It's almost like Bob is really dishonest or something.

It's almost like most people are both dishonest, and misinformed to the extreme...

This is false. Sex with a minor (who cannot legally consent) is a straight rape charge.

There may be other charges that indicate that the rape charge is something other than what it appears, but no, you're wrong. Further, given that the only information I have on the case as relates to this topic is from the OP, there is both sexual assault and rape charges.

I asked you for facts, I informed you that you do not understand what "rape" can indicate, and you call me liar. Yet in the majority of states, it's a legal FACT that "Rape" includes not only unconsenting aka forced sex, but it includes sex with a person that, due to statute, cannot legally consent.

Note: There are a few states where inebriated females cannot legally consent. Therefore, even if they consent, it will be charged as "Rape" and that is the literal charge. The fact that it's only "rape" due to statute, and not the status of consent, is completely irrelevant.

Not in New York, where the case is, which you would know if you even looked at the title and used google.

Oh look, Bob being dishonest. This is new and unusual. /s

This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on Nov 23 2021 10:52pm

Wait a second... Let's talk about people being dishonest, shall we? I made a generalized statement, and you've made an absolute statement regarding New York. First, city or state? Second, given that you've apparently looked up legal code in New York, why can't you simply provide a source on all charges and relevant facts of the case?

Who's being dishonest, here? Who has an agenda? I'm going to be as forthright as it's possible to be: If this guy's a true rapist, I'd like to see him executed. If, on the other hand, this guy is not guilty of forced rape, but statute-based rape, then I need details to come to a decision.

I've repeatedly requested for information regarding this case, and you specifically refuse to provide that information, yet you've indicated this case points to "white culture".

Who, Thor, is being dishonest? The guy simply looking for enough information to make up his mind with nothing to gain whatsoever, or the guy refusing to support his points while claiming his racist political point of "white culture" is at fault?

You are being dishonest. You are asking others to do basic google searches for you instead of just looking things up. Instead of being a toddler why not do your own homework?

Paramount + still contributing nothing to a conversation

I'm not. I've done the "basic google search" and come up with the first 30 pages of results being media reporting on what they think of the case, not on the facts of the case or the results.

I've asked for a fact-based rundown of the case, and the specific charges. I've received none of the above, from google OR from you. Provide those results, or stop discussing "dishonest" Mr. Agenda.

I have no agenda other than The Truth. I shall quote your agenda:



Which, I shall point out, is racist. Purely, simply, racist. If this one man, or even his judgement, are indicative of all white people, let's discuss Darrell Brooks, shall we?

Didn't think so.

If you actually wanted a fact based rundown you would find it. Instead you've just shown you're not willing to do any reading for yourself.

Dishonest and lazy. You are what's wrong with the white race honestly.

Why are you still lying, Thor?

You're refusing to present facts you claim to have because you feel they'll damage your agenda, is the only conclusion I'm left to draw.

Liars' veto will not win.