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

[dice]

what if she is doing the wrong here? She should also receive harsh punishment for being one of the rare people to falsely accuse someone (I say that personally knowing two women who did, and an acquaintance as well). Prison time imo, just like Rose and his friends deserve if they are guilty in any way.

derrick and his co-defendants are free to sue her for defamation of character, etc. should they so choose. but yeah, if she's lying she deserves jail time

[mj234eva]

They wanted to have sex with both women. At NO. 33. and 34. Of the complaint Allen screams why are you here then take off your clothes etc.. to C. Allen also says stop talking and more they just didn't drug both women. And since friend C didn't want to have sex they ordered a cab for her to leave so they could have sex with Jane Doe

Why not? Also, did Allen HAVE to call a cab, as it is alleged he did? Why not the friend call her own cab, since apparently he was being such an a-hole. Seems odd, to me.

friend C didn't want to leave her by herself with 3 men because she would have been gang raped at Rose's place.

But she was okay with leaving her drugged up friend, to get home by herself? As it's stated the friend was dropped off first. Please don't say she wasn't by herself, either..cab driver has no reason to provide any extra help to the drugged accuser. For all the friend knows, the cab just dropped her off, and drove away.

He said: "if she is telling the truth she can come to that conclusion".

What exactly is wrong with that? He isn't saying, "She is telling the truth, therefore her conclusion makes sense"

Our back and forth didn't begin with that quote.

[truth18]

Why not? Also, did Allen HAVE to call a cab, as it is alleged he did? Why not the friend call her own cab, since apparently he was being such an a-hole. Seems odd, to me.



But she was okay with leaving her drugged up friend, to get home by herself? As it's stated the friend was dropped off first. Please don't say she wasn't by herself, either..cab driver has no reason to provide any extra help to the drugged accuser. For all the friend knows, the cab just dropped her off, and drove away.

He said: "if she is telling the truth she can come to that conclusion".

What exactly is wrong with that? He isn't saying, "She is telling the truth, therefore her conclusion makes sense"

Our back and forth didn't begin with that quote.

I know, I read the full exchange (unless it goes back further than the full quote trains on the last few pages). Confused as to how the rest of the conversation makes what I said null?

[Ralphb07]

Some of you are being Rose homers like he's going up against the Cavs or something. It's hilarious. Disturbing too but I'm focusing on hilarious.

Have you read the complaint? It focuses on hilarious.

Yeah I've read it. Some of it seems bizarre and goofy, but I didn't see anything that makes me dismiss the whole account.

This story has been out there for, what, 72 hours, and the capes already want this woman to disappear? Relax. It's going to be uncomfortable for a while. If the claims are as baseless as we all hope she'll be gone eventually. But this rush to judgment in support of a guy you don't know from Adam is odd. I'm not talking to you specifically but rather the vibe in this thread.

It's a very touchy subject but my feeling is I don't buy it from what has been released but will also keep an open mind and reserve the right to change what I think depending on what else comes out.

There's just a lot of holes in her story.

[Ralphb07]

I like Rose but if true he should go to prison. But why is she just going for money and in the report why did she say she doesn't want to see Rose go to jail? That is a big red flag to me. I was raped by so and so by I don't want to see them serve time for it? That to me just doesn't make sense.

Exactly

There are lots of reasons she might not want to see Rose in jail. She had a relationship with Rose and knows his friends so its not like some random men gang raped her, if this happened. Maybe she feels she is to blame because if she was with Rose who was in a relationship and she knew it and she feels this wouldn't have happened if she stayed away from that (still doesn't justify rape if it happened), but she can still feel like she shouldnt send this man to jail and other men and take them away from their young children as well.

Sorry man I 100% disagree. Knowing the men who rape you doesn't make a difference, rape is rape. I want to see what else comes out but my take is she was a side piece and got mad when Derrick starting banging her friend and cut things off.

[BoozerRoNo]

Now explain way why when Rose texted her, he told her to bring a friend. Yet, it seems that they had no interest in assaulting anyone else, but the accused. Would love you hear your theory on that.

