Jameis Winston Decision 2pm

[wizards8507]

The "paperwork" you list does not show any report of the victims genitals, which if you read the actual SANE report, which this is not there is a very accurate description of real damage, very consistent with forcible rape.

What's the difference between the genitals of a rape victim and the genitals of someone who had consensual sex? I'm not being snarky, I'm serious. I feel like evidence of rape would show up elsewhere on the body in the form of bruising, ligature marks, etc. As far as genitals go, what's the difference between a raping penis and a welcome one? In fact, a well-endowed man would probably leave more "evidence" from consensual sex than a rapist with a small penis would.

I'm not professing anyone's innocence but I put very little stock in the evidence found by a rape kit. It would be useful if the accused denied all sexual activity whatsoever, but it's not particularly effective at distinguishing between rape and consensual sex.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S III using Tapatalk 4

 

[Bogtrotter07]

What's the difference between the genitals of a rape victim and the genitals of someone who had consensual sex? I'm not being snarky, I'm serious. I feel like evidence of rape would show up elsewhere on the body in the form of bruising, ligature marks, etc. As far as genitals go, what's the difference between a raping penis and a welcome one? In fact, a well-endowed man would probably leave more "evidence" from consensual sex than a rapist with a small penis would.

I'm not professing anyone's innocence but I put very little stock in the evidence found by a rape kit. It would be useful if the accused denied all sexual activity whatsoever, but it's not particularly effective at distinguishing between rape and consensual sex.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S III using Tapatalk 4

This post is self explanatory.

Not the answers to the questions posed. The disingenuous way questions doubting the forensic science behind diagnosing forced penetration and the alternative.

This post belongs with the guy that explained how in "legitimate rape" the woman's body has a way of shutting things down.

There is a subculture of woman hatred, which appears to be worse in the South, perhaps because sunny states like Florida lead the nation in per capita resident sexual offenders. All the science is available on the internet through reputable sources, and much is detailed earlier in this thread. There is a strong minority of young guys that feel that they are upstanding and maybe successful guys and that they deserve sex. Especially when they strike out, but not always, they get angry. This is what drives our rape culture.

Sadly, there are others who are not wired this way, but who also are recalcitrant to look at things from an empathetic perspective, who further occlude seeing the true misogynists for who they are. That is how things get so bent that a Santa Barbra happens. And that is how things get so bent that millions put a sociopathic head case with football ability ahead of his victims. (Shades of Gator football and A Hernandez!)

 

[GoIrish41]

What's the difference between the genitals of a rape victim and the genitals of someone who had consensual sex? I'm not being snarky, I'm serious. I feel like evidence of rape would show up elsewhere on the body in the form of bruising, ligature marks, etc. As far as genitals go, what's the difference between a raping penis and a welcome one? In fact, a well-endowed man would probably leave more "evidence" from consensual sex than a rapist with a small penis would.

I'm not professing anyone's innocence but I put very little stock in the evidence found by a rape kit. It would be useful if the accused denied all sexual activity whatsoever, but it's not particularly effective at distinguishing between rape and consensual sex.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S III using Tapatalk 4

Doctors simply look for the switch in the woman's body that "shuts that whole thing down." If that switch is flipped, its a rape. If not, it was consentual.

 

[kmoose]

What's the difference between the genitals of a rape victim and the genitals of someone who had consensual sex?

This post is self explanatory.

Not the answers to the questions posed. The disingenuous way questions doubting the forensic science behind diagnosing forced penetration and the alternative.

This post belongs with the guy that explained how in "legitimate rape" the woman's body has a way of shutting things down.

There is a subculture of woman hatred, which appears to be worse in the South, perhaps because sunny states like Florida lead the nation in per capita resident sexual offenders. All the science is available on the internet through reputable sources, and much is detailed earlier in this thread. There is a strong minority of young guys that feel that they are upstanding and maybe successful guys and that they deserve sex. Especially when they strike out, but not always, they get angry. This is what drives our rape culture.

Sadly, there are others who are not wired this way, but who also are recalcitrant to look at things from an empathetic perspective, who further occlude seeing the true misogynists for who they are. That is how things get so bent that a Santa Barbra happens. And that is how things get so bent that millions put a sociopathic head case with football ability ahead of his victims. (Shades of Gator football and A Hernandez!)

