Rose found not liable: Update pg. 62

[Swoosh_Stripes]

Well we've been talking about this for weeks now and you jumped in and made some of your own harsh assumptions about our character. We may make jokes and be naughty critters too, but if you are really paying attention and were up to speed you would realize almost all of the harshest criticisms made of her have been grounded in actual context whereas your comments were not.

For instance, you immediately assumed we are making a case that a woman has to be prim and proper to be believable when she makes a rape accusation.

I made no assumptions, I responded to what I read, in some cases people were saying her being with other guys ruined her credibility.

And based on that assumption of yours you proceeded to call us dirtbags.

Show me where I called you a dirtbag, talk about sensitive, what you're attributing to me is in you mind and that's on you not me.

Now how the heck did you come to that conclusion? Did you literally not even bother to read the past three pages of the thread? Because if you had you would see quite clearly the clarification is about how SHE and HER COUNSEL chose to present her, not us.

Ok, her counsel chose to present her that way and she is not shy or a prude, does that change anything? Promiscuous women can be/are raped and often times women do try to hide their sexual history because of the stigma.

So, no, her being a skank is not proof that she is either honest or lying.

But if you want to play that game, then you have to play it with Rose too who is also a skank.

We're talking about two skanky people here. One of them is lying.

I have given Rose the same consideration I have given her, everything I said about Rose revolves around his own comments which make him come across as an unsympathetic to put it mildly.

It is the first post on this page. You wrote:

"I don't know if he raped her, but what is being posted here is very primitive thinking about rape and sexuality assault victims. This whole notion that she's a freak so she couldn't be raped is ass backwards."

I'm not being sensitive. I was pointing out how you were uninformed and without context and casting aspersions on people posting here.

Making an assessment that she is FOS is not being primitive, it is called realism.

What I quoted was primitive thinking, the notion that her being with JR Smith means she's not credible is outlandish, I did not say EVERYTHING that is being posted is primitive and certainly it was not my intent to insinuate that so if that's how it came across I do apologize for it.

[CJackson]

What I quoted was primitive thinking, the notion that her being with JR Smith means she's not credible is outlandish, I did not say EVERYTHING that is being posted is primitive and certainly it was not my intent to insinuate that so if that's how it came across I do apologize for it.

No problem. You know what was meant now. Apology accepted

[Swoosh_Stripes]

Well we've been talking about this for weeks now and you jumped in and made some of your own harsh assumptions about our character. We may make jokes and be naughty critters too, but if you are really paying attention and were up to speed you would realize almost all of the harshest criticisms made of her have been grounded in actual context whereas your comments were not.

For instance, you immediately assumed we are making a case that a woman has to be prim and proper to be believable when she makes a rape accusation.

I made no assumptions, I responded to what I read, in some cases people were saying her being with other guys ruined her credibility.

it does ruin her credibility. this entire time, from her pre-trial media tour & thinkprogress crusade, she was portrayed to the public as being naive, sexually inexperienced, prude, very timid etc..someone reading that description may think "wow, no way would a person like that ever consent to groupsex", and get the impression that she's someone not capable of doing freaky stuff like that.

But, her lifestyle and background say different. parties, drugs, sexual relations with multiple nba'ers, texts about her wanting to trap a wealthy man, etc. As a jury how are you going to believe someone who says one thing, but is shown to do the complete opposite. Actions > Words. Had her attorneys been upfront about her lifestyle and not try to make up some facade, we wouldn't be talking about this.

this whole thing is proving to 100% be a sham now with the news that she withheld texts/critical info that effectively harm her case. if this goes to mistrial, she will drop it. no lawyer will go anywhere near this case.

How her lawyers chose to portray her is not or should not be relevant to whether she's credible or not, of course there are other factors that brings that in to question, but in general I do not see being promiscuous as an indication of how credible someone is in these type of situations.

