevant. The issue in the trial is whether he raped her.

[Jeff Van Gully]

Why the fuq did he not settle? I just hope that rose gets whey deserves. Nobody is even going to know what that is, but I hope that he gets not guilty if he didn't do it, or guilty if he did

this would have been settled so long ago. i can't help but wonder if it's the dollar amount. maybe she's asking for something like $20m and he's like... "i'm fighting this."

if he raped her, he is deservedly going to be in a world of trouble. the civil case can open up doors for a criminal one. they'll hit him in the pockets and take his freedom.

if i were innocent, i would still pay up and make it go away. then stop dealing with these freaks. go find you a queen. if i were guilty, there would be no dollar amount too high for me to put it on the table and make this go away. he is definitely maintaining innocence. at some point you have to know when being right isn't the most important thing.

[DrCoach]

Honestly have we ever seen a dumber athlete than drose??

Eddie Curry

Lance Stevenson

JR Smith

[OnTheWagon]

Ugh... from everything I've read, its pretty obvious that her lawyers knows she'll lose.

What they are doing is basically making life as miserable as possible and defaming him so that he'll settle faster. They know his brand is going to be hurt and that it will interrupt his preseason schedule.

Did Rose do anything wrong? Probably. I doubt it was worthy of a rape charge though. He definitely looks like a terrible guy to introduce your sister to, but I'm sure you all have known plenty of guys like that.

[madvillian]

We've all said that Rose is not very bright and worried that his own words would implicate him even if the facts do not. Few of us approve of his relationships, even if they were consensual. We've had a lot of reason to doubt if he's smart enough to adjust to the Knicks and play well with Hornacek's offense. So I was surprised to read this from, of all people, Mark Berman in the Post. Quoting Rose, he wrote:

This year, it’s different. I have a lot more options. I have shooters and can play through someone an entire game if that’s Melo [Carmelo Anthony] or KP [Kristaps Porzingis]. Just having so many options, I’m able to play the way I know and really can be a point guard first. This whole time playing pickup, they want me to attack, and it opens up everyone on the floor.

I've heard worse.

As a Bulls fan and at one time one of the biggest Derrick Rose homers in the world let me give you this advice: ignore every single thing Derrick says. Your life will be way easier. I'm not even sure Derrick knows what he's saying, when he's saying it, so for us fans to try and take anything from it is just an exercise in frustration.

___________________

As for the trial, Rose and the accuser are both idiots. Nobody looks good.