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

[truth18]

Do you guys see this affecting his game? On a scale of Kobe-Neutral-Tiger, what would you say your thoughts his efficiency and effectiveness this season with this issue in mind?

How could his play get worse? bad-ump-bump-ching

I honestly didn't watch a ton of Bulls games last year even though Butler was my fantasy MVP. He was that bad? I thought he look alright in the playoffs.

[DuckIII]

Do you guys see this affecting his game? On a scale of Kobe-Neutral-Tiger, what would you say your thoughts his efficiency and effectiveness this season with this issue in mind?

Kobe and Tiger had serious marital issues to deal with. Rose is a free bird. Plus, those were fresh wounds. Tiger had new women coming out the woodwork every other day. And Kobe was facing criminal charges.

My guess is probably closer to Kobe.

Not to mention that golf is a game of extreme precision and mental concentration, whereas basketball is far more instinctual and reactive. I don't think this is going to meaningfully impact his game. At least not at this early stage of things.

[mj234eva]

No doubt. They are trying to establish a narrative right up front that she was naive and for the most part sexually inexperienced and non-experimental. Hard to second guess that strategy when, as this thread validates to vivid degrees, the predictable response to such allegations is "she's a whore who was **** a professional athlete."

I think it's hard because, considering some people she is close with, seem to be a bit wild themselves. So in effect, she's suggesting to some degree, that all her friends were a bit slutty (to say the least), but she wasn't. Bit of a hard sell, for me.

I agree that its a hard sell. Hell, being a side piece for a professional athlete, regardless of her friends' conduct, makes it hard to sell that you are sexually naive. Lets face it, society thinks that if you are sleeping with a professional athlete on the side, you are likely a gold digging groupy slut. She's got an uphill battle on that front, which probably explains the strategy of coming out right of the bat with the "sheepish young lady caught up in a whirlwind of debauchary" angle.

For sure.

[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.

[DuckIII]

It is interesting though the degree to which all of the witness corroboration has been pled, including the content of text messages that should be relatively easily verified. Like you note, the degree of unnecessary detail is staggering, and there is a **** full of witnesses that will need to testify consistently with the allegations. It would be crazy irresponsible to file something like this without verifying it in advance, which sure makes you believe there are some folks lined up to testify consistently. If it is just a ploy to extract a settlement, that would be a crazy inadvisable practice.

This is my entire view in a nutshell (regarding the legal strategy).

[DuckIII]

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.

Her lawyers are thanking, and his are cursing, Donald Trump's lawyer who recently, idiotically and with much public blowback, claimed that a husband can't rape a wife.

[mj234eva]

edit

[mj234eva]

edit

[mj234eva]

(a) They did their research already and are confident they can corroberate all of the "non rape" facts, which they hope will lend credibility to the case as a whole.

My guess is they have plenty of corroboration for the sexual relationship, hoping that will make her rape claims believable. She very well could be telling the truth, but the crux of the complaint is the flimsiest. She was drugged, somehow escaped, and took a cab home. Then Rose & his posse went to her apartment and got inside because her gate AND front door are routinely left open (in LA), then gang-raped her. And she knew she had been raped because she remembered flashes of Rose and the posse assaulting her AND they left condoms behind.

I don't know, man. We'll see how it plays out.

Roommate walks in, see random guy sitting down, doesn't ask who he is or demand he leaves, (apparently he makes a motion toward her), and all she does is go into the room, close the door, and go to sleep. Not check on her roommate, to see if she's okay.

Does that suggest that seeing a random guy in their shared apartment was not out of the "norm?" That would seem in contrast to how they try to portray the accuser. Could be a bad move, on their part.

[Indomitable]

(a) They did their research already and are confident they can corroberate all of the "non rape" facts, which they hope will lend credibility to the case as a whole.

My guess is they have plenty of corroboration for the sexual relationship, hoping that will make her rape claims believable. She very well could be telling the truth, but the crux of the complaint is the flimsiest. She was drugged, somehow escaped, and took a cab home. Then Rose & his posse went to her apartment and got inside because her gate AND front door are routinely left open (in LA), then gang-raped her. And she knew she had been raped because she remembered flashes of Rose and the posse assaulting her AND they left condoms behind.

I don't know, man. We'll see how it plays out.

Roommate walks in, see random guy sitting down, doesn't ask who he is or demand he leaves, (apparently he makes a motion toward her), and all she does is go into the room, close the door, and go to sleep. Not check on her roommate, to see if she's okay.

Does that suggest that seeing a random guy in their shared apartment was not out of the "norm?" That's would seem in contrast to how they try to portray the accuser

Pretty much

[Keller61]

Yea, and her the young, naive, innocent, & well meaning girl.