[BKlutch]

I made no assumptions, I responded to what I read, in some cases people were saying her being with other guys ruined her credibility.

it does ruin her credibility. this entire time, from her pre-trial media tour & thinkprogress crusade, she was portrayed to the public as being naive, sexually inexperienced, prude, very timid etc..someone reading that description may think "wow, no way would a person like that ever consent to groupsex", and get the impression that she's someone not capable of doing freaky stuff like that.

But, her lifestyle and background say different. parties, drugs, sexual relations with multiple nba'ers, texts about her wanting to trap a wealthy man, etc. As a jury how are you going to believe someone who says one thing, but is shown to do the complete opposite. Actions > Words. Had her attorneys been upfront about her lifestyle and not try to make up some facade, we wouldn't be talking about this.

this whole thing is proving to 100% be a sham now with the news that she withheld texts/critical info that effectively harm her case. if this goes to mistrial, she will drop it. no lawyer will go anywhere near this case.

How her lawyers chose to portray her is not or should not be relevant to whether she's credible or not, of course there are other factors that brings that in to question, but in general I do not see being promiscuous as an indication of how credible someone is in these type of situations.

Being promiscuous does not determine your honesty. Lying is a fairly good indication of being dishonest and not having credibility.

[Knickerbock]

Well I guess the judge is letting rose play.. But expects him back in court Tuesday morning.

[E-Balla]

Well I guess the judge is letting rose play.. But expects him back in court Tuesday morning.

It's a civil case he doesn't have to show up at all he's going willingly. Unfortunately they put him on the stand to say some dumb crap but its looking like it might be a mistrial anyway.

EDIT: My bad didn't realize he didn't finish his testimony.

[E-Balla]

What does she look like?

[DaBxx]

As a fellow Ballboy, I will say she is absolutely ravishing!

[Riot Randolph]

Lala 2.0...

[Amsterdam]

Well we've been talking about this for weeks now and you jumped in and made some of your own harsh assumptions about our character. We may make jokes and be naughty critters too, but if you are really paying attention and were up to speed you would realize almost all of the harshest criticisms made of her have been grounded in actual context whereas your comments were not.

For instance, you immediately assumed we are making a case that a woman has to be prim and proper to be believable when she makes a rape accusation.

I made no assumptions, I responded to what I read, in some cases people were saying her being with other guys ruined her credibility.

And based on that assumption of yours you proceeded to call us dirtbags.

Show me where I called you a dirtbag, talk about sensitive, what you're attributing to me is in you mind and that's on you not me.

Now how the heck did you come to that conclusion? Did you literally not even bother to read the past three pages of the thread? Because if you had you would see quite clearly the clarification is about how SHE and HER COUNSEL chose to present her, not us.

Ok, her counsel chose to present her that way and she is not shy or a prude, does that change anything? Promiscuous women can be/are raped and often times women do try to hide their sexual history because of the stigma.

So, no, her being a skank is not proof that she is either honest or lying.

But if you want to play that game, then you have to play it with Rose too who is also a skank.

We're talking about two skanky people here. One of them is lying.

I have given Rose the same consideration I have given her, everything I said about Rose revolves around his own comments which make him come across as an unsympathetic to put it mildly.

What do you want him to say?

[CJackson]

Lala 2.0...

Free Range Lala (Antibiotics included)

[2010]

Looks wise she liver than Lala. But as far as character and personality obviously she is a thot and a money-grab.

[Swoosh_Stripes]

Well we've been talking about this for weeks now and you jumped in and made some of your own harsh assumptions about our character. We may make jokes and be naughty critters too, but if you are really paying attention and were up to speed you would realize almost all of the harshest criticisms made of her have been grounded in actual context whereas your comments were not.

For instance, you immediately assumed we are making a case that a woman has to be prim and proper to be believable when she makes a rape accusation.

I made no assumptions, I responded to what I read, in some cases people were saying her being with other guys ruined her credibility.

And based on that assumption of yours you proceeded to call us dirtbags.

