Summary 35 year old Chad gets knuckle deep in 17 year old slut. Year later slut cries sexual assault, can't back it with evidence. Female prosecutor doesn't care. Chad's trial starts today.

Body I am a long-time RP Criminal Attorney (who thankfully doesn't handle domestic or sex crimes cases) in a blue pill Office who witnesses the female bias and blue pill, feminist, agenda in the law on a daily basis. It scares me, and it should scare you, enough to be constantly covering your ass every time you engage in sexual activity.

18 months ago 35 yr old Chad comes home from bar and finger-bangs his daughter's 17 yr old slut best friend who is attending a sleepover with 5 or 6 girls. Moral judgments aside, this is perfectly legal so long as both individuals consent. The age of consent in my state is 16. Fast forward exactly one year. Slut, now 18, comes forward to State Police claiming sexual assault against Chad. Slut says deed started in a room with 3 other girls present, ends in bedroom. (They switched rooms in the middle.) Slut didn't say no, didn't wake the other girls in the room, or at any time revoke implied consent, rather, she says she couldn't say no because they were kissing. Finger-bang sesh concludes, slut then wakes friend and tells her what happened. Slut doesn't report the "crime" for a year. This is the totality of the evidence against Chad.

Female Prosecuting Attorney sees evidence, doesn't care the case is weak at best, and charges Chad with 1st degree sexual assault and 2nd degree sexual assault. Chad is now facing up to 30 years in the pen. for something slut could have, but did not, say "no" to. To make matters worse, Female Prosecutor is getting an instruction from BP Judge that "Chad has a sexual predilection towards children" because his browser history shows he has previously looked at teen porn websites.

Let's break this down into what actually happened that night and how slut, State Police, and Prosecutor spun this into 2 rape charges.

What actually happened: Chad comes home from bar and sees slut is only girl in the room still awake. Realizes he is horny and she is hot so he starts to rub up on and kiss slut. Slut doesn't say no, so he gets a little stinky pinky. Chad is a little drunk and it gets a little weird because he is fumbling around down there so they stop. Chad goes to sleep, slut wakes her friend and tells her what just happened then they all fall asleep. Everyone leaves in the morning as if nothing happened. During the next year slut gets shamed for being the slut she is and letting a chad 2x her age digitally explore her fuckhole. Daddy finds out and flips shit on slut. Slut now comes forward saying she didn't consent.

Slut-spin: At no time did slut revoke consent for the sexual act. Lacking an affirmative consent statute we can therefore determine that slut consented. However, for a year after the act slut was shamed for being the deep-rooted-daddy-issues slut she is. (side note: slut's father spent just shy of a decade in the pen for drugs) Convict daddy finds out and flips shit on slut. Slut now forms regret for the finger-bang. The hamster spins and spins until she realizes that she can frame this as a rape. She now fully believes that she would have said no but she was incapable of saying no because they were kissing. Note the backwards cognitive dissonance.

State Police-spin: Slut goes to report "crime" to state police. My state has a specialized "sex acts against children" task force. Literally every report filed with this agency is investigated to the fullest extent possible. (As it should be. If you are fucking little kids you deserve to have your dick cut off and fed to you on a hot dog bun.) This is where it gets fucking crazy from a legal stand point. Age of consent is 16. My 85 yr old neighbor can legally have sex with a 16 yr old if she consents. However, because slut is under 18, she is still considered a child even though she is an adult for consent purposes. State Police treats slut as weak little girl incapable of her own agency and brings the info to female prosecutor.

She Prosecutor-spin: OMG this cute little 17 yr old girl is incapable of her own agency even though the law gives her the ability to consent. OMG he kissed her and she felt so intimidated by him that she was incapable of saying no. She felt so bad about it and wanted to report it but our culture of Patriarchy pressured her into keeping her mouth shut for a year. As a female prosecutor I must protect the rights of those who are oppressed, exploited, and incapable of their own agency, etc., etc., etc.

This type of situation takes place on a daily basis. The law in which we place our trust and our confidence has been hijacked by the feminist agenda. The chips are stacked against you. Women can, and routinely do, cry rape years after the fact for acts that were consented to. Their word is held as gospel while ours is treated as lies. Similarly, women can have you arrested for domestic violence solely on their word. We often see cases where women allege they were severely beaten and/or strangled minutes before police arrived and charges are filed even when there are no marks visible. (A different, male, prosecutor is notorious for saying "it's VAWA - violence against women act - not VAMA, or VASA," and "revokes a male's 'man-card'" for crying domestic violence)

As Red Pill Men we must constantly cover our asses. The law favors the women and a woman scorned (or pumped-and-dumped) will do everything and anything in her power to rationalize her actions; even if it means lying to the authorities about being raped or battered. Evidence to the contrary will save your behind.

Stay Frosty

  • Val