TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Man found guilty of sexually assaulting York U student - CityNews

speed58

July 21, 2016
8 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://www.citynews.ca/2016/07/21/man-accused-of-sexually-assaulting-york-u-student-found-guilty/
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Man found guilty of sexually assaulting York U student - CityNews
Author

speed58

Upvotes 8
Comments 18
Date July 21, 2016 5:44 PM UTC
(9 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/4ty8dq/man_found_guilty_of_sexually_assaulting_york_u/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/man-found-guilty-of-sexually-assaulting-york-u.945148
https://theredarchive.com/post/945148
Top posts by speed58

University Might Expel Student Who Criticized Black Lives Matter

30 upvotes
July 12, 2016
/r/MensRights

Putting women soldiers like me on the front line is dangerous

23 upvotes
July 8, 2016
/r/MensRights

Osheaga attendee claims she was drugged and no one helped - Never had drink tested

10 upvotes
August 2, 2016
/r/MensRights

Formula One champion Damon Hill: 'Racing made me want another identity'-Good article on overcoming depression

9 upvotes
September 6, 2016
/r/MensRights

Will BelieveTheVictim get to the Canadaian judiciary? Judge says counselling will make him a better judge

6 upvotes
July 8, 2016
/r/MensRights

Comments

[+][deleted] 10 years ago* (12 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]girlwriteswhat 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

His word was completely dismissed, it seems, because the judge simply was unable to believe such a thing even could happen. From his statements, he seems incapable of conceiving a reality in which a woman might aggressively pursue sex with a man, and a man would (try to) turn down sex with a woman.

So yes... hmmm...

[–]Demonspawn 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I'm going to assume that Canada has rape shield laws similar to the US; meaning that even if this woman had a history of being sexually aggressive the man would not have been allowed to present it to the court.

I'm reminded of a case in the US where 6 people (male and female) were accused of a brutal gang rape on a not-quite-retarded woman. Out of the 6, 5 pleaded guilty. The 6th held out, and after a long trial that went to appellate court a few times was finally acquitted.

Why? Because the girl had a history of enjoying rough group sex in the S&M style (bondage, beating, etc.). The 5 who accepted plea bargains knew even with massive fees and a long trial they would likely lose. The 6th (a woman, IIRC) had to fight and fight and fight to get the presumed victim's sexual history before the jury due to the rape shield laws. The case literally took years.

In all (non-statutory) rape cases, there exists a reasonable doubt against guilt: that the presumed victim consented. All rape case convictions are decided by the jury or judge making the decision that there is no reasonable way that said presumed victim would have consented. That's what every rape case comes down to. With rape-shield laws preventing the accused from demonstrating that said presumed victim has a history of consenting to X, there should be no successful convictions on a non-statutory rape charge... there is a reasonable doubt created by laws that there is exculpatory evidence that the defendant is not allowed to present.

[–]girlwriteswhat 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Canada has worse rape shield laws than the US, I would guess. In the recent Ghomeshi case, the only reason the defence was allowed to bring in evidence of the accusers' behavior after the alleged assaults was because the Crown was stupid enough to open that line of questioning.

The Crown: What did you do after the assault? Accuser: I avoided any further contact with him. Defence: You avoided any further contact with him? Accuser: Yes, of course I would. I was traumatized. Defence: Could you read these dozens of emails, texts and handwritten love letters you sent him over the course of more than a year after the alleged assault, where you are obviously and aggressively pursuing a sexual relationship with him? Here, read this one where you dance around the "M" word. Oh, and can you also read his responses, which are almost entirely polite and diplomatic rebuffs?

And even with all of that it wasn't their pursuit of him after the fact that got the guy acquitted. It was that everything they testified to that could be verified was demonstrated to be false. The judge allowed that over a year of aggressive pursuit of a romantic/sexual relationship with the guy after the fact was not necessarily proof that the woman had not been assaulted--it was simply proof, given her prior testimony, that her word could not be trusted.

[–]deez_nuts_730 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I am unsure of the US on the whole, but I am in the military and our military does have something similar to your rape shield law. I was accused of a sexual assault and the attorneys weren't allowed to reference anything relating to the accusers sexual history.