They wanted to have sex with both women. At NO. 33. and 34. Of the complaint Allen screams why are you here then take off your clothes etc.. to C. Allen also says stop talking and more they just didn't drug both women. And since friend C didn't want to have sex they ordered a cab for her to leave so they could have sex with Jane Doe

Why not? Also, did Allen HAVE to call a cab, as it is alleged he did? Why not the friend call her own cab, since apparently he was being such an a-hole. Seems odd, to me.

friend C didn't want to leave her by herself with 3 men because she would have been gang raped at Rose's place.

But she was okay with leaving her drugged up friend, to get home by herself? As it's stated the friend was dropped off first. Please don't say she wasn't by herself, either..cab driver has no reason to provide any extra help to the drugged accuser. For all the friend knows, the cab just dropped her off, and drove away.

Her friend could have asked Allen to call a cab or Allen could have just called it himself. Im sure everything isn't word for word of what happened from 2 years ago in this complaint. One way to find out is phone records but who called the cab really isn't a difference maker here.

I agree the big question is why did her friend leave her. Thats a question her friend needs to answer. But honestly, there is no evidence she knew her friend was drugged as it was slipped in a drink. she likely assumed she was feeling sick and just doing weird things. Jane Doe could likely be over exaggerating how drugged she what whether Jane Doe is over exaggerating doesnt really matter if she was drugged without consent while Allen called and was on speaker saying we didnt know about a month later, etc...

If she is lying she should be punished but these call records are very important according to Jane Doe there are many of them. There should be no reason that Allen should have Jane Doe's number and be calling her a month after the taxi cab call its not his girl unless he is feeling guilty about something like Jane Doe is claiming.

[TimRobbins]

Why would he say that if it wasn't true, though? He'd be shooting himself in the foot by lying in what will become an investigation.

Jesus, dude. Common sense.

What is Rose saying isn't true? Where is Rose's account of what happened? Was he with her that night? Did he have group sex with her?

All Rose did so far was to provide so general denial, while admiting he was in a relationship with that woman. I'd like to hear from Rose what, according to him, happened that night.

[TimRobbins]

Its hard for anyone to believe that superstars are rapist. Guys like Tiger Woods Kobe Russel Wilson Kaepernick Tom Brady Lebron Curry KD Rose hell even James harden can get pussy anytime they want literally. Sounds like a money grabbing gold digging thot to me.

You do realize that Kobe did rape that woman, right?

you were there?

Kobe paid her off, and admitted, in a written statement, that he "understands she didn't see the sex as consensual". I can't believe people still think she was making it up.

People siding with the attacker, just because they are rich and famous is terrible.

[truth18]

Exactly

There are lots of reasons she might not want to see Rose in jail. She had a relationship with Rose and knows his friends so its not like some random men gang raped her, if this happened. Maybe she feels she is to blame because if she was with Rose who was in a relationship and she knew it and she feels this wouldn't have happened if she stayed away from that (still doesn't justify rape if it happened), but she can still feel like she shouldnt send this man to jail and other men and take them away from their young children as well.

Sorry man I 100% disagree. Knowing the men who rape you doesn't make a difference, rape is rape. I want to see what else comes out but my take is she was a side piece and got mad when Derrick starting banging her friend and cut things off.

Not true. Read about the Mamas and the Papas. Not saying that last sentence is incorrect, but the one before in bold isn't.

Another example would be women (and perhaps men) raped during military service.

Countless other examples of why knowing the people who committed the act can matter (in the opposite manner as well, make you more likely to report).

[jax98]

What is Rose saying isn't true? Where is Rose's account of what happened? Was he with her that night? Did he have group sex with her?

All Rose did so far was to provide so general denial, while admiting he was in a relationship with that woman. I'd like to hear from Rose what, according to him, happened that night.

Here's what you wrote:

He's responding with a vague denial. A decive response would have been "I don't know that woman", "we never had sex", "I wasn't with her that night", "My friends didn't have sex with her". That would have been a decisive response, but the lawyer never says that. She admits Rose had a sexual relationship with the woman and denies nothing specific (i.e. being with her that night and/or having group sex with his friends).

