In college rape accusation case, the panel was trained to be "very, very cautious in accepting a man’s claim that he has been wrongly accused of abuse or violence” and that indicator of guilt is that the accused will “act persuasive and logical.”

DavidByron2 · 2015-02-06T05:46:10+00:00

Trained by who?

This is the feminist protection racket in practice. If you're a university and you don't want to be attacked by feminists you have to pay them literally and figuratively. You have to adopt their policies and hire their people as "trainers" or whatever.

Turtle_Color_Accents · 2015-02-06T09:36:37+00:00

Yeah, because being logical about a reality that proves that you COULDN"T HAVE POSSIBLY RAPED A WOMAN...means you raped her. #feminst"logic"

SigmundFloyd76 · 2015-02-06T12:51:13+00:00

one indication of an abuser is that he will “act persuasive and logical.”

What? This makes NO sense and defies reason.

I was spuriously and falsely accused of domestic violence by my ex as a tool to gain control of our children and my house (3 years ago). A hell I can't even wish on her, as the mother of my children (the father's paradox).

On the two occasions where I was actually able to stand before a judge and profess my innocence; the one comfort I took was that I was certainly PERSUASIVE and LOGICAL. The one and only really good thing I had going for me, after being ground down to a shell of my former self; was that I was RIGHT, I was innocent, and this was an injustice of immeasurable magnitude.

I had the passion of a father forced apart from his children and the conviction of an honest person. I was able to present the situation in a logical manner. to Think that, in any context, this would work against anybody in a similar situation is disgusting.

What we're saying is this: If the accused has a logical explanation and your tendency is to instinctively believe him, then THIS is proof that he's guilty. Ignore you human intuition. Shocking.

Surely it's based on the parallel and junk science that I keep running into in this context.

MisterDamage · 2015-02-06T12:08:00+00:00

In any hearing, being persuasive and logical is the only means by which a person accused can prevail. That advice stands as a profound roadblock to an accused ever being acquitted.

Mission accomplished.

5eraph · 2015-02-06T14:46:15+00:00

Indicators of guilt:

1) Act persuasive and logical. Clearly he's trying to be manipulative and get away with something

2) Act panicked and emotional. Clearly he is overwhelmed with the guilt of his actions. Clearly guilty.

So... just a pseudo-"scientific" way to ensure that people who make judgements in these cases always return with the "right" verdict. Man = guilty. Woman = victim.

NUMBERS2357 · 2015-02-06T12:08:54+00:00

I remember this - it was Stanford's "training" materials. The context of the entire packet of materials made it worse. I don't think it's online anymore, it used to be on The Fire's website. It had very little in the way of procedures, but it had an exerpt from a book called "Why does he do that?" or something, it said that maintaining your innocence is a sign of guilt, it had a poem from a DV victim ... everything about it conveyed "if you don't find him guilty then fuck you, you're complicit in violence". Then at the end there's like 2 pages of 'what rights do people have' which didn't include any details on procedure, or the right to present exculpatory evidence (though detailed enough in the list of rights to include the right to know what time the proceeding starts).

titocosa · 2015-02-06T14:27:49+00:00

"has been aiding a student found guilty of sexual misconduct for having sex with a female student while they both were intoxicated. "

so they both were charged and sanctioned?

piranha_solution · 2015-02-06T15:06:28+00:00

"He was, like, using all these words and stuff, like, to try to convince us he wasn't guilty. He was like, doing pretty good at it, too. Like, because I was actually starting to think he wasn't, like, guilty, or anything. You know? So, like, he must be guilty."

Wargame4life · 2015-02-06T15:16:54+00:00

that indicator of guilt is that the accused will “act persuasive and logical.”

fucking hell that is some onion shit right there

Keiichi81 · 2015-02-06T15:50:41+00:00

Article from July 2011 btw...

thename226 · 2015-02-06T18:23:42+00:00

This is like witch hunts. If she drowns then she's not a witch but she's dead and if she doesn't drown she's a witch and must be killed.

Meistermalkav · 2015-02-06T15:53:21+00:00

Everybody that gets this kind of treatment , it is denying a fair and impartial trial.

Lawyers for all trials, sue the universities, and force the people that publish "He is guilty, I know it!" to publish redactions as part of the settlement, if he is not guilty.

Because if you confess to acting under the pesumption of guilt, any lawyer worth his salt can toss the case out and launch the countersuit of sexist discrimination, with a suing value of a couple of millions to make the university think over its policies. .

Vandechoz · 2015-02-06T17:54:53+00:00

Stanford shifted to the “preponderance” standard in the middle of his case.

wow wtf

vox_libertatis · 2015-02-06T21:42:10+00:00

Guys, gals, calm down...they're forcing logic and reasoning upon them against their will and consent. Feminists don't consent to common sense and thought, so any attempt to introduce it is mind rape. /s

perogies · 2015-02-06T21:46:49+00:00

'Act persuasive and logical'

are you fucking kidding me..

cajunrevenge · 2015-02-06T17:00:35+00:00

So if a guy masturbate after having a beer is he guilty of raping himself?

Unenjoyed · 2015-02-06T17:10:16+00:00

Since students do not give up their rights as citizens when they attend college, perhaps someone needs to press the matter aggressively.

guywithaccount · 2015-02-06T17:20:33+00:00

indicator of guilt is that the accused will “act persuasive and logical.”

That is some industrial-grade kafkatrap bullshit right there.

olioster · 2015-02-06T17:34:00+00:00

Listen and believe.

jostler57 · 2015-02-06T18:15:44+00:00

It's so absurd, I burst out laughing. This is what idiocracy looks like.

TracyMorganFreeman · 2015-02-07T02:10:16+00:00

The indicator of guilt is acting as if he has a case for not being guilty.

FTFY.

xxr500 · 2015-02-06T18:13:32+00:00

Your denial is only further proof your guilt!

Comments