Also in the military (again I am unsure about the rest of our country,) Not only does the prosecution have to prove that consent wasn't given, but they also have to prove that the accused couldn't have believed that there was no consent. Meaning that even if someone didn't give consent, there is still a defense if the accused "reasonably believed" there was consent. If this is also true outside of the military, then that could save the asses of a lot of men.

[–]bufedad 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

that the presumed victim consented.

Or lied. Or is mistaken about the identity of her attacker. Or hallucinated the whole thing. OR any number of other things that might make the accused innocent of the charges.

[–]Consilio_et_Animis 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Or dreamt it...

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/new-trial-man-jailed-28-years-dream-rape-claim-article-1.2469667

[–]Demonspawn 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That case is so fucking weird. I don't think of that one as a false rape allegation, since there was a rape. I think of it as a mis-targeted accusation... based on a dream (and the prosecutors going along with it?? And, IIRC, it being admitted to be dream evidence in court and the jury went along with it!!??!!).

Seriously... WTF?

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah... that shit scares the hell out of me.

[–]Vermouth1991 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm going to assume that Canada has rape shield laws similar to the US; meaning that even if this woman had a history of being sexually aggressive the man would not have been allowed to present it to the court.

SLUT-SHAAAAAMMMMING.

(>-<)

[–]DevilishRogue 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I've been in the exact situation the guy described with a girl coming onto me and getting upset and using emotional blackmail to get me to let her stay only to find that later on she wants more. It's shocking that on the evidence presented in the article that anyone could think there wasn't reasonable doubt.

[–]Vermouth1991 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

About a decade ago when I first learned of the fact that men are perfectly capable of not wanting sex from a woman, I came up with a perfectly valid reason: For all you know he's devoutly religious and wants to remain a virgin until he's married.

[–]Consilio_et_Animis 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

She texted him that night: Afterwards, they could have “hot sex” she wrote in a text message sent shortly before 8 p.m. Then she went back to his place; after they both tried to persuade a friend of hers to join in a threesome.

http://news.nationalpost.com/toronto/crown-accuses-defence-of-hauling-out-rape-myths-in-closing-statements-for-trial-involving-university-students

Five days after the alleged assault, Ururyar sent this text message to Gray: “I am sorry things went as they did. I shouldn’t have said and done some of the things I did. I was upset and felt wronged by you but that does not excuse my own mistakes.”

The defence said Ururyar was apologizing for a bad breakup; the Crown said he was trying to apologize for rape without incriminating himself.

[–]Mens-Advocate 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This seems to be little more than an oath-on-oath case (he-said-she-said). If so, any conclusions drawn (including by the judge) are inherently unreliable:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/4a8xw3/potential_argument_against_hesaidshesaid/

[–]deez_nuts_730 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

At least the article is fairly balanced in trying not to paint the man as guilty. They should have reported more of the evidence however like whether or not the text message was sent, if there were any witnesses, if there were any easily identifiable holes in either individuals stories...

[–]JebberJabber 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

Justice Marvin Zuker said in his decision that he rejected Ururyar’s testimony and called his narrative a total fabrication.

Zuker said Ururyar paints Gray as the aggressor, and that she sexually assaulted him by groping his leg twice.

“His version is without reality; it never never happened,” the judge said. “It begs credulity; it never happened, none of it.”

The judge so aggressively rejects the defendant's whole story, he must have justified that elsewhere in the judgement. This is a judgement beyond reasonable doubt, not a matter of preferring one witness' testimony over another on balance.

Are Canadian judgements available free or does anyone here have access? Even without hearing the evidence, just reading the judgement would give some idea of his thinking. There is really nothing to go on in the article.

[–]omegaphallic 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

A copy of a Supreme Court of Canada Judgement costs $15, $350 for an annul subscription.

I would not be surprised if the costs for other Canadian courts was the same.

[–]JebberJabber 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Thanks. The National post has posted photocopies of the whole judgement, but this is the digital text version:

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/2016/2016oncj448/2016oncj448.html

I read all 180 pages and don't see where the judge gets his absolute certainty from.

Her story all makes sense and fits their TXT evidence. His story isn't ridiculous but it has a bunch of weak points. One of the pair is lying outrageously so I'm pretty sure he's guilty.

I don't think this case would normally get a conviction, I've seen what I thought were much stronger cases fail. So there might be a reversal on appeal.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter