Anonymous wrote:I thought I heard from the state she had sex with the boy once before and her texts revealed they have a long going relationship. That's why charges were dropped.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought I heard from the state she had sex with the boy once before and her texts revealed they have a long going relationship. That's why charges were dropped.

Very strange. Even if she had sex with one boy, what about the second one? It looks like the boy #1 shared her with the boy #2.
Which is a terrible betrayal and yes, rape.

I should say "man", not "boy".

Anonymous wrote:I thought I heard from the state she had sex with the boy once before and her texts revealed they have a long going relationship. That's why charges were dropped.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rape victims get unbelievable leeway and consideration by Liberals (arguably more than they should - look what happened at Duke and UVA). Except, of course, when their victimhood status is superceded by the victimhood of Illegal Immigrants.

Let's be honest. These two rapist MEN represent the ultimate in cognitive dissonance for them.

Precisely. In any other instance (that is, if the rapists had been white), there would be utter outrage from the left - picketing, protests, etc. But not in this case. Crickets. Even when charges were shamelessly dropped. Disgusting, yet predictable, liberal hypocrisy.

Anonymous wrote:Rape victims get unbelievable leeway and consideration by Liberals (arguably more than they should - look what happened at Duke and UVA). Except, of course, when their victimhood status is superceded by the victimhood of Illegal Immigrants.

Let's be honest. These two rapist MEN represent the ultimate in cognitive dissonance for them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It just sickens me to have the feeling that a lot of Liberals are quick to jump on the consensual wagon just so the "illegal immigrant man raping underage girl" headline can go away and they can go about their merry day without that nasty bit of cognitive dissonance.

Sickening hypocrites.

It sickens me that you used a 14 yo girl's rape to further your political agenda raping her again, for your own gain.

Where is your effort to stop rapes committed by white males?

The way your party uses people and tosses them aside sickens me.

Can you post the link to her Go Fund Me page your party set up for her mental health bills? Oh, wait, nobody gives a shit about her mental health. Now she has a preexhisting condition and your great health care plan won't cover her.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since we discussed this incident for a long time in the political forum want to bring this to closure: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/rape-charge-against-immigrant-teen-in-maryland-case-will-be-dropped-defense-lawyer-says/2017/05/05/a4806c02-312f-11e7-8674-437ddb6e813e_story.html?hpid=hp_local-news_rockvillecase-625am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.3dfd16fa5f3c

Apparently this was not rape, but consensual. Still not okay, however we need to do some soul searching whether we rushed to judge because the guys involved were immigrants.

That is your take away? Really? Did you even read the news?

On the contrary, this is the worst nightmare come true, from when people were first discussing this- they will get off , AND they will stay in the country.

or they are innocent but they will be deported.

They are not innocent. The girl is 14. She spoke to one of the two about having sex.
Prosecutors say the older forwarded pictures to the other and they planned to rape her the next day.
Do you think a 14 year old WANTS to be sodomized by two 17/18 year olds at the same time? On the toilet?
Anyone should be ashamed for thinking that. There is a difference between fantasizing about sex, and being gang raped on a toilet.

Are they innocent from a moral stand point? Maybe not. But legally, yes, they are, from a legal standpoint, innocent if the girl consented -- &, like it or not, according to MD law, a 14-year-old can consent to sex with one (or multiple) 17/18-year-olds. Whether or not you or I agree with the law is irrelevant.

What are you talking about? "Innocent, if she consented?" The point here is, that she had apparently flirted with ONE of the guys ahead of time. And that, and nothing more, is already cited as her downfall. Perhaps she even did text him about WANTING to have sex. The next day she walks with him, yes, but guess what, when TWO guys show up and push her into a toilet stall, she CHANGES her mind, she ASKS THEM TO STOP! (This is how the prosecutors see it) Telling someone you want to have sex, is not a Carte Blanche for eternity. People are allowed to say stop. Girls are allowed to change their minds the next day, or even the next minute! Yes, read that again. They obviously didn't stop there.
Until our justice system catches up with the notion, that girls must not be forever available, and forsake all their human rights, once they flirt or show interest, girls will continue to be at a severe disadvantage in a crime like this.

The system totally failed the (14 year old!) victim here. Shameful!

Are we sure the 14 year actually "consented" to a 3-way in a toilet, than included anal, while she was having her period?

-because that's the exact argument used by the boys' lawyers to get the rape charges dropped.

Do YOU believe the 14 year old consented?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It just sickens me to have the feeling that a lot of Liberals are quick to jump on the consensual wagon just so the "illegal immigrant man raping underage girl" headline can go away and they can go about their merry day without that nasty bit of cognitive dissonance.