So, in other words, you don't know? Because I am wondering basically the same thing...... many women enjoy "rough" sex, and I am wondering how the trauma from consentual, rough sex would differ from the trauma of rape?

 

[Cackalacky]

"Rape Kits" (abhorent term BTW) are typically used to identify an unknown assailant or confirm the accused assailant. The procedure itself is a thorough examination of sources of DNA left by the assailant to prove the act of sex. Rape allegations will then be determined by other physical trauma such as bodily injury , and circumstances. Consent would have to be determined by jury. They are extremely good at identifying foreign DNA, but if the assailant has no identity then it is not worth much except for going into a national database for future reference. If it can confirm the assailants identity, it is proof of intercourse.

A well endowed man enjoying consenual sex will most likely not leave bruises, broken bones, ligament damage, etc. in other parts of the body on his consort. Typically the signs of struggle include bodily damage to wrist, legs, ankles, thighs, necks, and hair.

 

[Cackalacky]

So, in other words, you don't know? Because I am wondering basically the same thing...... many women enjoy "rough" sex, and I am wondering how the trauma from consentual, rough sex would differ from the trauma of rape?

Because consensual sex does not leave the same physical and psychological scars. Additionally, forensic evidence accumulated (if the girl is able to actually complete the process) is very good at identifying drugs, struggle, and other evidence that leads to a rational conclusion of forced sex. The full process is much more involved than just filling a "kit." The problem is most girls who claim rape, realize the extent of the process and may or may not go through with the whole thing or can only just complete parts of it.

 

[kmoose]

Because consensual sex does not leave the same physical scars.

No offense, but that is the question......... what is different about the physical evidence left behind, between the two?

 

[Cackalacky]

No offense, but that is the question......... what is different about the physical evidence left behind, between the two?

"Rape Kits" (abhorent term BTW) are typically used to identify an unknown assailant or confirm the accused assailant. The procedure itself is a thorough examination of sources of DNA left by the assailant to prove the act of sex. Rape allegations will then be determined by other physical trauma such as bodily injury , and circumstances. Consent would have to be determined by jury. They are extremely good at identifying foreign DNA, but if the assailant has no identity then it is not worth much except for going into a national database for future reference. If it can confirm the assailants identity, it is proof of intercourse.

A well endowed man enjoying consenual sex will most likely not leave bruises, broken bones, ligament damage, etc. in other parts of the body on his consort. Typically the signs of struggle include bodily damage to wrist, legs, ankles, thighs, necks, and hair.

Additionally, the psychological examinations can identify issues.

 

[wizards8507]

"Rape Kits" (abhorent term BTW) are typically used to identify an unknown assailant or confirm the accused assailant. The procedure itself is a thorough examination of sources of DNA left by the assailant to prove the act of sex. Rape allegations will then be determined by other physical trauma such as bodily injury , and circumstances. Consent would have to be determined by jury. They are extremely good at identifying foreign DNA, but if the assailant has no identity then it is not worth much except for going into a national database for future reference. If it can confirm the assailants identity, it is proof of intercourse.

A well endowed man enjoying consenual sex will most likely not leave bruises, broken bones, ligament damage, etc. in other parts of the body on his consort. Typically the signs of struggle include bodily damage to wrist, legs, ankles, thighs, necks, and hair.

Additionally, the psychological examinations can identify issues.

I'm not sure if you're trying to disagree with me but I think we're saying the same thing. Bogs kept harping on "genitals, genitals, genitals," and all I was saying is that there's nothing you can get EXCLUSIVELY from genital examination that proves rape versus consensual sex. It can prove penetration, but that's not a disputed fact.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S III using Tapatalk 4

 

[Cackalacky]

I'm not sure if you're trying to disagree with me but I think we're saying the same thing. Bogs kept harping on "genitals, genitals, genitals," and all I was saying is that there's nothing you can get EXCLUSIVELY from genital examination that proves rape versus consensual sex. It can prove penetration, but that's not a disputed fact.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S III using Tapatalk 4

I am neither disagreeing or agreeing with anyone. There are several facets to an investigation and it is grueling, dehumanizing and brutal. There is plenty of evidence that can be obtained from pelvic exams. The extent of which is determined in how much the girl can take physically and mentally and how far the doctors can investigate, how quickly it's reported and assessed and if the assailant is known or not. There will be signs of struggle if it was forced. There is not much disagreement in that. If the girl was passed out or drugged other evidence will support that.

 

[JTLA]

This post is self explanatory.

Not the answers to the questions posed. The disingenuous way questions doubting the forensic science behind diagnosing forced penetration and the alternative.

This post belongs with the guy that explained how in "legitimate rape" the woman's body has a way of shutting things down.

There is a subculture of woman hatred, which appears to be worse in the South, perhaps because sunny states like Florida lead the nation in per capita resident sexual offenders. All the science is available on the internet through reputable sources, and much is detailed earlier in this thread. There is a strong minority of young guys that feel that they are upstanding and maybe successful guys and that they deserve sex. Especially when they strike out, but not always, they get angry. This is what drives our rape culture.

Sadly, there are others who are not wired this way, but who also are recalcitrant to look at things from an empathetic perspective, who further occlude seeing the true misogynists for who they are. That is how things get so bent that a Santa Barbra happens. And that is how things get so bent that millions put a sociopathic head case with football ability ahead of his victims. (Shades of Gator football and A Hernandez!)

Wow. You obviously are not biased and are able to review the facts of THIS case.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

I'm not sure if you're trying to disagree with me but I think we're saying the same thing. Bogs kept harping on "genitals, genitals, genitals," and all I was saying is that there's nothing you can get EXCLUSIVELY from genital examination that proves rape versus consensual sex. It can prove penetration, but that's not a disputed fact.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S III using Tapatalk 4

Pubic hair

Semen

Foreign objects

Bacteria of different varieties

Finger nails

Blood

Scratches

Saliva

Bite marks

STD's

Chemicals including but not limited to soap

Scraping/abrasions in different areas

In some cases examination under a black light shows contact that indicates different things in consensual versus forced contact.

Since rape is a power thing, many instances involve a rapist trying to injure the victim's genitals, breasts, vulva, labia, up to the cervix and even uterus.

When someone is strangled as opposed to drowns, or chokes, the hyoid bone is broken and the victim usually exhibits petechial hemorrhages. The same sort distinction can be observed by trained professionals with a potential rape victim. Is it perfect? Probably not. But I know a group of five SANE Nurse Examiners, and with over fifty years of combined experience, all of them have only been fooled once :

A program called SANE (Sexual Assault Nurse Examiners), established in Tulsa, Oklahoma and several other U.S. cities, seeks to treat the emotional, physical, and legal needs of rape victims with greater consideration and sensitivity. In the SANE program, female nurses are trained to handle the physical examination of the victim and to obtain physical evidence using a sexual offense collection kit. In addition, the nurses are taught to interview the victim about the assault and to keep good records, which are critical to a successful criminal prosecution of the suspect.
Victims are seen in private rooms that are decorated to avoid the look of a sterile, hospital waiting room. The nurse examiner allows the victim to complete the examination at her own pace, in from one to five hours. A police officer is available to transport the evidence to headquarters, but is not allowed in the examining room.
Prosecutors have lauded the SANE program because its nurse examiners are better than emergency-room staff at confirming sexual contact and collecting evidence that shows the encounter was forcible rather than consensual.

 

[irish1958]

Bog touches upon an important point in his discussion of the drowning victim. As a further example, if one comes upon a dead person with a gun shot wound to the chest, what determines if it a suicide or murder? The hole in the chest looks the same.
It is other factors. If the investigating officer refuses to investigate the case for a couple of months and the body is cremated, it is unlikely that a clear answer will be obtained.
Unfortunately that is exactly what happened in this case.

 

[Cackalacky]

Bog touches upon an important point in his discussion of the drowning victim. As a further example, if one comes upon a dead person with a gun shot wound to the chest, what determines if it a suicide or murder? The hole in the chest looks the same.
It is other factors. If the investigating officer refuses to investigate the case for a couple of months and the body is cremated, it is unlikely that a clear answer will be obtained.
Unfortunately that is exactly what happened in this case.

Exactly. Also I am not fully aware of all the police activities in this case, but as far as drug screens etc. there are finite times that a drug remains in the body in a detectable form (pharmacokinetics) and police officer's are well educated of this fact. If they dragged their feet or purposely did not include reported drugs used in the drug panel, that is a serious question that must be addressed.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Bog touches upon an important point in his discussion of the drowning victim. As a further example, if one comes upon a dead person with a gun shot wound to the chest, what determines if it a suicide or murder? The hole in the chest looks the same.
It is other factors. If the investigating officer refuses to investigate the case for a couple of months and the body is cremated, it is unlikely that a clear answer will be obtained.
Unfortunately that is exactly what happened in this case.

Irish, a chara,

Am I right for not disclosing any more about the forensics than what I did? Or did I go too far?

Beir bua agus beannacht,

Bogs

Note for general consumption : I have felt hamstrung in this conversation, ethically, because I have seen statistics showing how the CSI shows have "educated" the criminals. It is not that I think anyone on this board fits into that group, but this forum is out there on the internet for anyone to read.

Anyone that wants further information of what rape investigators are looking for should call their local police department and ask to speak with a veteran investigator. Preferably a woman. I think that would be helpful.

I still find it interesting that people cannot envision the difference between "rough sex" whatever that is, and rape. A good mental exercise may be to envision a boxing match, with gloves and head gear, versus a street brawl with brass knuckles saps bare feet and boots. That just reminded me of a high school fight were a kid who went down had the impression of the "Red Ball Jets" logo on his face, more than once. One could surmise that wasn't a fair or organized fight.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Exactly. Also I am not fully aware of all the police activities in this case, but as far as drug screens etc. there are finite times that a drug remains in the body in a detectable form (pharmacokinetics) and police officer's are well educated of this fact. If they dragged their feet or purposely did not include reported drugs used in the drug panel, that is a serious question that must be addressed.

The screen panel was narrow and very late. No hair.

 

[Cackalacky]

The screen panel was narrow and very late. No hair.

 

[kmoose]

I still find it interesting that people cannot envision the difference between "rough sex" whatever that is, and rape.

So you don't know what "rough sex" is, but you can't understand why people can't see the difference between it and rape?

Nice

*edit* And, for the record, no one was questioning the psychological differences....... the question was how the physical evidence varies?

 

[philipm31]

I think he answered that pretty conclusively.

The fact that there is any debate about this at all is because the accused is a football player, and because the TPD did an absolutely crappy job of "investigating".

 

[philipm31]

This post is self explanatory.

Not the answers to the questions posed. The disingenuous way questions doubting the forensic science behind diagnosing forced penetration and the alternative.

This post belongs with the guy that explained how in "legitimate rape" the woman's body has a way of shutting things down.

There is a subculture of woman hatred, which appears to be worse in the South, perhaps because sunny states like Florida lead the nation in per capita resident sexual offenders. All the science is available on the internet through reputable sources, and much is detailed earlier in this thread. There is a strong minority of young guys that feel that they are upstanding and maybe successful guys and that they deserve sex. Especially when they strike out, but not always, they get angry. This is what drives our rape culture.

Sadly, there are others who are not wired this way, but who also are recalcitrant to look at things from an empathetic perspective, who further occlude seeing the true misogynists for who they are. That is how things get so bent that a Santa Barbra happens. And that is how things get so bent that millions put a sociopathic head case with football ability ahead of his victims. (Shades of Gator football and A Hernandez!)

I cannot rep you enough, Bogs.

Nicely explained, man.

 

[irish1958]

So you don't know what "rough sex" is, but you can't understand why people can't see the difference between it and rape?

Are you evoking the uncertainty principle of Heisenberg? I can see no other reason for that statement.

 

[kmoose]

Are you evoking the uncertainty principle of Heisenberg? I can see no other reason for that statement.

I'm evoking the "I'm calling BS principle of k.moose". When you say that you can't understand why people don't see the difference between A and B, you are insinuating that you DO see it. But how can you see the difference between A and B, when you admit that you don't know what A is?

 

[Cackalacky]

I'm evoking the "I'm calling BS principle of k.moose". When you say that you can't understand why people don't see the difference between A and B, you are insinuating that you DO see it. But how can you see the difference between A and B, when you admit that you don't know what A is?

I am sure google and google images can help sort out any information you might need to help you see the difference. Probably a discussion better left elsewhere or explored on ones own.... you know?

 

[kmoose]

I am sure google and google images can help sort out any information you might need to help you see the difference. Probably a discussion better left elsewhere or explored on ones own.... you know?

I'm sorry for seeking answers from anyone who presented their self as being knowledgable on the subject.

 

[Cackalacky]

I'm sorry for seeking answers from anyone who presented their self as being knowledgable on the subject.

No problem, I just think that trying to get descriptions or pictures of the differences of raped vaginas and casually roughed up vaginas is a bit out of the realm of this message board. There are others out there but I think they require a credit card.

 

[kmoose]

No problem, I just think that trying to get descriptions or pictures of the differences of raped vaginas and casually roughed up vaginas is a bit out of the realm of this message board. There are others out there but I think they require a credit card.

Whoa!! No one said anything about pictures. And the descriptions could have been pretty clinical. No offense, but we are all adults here, and I think that a clinical, generic description would not be out of line.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Whoa!! No one said anything about pictures. And the descriptions could have been pretty clinical. No offense, but we are all adults here, and I think that a clinical, generic description would not be out of line.

I still find it interesting that people cannot envision the difference between "rough sex" whatever that is, and rape.

The other, and correct way, to read my statement is "how ever defined", instead of "whatever that is," if it helps you to a better understanding of my statement. Pardon me if I added a faux lexiconic idiom to our conversation.

You see for me rough sex may be different than for what it is to you. And then you have the idiots that believe all that was written into the magazine "forums." Do they still have those forums?

There are rapists that have left victims in need of hysterectomies, that have claimed they were just having "consensual rough or physical" sex. And there is Needledick the bugfucker that goes fast for thirty seconds priding himself on giving his woman some "rough sex." I was including the whole range; so my statement could be I don't know how anyone cannot distinguish between what is rape and rough sex, buy any definition. Few women that are raped are prepared for intercourse.

And if someone still wonders, and they have a lot of sexual partners that exhibit bleeding and bruising, etc., then they should pretty much figure what they calculated as rough sex, may be looked at with the light of reality as rape.

I will drop another one, does anyone care to discuss how often and how many women submit to rape? Some of whom don't even realize they are being raped, or have the right to say no?

And, anyone care to speculate the leading cause of death among pregnant women in America through at least 2013? Yup, murder. I have an old acquaintance who is working on a study running through the numbers, looking to see if there is support for a thesis that certain controlling, angry males use "accidental" impregnation, and physical violence as a means of controlling (their) women.

So, I am not going to detail everything I have seen or know; nor did I claim to be an expert. I am rather humble in my opinion, as I didn't challenge anyone with a ludicrous question, to try to trap them into invalidating their points.

 

[ACamp1900]

Whoa!! No one said anything about pictures. And the descriptions could have been pretty clinical. No offense, but we are all adults here, and I think that a clinical, generic description would not be out of line.

 

[kmoose]

That line of thinking gets me every time! I keep forgetting where I am at.

 

[JTLA]

The other, and correct way, to read my statement is "how ever defined", instead of "whatever that is," if it helps you to a better understanding of my statement. Pardon me if I added a faux lexiconic idiom to our conversation.

You see for me rough sex may be different than for what it is to you. And then you have the idiots that believe all that was written into the magazine "forums." Do they still have those forums?

There are rapists that have left victims in need of hysterectomies, that have claimed they were just having "consensual rough or physical" sex. And there is Needledick the bugfucker that goes fast for thirty seconds priding himself on giving his woman some "rough sex." I was including the whole range; so my statement could be I don't know how anyone cannot distinguish between what is rape and rough sex, buy any definition. Few women that are raped are prepared for intercourse.

And if someone still wonders, and they have a lot of sexual partners that exhibit bleeding and bruising, etc., then they should pretty much figure what they calculated as rough sex, may be looked at with the light of reality as rape.

I will drop another one, does anyone care to discuss how often and how many women submit to rape? Some of whom don't even realize they are being raped, or have the right to say no?

And, anyone care to speculate the leading cause of death among pregnant women in America through at least 2013? Yup, murder. I have an old acquaintance who is working on a study running through the numbers, looking to see if there is support for a thesis that certain controlling, angry males use "accidental" impregnation, and physical violence as a means of controlling (their) women.

So, I am not going to detail everything I have seen or know; nor did I claim to be an expert. I am rather humble in my opinion, as I didn't challenge anyone with a ludicrous question, to try to trap them into invalidating their points.

It is clear that your view on this incident has less to do with Jameis Winston and more to do with a predetermined bias.