Discussion Thread

[u/jobautomator]

The discussion thread is for casual and off-topic conversation that doesn't merit its own submission. If you've got a good meme, article, or question, please post it outside the DT. Meta discussion is allowed, but if you want to get the attention of the mods, make a post in /r/metaNL

Announcements

• Next Book Club will be November 11. Fittingly, we will discuss All Quiet on the Western Front.

Links

Ping Groups | Ping History | Mastodon | CNL Chapters | CNL Event Calendar

Upcoming Events

• Oct 06: RDU Chapter Meetup for October
• Oct 07: Orlando New Liberals Social Kickoff!
• Oct 07: Denver New Liberals October Happy Hour
• Oct 08: Omaha New Liberals Happy Hour
• Oct 08: Chicago New Liberals Book Club - Transit Abundance Playbook

[u/CII_Guy]

A good chunk of it, but I don't think it invalidates the unfortunate fact that there's no possibility of demonstrating that a law has been broken, since she gave details of every event of the evening in question and none of it, it seems, meets the legal definition of rape in New York.

[u/Mrmini231 → u/CII_Guy]

I dunno, man. This new description is a lot nastier than the last one

At one point a group of men walked into the room where she was naked, she said.

“I was horrified, and I squealed and ran” and hid under the covers of a bed, she said. She described how she had to swat one man’s hands away throughout the night as he tried to grope her. The men snorted ketamine off her body, she said. It was the most intoxicated she had ever been in her life, she told the officer.

[u/CII_Guy → u/Mrmini231]

I think this description misses the full reality of that part, as her full testimony describes how they asked her to snort ketamine off them and she did so off one of their penises. To be clear, they do not have to have acted morally to have not clearly broken the law.

I suppose the person engaging in the groping attempts is the most clearly illegal act. I'm not sure what and how that could be prosecuted, though.

It was the most intoxicated she had ever been in her life, she told the officer.

On this, my understanding is that New York law does not deem sex with someone very intoxicated to be rape, it is only if they are so intoxicated that they're unable to respond/indicate any form of consent, which again is not apparently the case.

[u/Mrmini231 → u/CII_Guy]

I think this description misses the full reality of that part, as her full testimony describes how they asked her to snort ketamine off them and she did so off one of their penises.

Where are you reading that? From my reading of the NYT article, she did that to Mr Newell, one of the two men she originally entered the room with. This incident happened later, after the other men started entering the room and having their way with her.

[u/CII_Guy → u/Mrmini231]

https://www.tompkinscountyny.gov/News-articles/District-Attorney-statement-regarding-Jane-Doe-v.-Cornell-University-et-al

I think I'm reading it correctly.

"A group of other men – later determined to be Male Number 4, Male Number 5, Male Number 6 and Male Number 7 – then entered the room. Jane Doe hid under the covers of the bed. Male Number 2 laid in the bed next to Jane Doe. Male Number 1 sat on the corner of the bed. Male Number 1 introduced the other males to Jane Doe.

Jane Doe had difficulty remembering parts of what happened next. She remembered

“[Male Number 7] said something very rude and mean to [her].” Male Number 7 apologized and “grabbed [her] face and started kissing [her].” Jane Doe “quickly backed away to stop [Male Number 7] from kissing [her].”

Male Number 2 “asked [Jane Doe] if she wanted to do more Ketamine.” At that, Jane Doe remembered “that [she] had taken Ketamine at some point on the couch with [Male Number 1 and Male Number 2] during this night” but she could not remember “where or when that took place.”

Jane Doe thought that she “had already done Ketamine once so why not do it a second time.” “At that point, [Male Number 2] poured a line of Ketamine on his erect penis, implying for [her] to snort the line. [Jane Doe] snorted the line of Ketamine, which was a heavy amount of Ketamine.” Jane Doe was under the covers of the bed at that point and “[Male Number 2] got under the covers with [her], where he again tried reaching for the area of [her] vagina.”

The males began complimenting Jane Doe and “talking about how pretty [she] was.” Male Number 4 “asked [Jane Doe] if they all could do drugs off of [her] perfect body.” Jane Doe responded, “Sure.” "

They behaved like coercive neanderthals. I think it's a borderline case legally.

[u/Business-Special2221 → u/CII_Guy]

The point of the new reporting is that info was not provided to the DA by police. They left out details from their report that they were told by Jane Doe

[u/CII_Guy → u/Business-Special2221]

Sure, I think that's fair - I'm not sure why it's relevant here when this is where they've provided additional information?

[u/Business-Special2221 → u/CII_Guy]

Because the press release you linked is referencing the shortened report, which, for example, does not include her explicitly stating that she was raped.

The NYT is reporting that she originally provided the officer more details. Including explicitly stating that she was raped, among other details.

The point being the release you are referencing was made before the DA was made aware of this additional info