Show me where I called you a dirtbag, talk about sensitive, what you're attributing to me is in you mind and that's on you not me.

Now how the heck did you come to that conclusion? Did you literally not even bother to read the past three pages of the thread? Because if you had you would see quite clearly the clarification is about how SHE and HER COUNSEL chose to present her, not us.

Ok, her counsel chose to present her that way and she is not shy or a prude, does that change anything? Promiscuous women can be/are raped and often times women do try to hide their sexual history because of the stigma.

So, no, her being a skank is not proof that she is either honest or lying.

But if you want to play that game, then you have to play it with Rose too who is also a skank.

We're talking about two skanky people here. One of them is lying.

I have given Rose the same consideration I have given her, everything I said about Rose revolves around his own comments which make him come across as an unsympathetic to put it mildly.

What do you want him to say?

In terms of what? If you're talking about his deposition, I would like him to say something that shows that he has some common sense and self awareness. Answering a question about consent with she came over at 1am, we men and she knew what goes going to happen is not what one should say in a courtroom.

[Ville5]

What I don't get is how she could 'hide' a text. I thought all the texts were from the logs of her mobile service provider. Isn't that so? Or can they only be obtained with a warrant? Anyway, she had to know that Rose had all her texts so hiding something would be stupid

[AmazingJason]

What I don't get is how she could 'hide' a text. I thought all the texts were from the logs of her mobile service provider. Isn't that so? Or can they only be obtained with a warrant? Anyway, she had to know that Rose had all her texts so hiding something would be stupid

There's too many idiots involved in this entire case, I can't even keep track anymore.

Rose hired the Amare Stoudamire of defense lawyers.

She hired the Derrick Rose.

[ChilledAlex]

Does a mistrial mean the case is thrown out entirely, or just delayed?

It means this trial is over and they have to start again from the beginning. Given all that has happened, and the fact that Rose can reveal that she hid a text message, means that the next risk would be harder for her. I think they believe her attorneys see the writing in the wall and will not be foolish enough to seek a second trial. Or they will settle for peanuts. I'm thinking this is worth about $3.49 to settle at this point.

Rose could look good and pay her attorney fees if there are any. However if I was Rose i'd strip the stripper for false public accusations of serious crime.

Nobody should get away with trashing someones name and possibly ruining his career and future for their selfish desires

[StephNYKurry]

Well we've been talking about this for weeks now and you jumped in and made some of your own harsh assumptions about our character. We may make jokes and be naughty critters too, but if you are really paying attention and were up to speed you would realize almost all of the harshest criticisms made of her have been grounded in actual context whereas your comments were not.

For instance, you immediately assumed we are making a case that a woman has to be prim and proper to be believable when she makes a rape accusation.

I made no assumptions, I responded to what I read, in some cases people were saying her being with other guys ruined her credibility.

And based on that assumption of yours you proceeded to call us dirtbags.

Show me where I called you a dirtbag, talk about sensitive, what you're attributing to me is in you mind and that's on you not me.

Now how the heck did you come to that conclusion? Did you literally not even bother to read the past three pages of the thread? Because if you had you would see quite clearly the clarification is about how SHE and HER COUNSEL chose to present her, not us.

Ok, her counsel chose to present her that way and she is not shy or a prude, does that change anything? Promiscuous women can be/are raped and often times women do try to hide their sexual history because of the stigma.

So, no, her being a skank is not proof that she is either honest or lying.

But if you want to play that game, then you have to play it with Rose too who is also a skank.

We're talking about two skanky people here. One of them is lying.

I have given Rose the same consideration I have given her, everything I said about Rose revolves around his own comments which make him come across as an unsympathetic to put it mildly.

Just humor me for a second, why should Derrick Rose empathize with this woman?

Isn't it evident at this point that her feelings of melancholy and betrayal are largely fabricated?

[Johnny Hoops]

Looks wise she liver than Lala. But as far as character and personality obviously she is a thot and a money-grab.