If Rose did brign his friends to have sex with her that night, good luck to him claiming consent.

I was addressing the underlined part, where you suggest that Rose should state that they have never had sex. And before that, you suggest that he should deny knowing this woman.

Obviously, he did. His own freaking spokesperson acknowledged they had a sexual relationship as you yourself touched on afterwards. That limits what he can say severely.

[TimRobbins]

I was addressing the underlined part, where you suggest that Rose should state that they have never had sex. And before that, you suggest that he should deny knowing this woman.

Obviously, he did. His own freaking spokesperson acknowledged they had a sexual relationship as you yourself touched on afterwards. That limits what he can say severely.

OK. That's not what I meant. I was implying that I would have felt much better about Rose's response if it was more specific and not some vague denial. I was giving hypothetical examples of what would have been a great response by his lawyer (if it was true). Naturally, given the fact that he knows the woman and had a relationship with her, I don't think he should have lied.

The fact that Rose doesn't offer his own account to what happened that night is somewhat alarming. Did he see her that night? did they have sex? Did he have group sex with her? He could have easily denied any of these of he wanted to, but he didn't. He simply issued some blanket denial which doesn't mean much.

[whodey]

I was addressing the underlined part, where you suggest that Rose should state that they have never had sex. And before that, you suggest that he should deny knowing this woman.

Obviously, he did. His own freaking spokesperson acknowledged they had a sexual relationship as you yourself touched on afterwards. That limits what he can say severely.

OK. That's not what I meant. I was implying that I would have felt much better about Rose's response if it was more specific and not some vague denial. I was giving hypothetical examples of what would have been a great response by his lawyer (if it was true). Naturally, given the fact that he knows the woman and had a relationship with her, I don't think he should have lied.

The fact that Rose doesn't offer his own account to what happened that night is somewhat alarming. Did he see her that night? did they have sex? Did he have group sex with her? He could have easily denied any of these of he wanted to, but he didn't. He simply issued some blanket denial which doesn't mean much.

This is standard operation when it comes to a legal matter. It happens all the time, as a lawyer you have to limit what your client says in the press, especially when it's a high profile person. And let's be honest, Rose is never the best with his words, so it's probably better that he doesn't respond in any detail.

[TimRobbins]

This is standard operation when it comes to a legal matter. It happens all the time, as a lawyer you have to limit what your client says in the press, especially when it's a high profile person. And let's be honest, Rose is never the best with his words, so it's probably better that he doesn't respond in any detail.

Fine. He's going to have to come up with a detailed version of events at some point. The blanket denial says very little.
If I had to bet money, I'd say that the girl's story is not some sort of complete fabrication. Something probably happened that night.

Also, people need to chill with the accuser bashing. How many NBA players were accused of rape during the past decade? I can only remember Kobe and he was hardly falsely accused. It's not like there are squads of girls just shooting rape accusations all over the place. These things are very rare.

[Ralphb07]

There are lots of reasons she might not want to see Rose in jail. She had a relationship with Rose and knows his friends so its not like some random men gang raped her, if this happened. Maybe she feels she is to blame because if she was with Rose who was in a relationship and she knew it and she feels this wouldn't have happened if she stayed away from that (still doesn't justify rape if it happened), but she can still feel like she shouldnt send this man to jail and other men and take them away from their young children as well.

Sorry man I 100% disagree. Knowing the men who rape you doesn't make a difference, rape is rape. I want to see what else comes out but my take is she was a side piece and got mad when Derrick starting banging her friend and cut things off.

Not true. Read about the Mamas and the Papas. Not saying that last sentence is incorrect, but the one before in bold isn't.

Another example would be women (and perhaps men) raped during military service.

Countless other examples of why knowing the people who committed the act can matter (in the opposite manner as well, make you more likely to report).