No doubt. They are trying to establish a narrative right up front that she was naive and for the most part sexually inexperienced and non-experimental. Hard to second guess that strategy when, as this thread validates to vivid degrees, the predictable response to such allegations is "she's a whore who was **** a professional athlete."

That reaction makes it hard to second-guess the strategy? Wouldn't that knee-jerk reaction call the strategy into question (i.e. make it hard not to second-guess it), or do you think the inevitable blowback to that initial reaction would be a net benefit?

Also, pushing back on those allegations can certainly be done without reacting so boorishly as to simply say "Oh, she's a whore." The complaint indicates she was raised to believe that "a woman should have sex only with one person - her spouse." The very next paragraph talks about her sex life with Rose. The complaint discusses a previous pregnancy that apparently occurred prior to her relationship with Rose. She only saw Rose about once a month, even during the long stretches he was living in California. Yet she thought they were girlfriend/boyfriend? She continued to see him after learning Rose had a girlfriend in Chicago. The whole "sex therapist thing." She claims not to know Rose had a child, which seems like a stretch when your very famous purported boyfriend's fatherhood has been discussed in the media ad nauseum.

The plaintiff seems pretty clearly to either be lying about the degree of her prudishness, or to just be an odd, odd person. A lot of this stuff just seems really inconsistent.

It is interesting though the degree to which all of the witness corroboration has been pled, including the content of text messages that should be relatively easily verified. Like you note, the degree of unnecessary detail is staggering, and there is a **** full of witnesses that will need to testify consistently with the allegations. It would be crazy irresponsible to file something like this without verifying it in advance, which sure makes you believe there are some folks lined up to testify consistently. If it is just a ploy to extract a settlement, that would be a crazy inadvisable practice.

On the other hand, maybe they were in such a hurry to beat the statute of limitations deadline that they didn't have time to proofread thoroughly, as they screwed up the date of the rape (kind of an important detail) and the fact that Rose didn't play in a game in May 2013.

[DuckIII]

That reaction makes it hard to second-guess the strategy? Wouldn't that knee-jerk reaction call the strategy into question (i.e. make it hard not to second-guess it), or do you think the inevitable blowback to that initial reaction would be a net benefit?

I don't know that it will be beneficial or harmful. As both you and mj23 pointed out, there are other facts pled which don't appear to align well with the "long-skirted librarian" image they attempt to establish. It might blow up in her face.

What I'm saying is that its hard to criticize a rape-accuser's legal team for preemptively trying to establish a narrative of naivete and innocence given what society assumes about women who sleep with professional athletes and then sue them.

[Keller61]

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.

[bullsRlife]

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.

He doesn't owe YOU anything. Either you believe him, don't believe him, could care less, still root for him, won't root him, stopped rooting him, whatever. I'm still rooting for him, until I find out he actually did it.

Don't root for him then. Who cares?

[Droseisthe1]

Did any of you read the entire lawsuit? From a Bulls fan perspective, what irks me the most is to think that Rose was doing all this stupid **** when he decided to sit out in 2013 but was cleared to play.

Also noticed the lawsuit saying somewhere that Rose returned to his house after a game he had played in and invited Jane Doe over. But the supposed timeline of this day was in Spring 2013....and Rose DEFINITELY did not play in a game then. Something doesn't add up.


[url]http://www.scribd.com/doc/276510161/Rose-Derrick-v-Jane-Doe-Complaint[/url]

Being cleared to play or being injured has zero correlation with someone's sex life.

Abstaining from basketball and abstaining from sex are linked. This is why despite being married I've had no sex in nearly 6 years. Though I'm strongly thinking about finding a pick-up game on my home from work tonight to put an end to this madness.

You guys choosing to be smug in your responses for no reason. Clearly missed my point.

Obviously in the literal sense there isn't any correlation. But you have to understand the alleged things that happened isn't simply just a normal dating relationship/casual sexual affair that I'd assume most players carry, whether injured or not.

But the fact he wasn't playing when cleared to, saying **** like the roster wasn't good enough or just flat out being all hush hush to the media during the time, and all the while, him and his high school dropout dumbass friends are taking advantage of women.

Again, everything is alleged. Still, puts a sour taste in my mouth for defending the guy all of 2013, for sure.

[Indomitable]

Being cleared to play or being injured has zero correlation with someone's sex life.

Abstaining from basketball and abstaining from sex are linked. This is why despite being married I've had no sex in nearly 6 years. Though I'm strongly thinking about finding a pick-up game on my home from work tonight to put an end to this madness.

You guys choosing to be smug in your responses for no reason. Clearly missed my point.

Obviously in the literal sense there isn't any correlation. But you have to understand the alleged things that happened isn't simply just a normal dating relationship/casual sexual affair that I'd assume most players carry, whether injured or not.

But the fact he wasn't playing when cleared to, saying **** like the roster wasn't good enough or just flat out being all hush hush to the media during the time, and all the while, him and his high school dropout dumbass friends are taking advantage of women.