Figured D-Fish would beat Rose to this girl.

Where is Fisher when we need him?

[HarthorneWingo]

You are getting righteous without having a full deck it seems unless you feel it is irrelevant the defense has a deposition from a friend of the plaintiff saying she admitted they didn't rape her AND admitting she is doing this because she's broke.

Nothing I hate more than pointing fingers at women who claim they were raped and assuming they are lying, but in this case she seems to be a liar.

We are not cavemen. We are responding to the evidence presented and she looks like a gold digger. Deal with it, but don't make us out to be trogs for being frank about what is going on here.

I did not know there was a deposition from a friend of the accuser, you are the first one to mention that, all I've read is people bringing up her pasts history as a reason for her not having credibility. Like I said I don't know what happened, I never said that Rose raped her, I just found it disgusting that her not being a shy prude means that she has no credibility.

Well we've been talking about this for weeks now and you jumped in and made some of your own harsh assumptions about our character. We may make jokes and be naughty critters too, but if you are really paying attention and were up to speed you would realize almost all of the harshest criticisms made of her have been grounded in actual context whereas your comments were not.

For instance, you immediately assumed we are making a case that a woman has to be prim and proper to be believable when she makes a rape accusation. And based on that assumption of yours you proceeded to call us dirtbags.

Now how the heck did you come to that conclusion? Did you literally not even bother to read the past three pages of the thread? Because if you had you would see quite clearly the clarification is about how SHE and HER COUNSEL chose to present her, not us.

I have spent weeks watching this on the sidelines and have said all along nobody will get the absolute truth, but we'll have a very clear idea on what the truth really is. She never went to the police and there is no physical evidence. This is a civil trial, not a criminal trial. Los Angeles LAPD and AG declined to file criminal charges. And there is one, maybe two now, witnesses who know the plaintiff who have given their depositions that she is a liar.

So, no, her being a skank is not proof that she is either honest or lying.

But if you want to play that game, then you have to play it with Rose too who is also a skank.

We're talking about two skanky people here. One of them is lying.

Did someone say "skank"? As in "skanky skank skankity skank!"

[Swoosh_Stripes]

Well we've been talking about this for weeks now and you jumped in and made some of your own harsh assumptions about our character. We may make jokes and be naughty critters too, but if you are really paying attention and were up to speed you would realize almost all of the harshest criticisms made of her have been grounded in actual context whereas your comments were not.

For instance, you immediately assumed we are making a case that a woman has to be prim and proper to be believable when she makes a rape accusation.

I made no assumptions, I responded to what I read, in some cases people were saying her being with other guys ruined her credibility.

And based on that assumption of yours you proceeded to call us dirtbags.

Show me where I called you a dirtbag, talk about sensitive, what you're attributing to me is in you mind and that's on you not me.

Now how the heck did you come to that conclusion? Did you literally not even bother to read the past three pages of the thread? Because if you had you would see quite clearly the clarification is about how SHE and HER COUNSEL chose to present her, not us.

Ok, her counsel chose to present her that way and she is not shy or a prude, does that change anything? Promiscuous women can be/are raped and often times women do try to hide their sexual history because of the stigma.

So, no, her being a skank is not proof that she is either honest or lying.

But if you want to play that game, then you have to play it with Rose too who is also a skank.

We're talking about two skanky people here. One of them is lying.

I have given Rose the same consideration I have given her, everything I said about Rose revolves around his own comments which make him come across as an unsympathetic to put it mildly.

Just humor me for a second, why should Derrick Rose empathize with this woman?

Isn't it evident at this point that her feelings of melancholy and betrayal are largely fabricated?

Who said anything about being sympathetic to her? Sexual assault is a serious problem that hits close to home for a lot of people to have such a cavalier attitude about such a serious issue is never going to be well received in the public's eye. Speaking in a courtroom as though you're speaking to your friends is not smart, but that's just my view of it.