Mackenzie Phillips did not pursue legal action against her father. Jane Doe is pursuing legal action against Rose. My questioning is Jane Doe is not doing that in the 2 years and 2 other lawyers prior. She went straight for the money. There's a big difference between keeping/silent and not taking legal action and taking legal action and just going after money.

In regards to the military has there been cases of it coming out and then them going for money over criminal charges or are you talking about them just keeping it internal/quiet?

[mj234eva]

Her friend could have asked Allen to call a cab or Allen could have just called it himself. Im sure everything isn't word for word of what happened from 2 years ago in this complaint. One way to find out is phone records but who called the cab really isn't a difference maker here.

I agree the big question is why did her friend leave her. Thats a question her friend needs to answer. But honestly, there is no evidence she knew her friend was drugged as it was slipped in a drink. she likely assumed she was feeling sick and just doing weird things. Jane Doe could likely be over exaggerating how drugged she what whether Jane Doe is over exaggerating doesnt really matter if she was drugged without consent while Allen called and was on speaker saying we didnt know about a month later, etc...

If she is lying she should be punished but these call records are very important according to Jane Doe there are many of them. There should be no reason that Allen should have Jane Doe's number and be calling her a month after the taxi cab call its not his girl unless he is feeling guilty about something like Jane Doe is claiming.

There's actually no evidence that she was even drugged. Allegedly he's yelling, cursing at her the entire time, but he was nice enough for a minute to call her a cab? I'd think that he'd be like, if you want to leave find your own f'n way home.

Also as to the bold - it says in the complaint, that "C" knew that the plaintiff was incapacitated. Regardless if she knew it was via drugging or really sick, she left her...after being so concerned about her safety.

As to that phone call, if Allen doesn't think there was anything wrong done that night, why not call? And why is it your assumption that he was maybe feeling guilty? According to the complaint, the first thing he says that "he was not aware that she was drugged that night." If you knowingly took part in an elaborate scheme to drug and rape someone, as this complaint alleges, are you placing a call to them a month later?

[GetBuLLish]

I was addressing the underlined part, where you suggest that Rose should state that they have never had sex. And before that, you suggest that he should deny knowing this woman.

Obviously, he did. His own freaking spokesperson acknowledged they had a sexual relationship as you yourself touched on afterwards. That limits what he can say severely.

OK. That's not what I meant. I was implying that I would have felt much better about Rose's response if it was more specific and not some vague denial. I was giving hypothetical examples of what would have been a great response by his lawyer (if it was true). Naturally, given the fact that he knows the woman and had a relationship with her, I don't think he should have lied.

The fact that Rose doesn't offer his own account to what happened that night is somewhat alarming. Did he see her that night? did they have sex? Did he have group sex with her? He could have easily denied any of these of he wanted to, but he didn't. He simply issued some blanket denial which doesn't mean much.

There is practically no benefit to airing out the facts in public. And I don't categorize appeasing someone on an internet forum as a benefit.

[GetBuLLish]

derrick and his co-defendants are free to sue her for defamation of character, etc. should they so choose.

No, they really can't.

[Indomitable]

derrick and his co-defendants are free to sue her for defamation of character, etc. should they so choose.

No, they really can't.

Why not?

[TimRobbins]

There is practically no benefit to airing out the facts in public. And I don't categorize appeasing someone on an internet forum as a benefit.

That's fine. In this case, I wouldn't call Rose's response a "strong response", more like the standard BS response which says pretty much nothing.

He'll have to give his account in court and that will leak one way or the other. The only way for him to "air it out in public" is to settle. Something he should have done long ago.

[GetBuLLish]

derrick and his co-defendants are free to sue her for defamation of character, etc. should they so choose.

No, they really can't.

What I'm referring to is the fact that everyone has immunity from a defamation claim for statements made in court proceedings. So basically whatever you say in a pleading (like this complaint), deposition, trial testimony, etc. would be protected from a defamation claim.

However, on second thought, Rose does have a defamation claim against this girl (if the allegations are false) since she says that she told a friend that she was raped by him. That statement would not be protected since it was made outside of litigation.