Woman tries to have a man arrested for sexual crimes saying he killed a dog in front of her to keep her from going to the police, the dog was found alive absolving him from the crimes. And they just let her walk away.

mikesteane · 2018-09-11T23:58:48+00:00

The woman who lied about this needs to be charged with perjury and attempting to pervert the course of justice. A strong signal needs to be sent that false accusations will not be tolerated.

Electroverted · 2018-09-12T03:30:01+00:00

she still gets to keep her anonymity too

R3DLOTU5 · 2018-09-11T23:26:26+00:00

Xpost from /r/upliftingnews

FlagrantWrongsDotCom · 2018-09-12T04:51:12+00:00

/r/JusticeServed assuming a quality identification of the dog was done etc.

If anybody finds my dog flint that my ex gf/her father John C. Rogers etc who turned terrorist killed, taunted me about, then had a police chief admit to systematically falsifying/destroying/tampering legally protected records then mishandling records, then being arrested on blatantly false charges when I was the victim of multiple crimes in an entirely different country after readily documentable ex gf claims we never even dated once among a long list of other things in the statement as well as other things she/her father have done I would greatly appreciate it if you let me know. My dog was actually capable of love and loyalty to something. Wow that was a run on sentence and I hardly even got into just whats pretty much readily documented/confessed. Wonder if theres even a single red flag here for law enforcement or anybody interested in actually protecting national/international security? Do people remember reading about when they used to just straight up publicly execute people who did less than this? Almost like there was a time when people actually thought that people that pretty much murdered 1000s of people per year including "citizens of the same nationality" needed to no longer be threats to the rest of society.

thrway_1000 · 2018-09-12T05:35:07+00:00

Archive -- https://archive.is/BL9M6

azazelcrowley · 2018-09-12T14:48:28+00:00

When feminists blame mental health issues for false accusers to excuse their behavior, what they're essentially saying is that the person is a threat to the public due to mental illness. That's not a reason to let them go. It's a reason to have them committed. But they never argue for that, because they're not sincere in their defense of the people, and are merely using it as an excuse to defend female privilege, and womens socially sanctioned ability to harm men without consequences when they want to, keeping men in a position where they are aware if they upset a woman or give her reason for grievance, violence, either physical or social, can be the consequence, with no redress.

That these people are threats to the public is never the focus. It's always shifted by feminists, deliberately, onto female victimhood and gynocentrism. In doing so, they attack the notion of prison as a rehabilitative process and as a means of keeping the public safe, implying it is there solely as a punitive measure, which is revealing of their underlying biases and contempt for men, and urge to punish them when they commit crimes, but find excuses for women for why they don't deserve punishment. (But notably, entirely ignore the question of whether they are a threat to the public.)

The purpose of prison is threefold, to seperate dangerous individuals from the public, to rehabilitate those individuals, and to punish them. Of these, the last is the most dubious and scrutinized, yet it is the one feminists rely on in their defenses of these cases as though it were the only purpose of prison. That can only be explained through deliberately duplicity and lying, or a manifestation of bias revealing of their underlying prejudices and tendencies.

The essence of their argument is that women who are a threat to the public and violent toward others either socially or physically should not be considered or perceived as threats to the public, and our focus should instead be on her and her wellbeing. This is because feminists are gynocentrists and female supremacists. Their behavior here is merely another instance of them expressing the same tired and dysfunctional ideological lens and priority order that they utilize for everything, with obviously negative results. The reasons their approach is flawed and dysfunctional (And causes danger to other people) are apparent in this isolated example, but can be found everywhere they apply their worldview.

The feminist pathology and inability or unwillingness to confront ways in which women can be threats to the wellbeing of others, and deeply embedded insecurity and hostility to the notion that it isn't appropriate to always cast things in terms of the womans wellbeing when other people are also involved, is rooted in their chauvinism and expressed best in their inane theories about the nature of sexism, which are merely this kind of behavior writ large and rationalized as an explanation for a whole system.

While the feminist might vaguely be aware of how the woman is a threat to the public here, the feminists ideology induced dysfunction and pathology means they do not focus on it and encourage others to focus elsewhere. In terms of crime and punishment and the safety of the public, that is an obvious failure of their worldview to be reasonable.

Comments