Again, everything is alleged. Still, puts a sour taste in my mouth for defending the guy all of 2013, for sure.

[Droseisthe1]

Abstaining from basketball and abstaining from sex are linked. This is why despite being married I've had no sex in nearly 6 years. Though I'm strongly thinking about finding a pick-up game on my home from work tonight to put an end to this madness.

You guys choosing to be smug in your responses for no reason. Clearly missed my point.

Obviously in the literal sense there isn't any correlation. But you have to understand the alleged things that happened isn't simply just a normal dating relationship/casual sexual affair that I'd assume most players carry, whether injured or not.

But the fact he wasn't playing when cleared to, saying **** like the roster wasn't good enough or just flat out being all hush hush to the media during the time, and all the while, him and his high school dropout dumbass friends are taking advantage of women.

Again, everything is alleged. Still, puts a sour taste in my mouth for defending the guy all of 2013, for sure.

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.

[red222]

You guys choosing to be smug in your responses for no reason. Clearly missed my point.

Obviously in the literal sense there isn't any correlation. But you have to understand the alleged things that happened isn't simply just a normal dating relationship/casual sexual affair that I'd assume most players carry, whether injured or not.

But the fact he wasn't playing when cleared to, saying **** like the roster wasn't good enough or just flat out being all hush hush to the media during the time, and all the while, him and his high school dropout dumbass friends are taking advantage of women.

Again, everything is alleged. Still, puts a sour taste in my mouth for defending the guy all of 2013, for sure.

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.

[Droseisthe1]

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.

[Stratmaster]

I'm not seeing the same thing you and Musiq are. I'm seeing a poorly written document that reads like a Penthouse letter entry. Not a single point being made (him wanting to have group sex, or skype sex etc.) has anything to do with the charge.

But thats my whole point about the strategy. And while its not written in traditional legal language, its written in a more common "tongue" to appeal to press clippings and laypersons. If the strategy is the wise one I mentioned, rather than the stupid one I mentioned, then its a remarkably well written complaint for that purpose.

It talks about her being drugged, and then says one of the men called her to let her know he was unaware she had been drugged.

It doesn't say that all three men drugged her at the same time or were all aware of the drugging. In fact it doesn't say who drugged her at all. Which is of course logically consistent with her story that she didn't know she'd been drugged.

But there is no other mention of drug type or other details.

She didn't know who drugged her specifically or that she'd even be drugged at all. How would it be consistent with her story to identify the drug? You actually want to see MORE detail? It already contains about 1,000% more detail than is normallly advisable.

She admits to drinking tequila. how much? If it wasn't enough to cause the same systems you would think they would want to mention that.

The "I was drugged" part takes care of that. She doesn't need to affirmatively assert that she didn't drink enough to be in that state. Complaints are not a vehicle to state every conceivable aspect of the claim. That complaint is excessively detailed. Its odd that your issues are with insufficient detail. Want to see what it would look like if I was her lawyer?

"On the night of ________, Defendants conspired to and did surreptitiously drug _____________, break into her home, and forceably rape her against her will."

Now that is a bit of an exaggeration because you'd have to plead damages, the basic elements of the civil claims, and might want to add a little bit of filler, but its all you need. And typically all you want so as to avoid boxing yourself in to the details.

It states they saw each other less than once a month yet she somehow thought they were "exclusive". And she didn't know he had a baby? He's a public figure. She didn't follow any news about him? In the lawsuit they basically build the case for her having a grudge against him... "cheated" on her, was fooling around with her trusted friend etc.

Its no different than having her wear a polka-dot church gown and a string of pearls to court. They are starting early with their narrative about her naivete. It might work, it might not.

Please note, I am not casting any opinion on what actually happened; just commenting on the way the complaint was drafted. If I were the defense attorney I would see it as a gift.

If I were the defense attorney I would too. Because it gives me a laundry list of things to poke holes in. But if plaintiff's counsel have documented it all, obtained witness statements, gathered the skype records, texts, phone records, etc., then its going to make for a powerful tool later if they can prove it all. Like I said, its a highly unusual but interesting strategy.

If they had all of that proof, I'm not sure why she would be on her third lawyer. I think it more likely was a blatant attempt to threaten Rose that if they didn't settle they were going to run his name through the mud.

You are right, I shouldn't expect MORE detail. I was pointing out just a couple of the holes that it opens up for the defense attorneys. But hey...maybe the girl's attorney isn't just a good lawyer he is a genius lawyer and he purposely opened those holes knowing they will try to exploit them because he does have a counter for every one of them. Maybe he spent so much time thinking this through, that is why they barely got it filed on time. Or maybe it was a last minute "I'll take the case let me throw together something before it is too late".

It's certainly all just conjecture at this point.