Sickening hypocrites.

It sickens me that you used a 14 yo girl's rape to further your political agenda raping her again, for your own gain.

Where is your effort to stop rapes committed by white males?

The way your party uses people and tosses them aside sickens me.

Can you post the link to her Go Fund Me page your party set up for her mental health bills? Oh, wait, nobody gives a shit about her mental health. Now she has a preexhisting condition and your great health care plan won't cover her.

DP here. Dear God, do some reading and actually educate yourself instead of braying outrageous rumors. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/05/us/politics/pre-existing-conditions-health-care.html?_r=0

If anyone here is "using people and tossing them aside," it's you. If white boys or men had raped this girl, the outrage would be explosive. But since these were illegal immigrants, you and your party are excusing them - and actually claiming a brutal gang rape in a bathroom was consensual.

What's it going to be, liberals? Only white men are guilty of rape? You are truly sickening.

The RM head of security raped a girl and was given a couple thousand $$ bond. Where is your outrage for that case?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since we discussed this incident for a long time in the political forum want to bring this to closure: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/rape-charge-against-immigrant-teen-in-maryland-case-will-be-dropped-defense-lawyer-says/2017/05/05/a4806c02-312f-11e7-8674-437ddb6e813e_story.html?hpid=hp_local-news_rockvillecase-625am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.3dfd16fa5f3c

Apparently this was not rape, but consensual. Still not okay, however we need to do some soul searching whether we rushed to judge because the guys involved were immigrants.

That is your take away? Really? Did you even read the news?

On the contrary, this is the worst nightmare come true, from when people were first discussing this- they will get off , AND they will stay in the country.

or they are innocent but they will be deported.

They are not innocent. The girl is 14. She spoke to one of the two about having sex.
Prosecutors say the older forwarded pictures to the other and they planned to rape her the next day.
Do you think a 14 year old WANTS to be sodomized by two 17/18 year olds at the same time? On the toilet?
Anyone should be ashamed for thinking that. There is a difference between fantasizing about sex, and being gang raped on a toilet.

Are they innocent from a moral stand point? Maybe not. But legally, yes, they are, from a legal standpoint, innocent if the girl consented -- &, like it or not, according to MD law, a 14-year-old can consent to sex with one (or multiple) 17/18-year-olds. Whether or not you or I agree with the law is irrelevant.

What are you talking about? "Innocent, if she consented?" The point here is, that she had apparently flirted with ONE of the guys ahead of time. And that, and nothing more, is already cited as her downfall. Perhaps she even did text him about WANTING to have sex. The next day she walks with him, yes, but guess what, when TWO guys show up and push her into a toilet stall, she CHANGES her mind, she ASKS THEM TO STOP! (This is how the prosecutors see it) Telling someone you want to have sex, is not a Carte Blanche for eternity. People are allowed to say stop. Girls are allowed to change their minds the next day, or even the next minute! Yes, read that again. They obviously didn't stop there.
Until our justice system catches up with the notion, that girls must not be forever available, and forsake all their human rights, once they flirt or show interest, girls will continue to be at a severe disadvantage in a crime like this.

The system totally failed the (14 year old!) victim here. Shameful!

Are we sure the 14 year actually "consented" to a 3-way in a toilet, than included anal, while she was having her period?

-because that's the exact argument used by the boys' lawyers to get the rape charges dropped.

Do YOU believe the 14 year old consented?

I think she consented to boy #1. You don't think girls have sex on their period?

What are you implying? That if she said yes to the first boy, then who cares if the second man forced himself on her.

If she didn't consent to BOTH males, a rape occurred.

what I am saying is she consented to boy #1, on her period (which you seem to think is some huge deal)

I think she was raped by boy #2 and if you care to get a rape conviction you should demand a full audit of the state's attorney's office who clearly is incompetent.

The same justice system that let the RM rapist out on bond and did NOT revoke his visitation with his children and step-children.

It's not just about this one case, it's about all the cases. She was raped and a girl from RM was raped.

Tons of girls are raped every year.

Sorry. I should have mentioned I'm a NP. I thought this thread was about the Rockville HS incident. I don't know what "RM" refers to.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since we discussed this incident for a long time in the political forum want to bring this to closure: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/rape-charge-against-immigrant-teen-in-maryland-case-will-be-dropped-defense-lawyer-says/2017/05/05/a4806c02-312f-11e7-8674-437ddb6e813e_story.html?hpid=hp_local-news_rockvillecase-625am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.3dfd16fa5f3c

Apparently this was not rape, but consensual. Still not okay, however we need to do some soul searching whether we rushed to judge because the guys involved were immigrants.

That is your take away? Really? Did you even read the news?

On the contrary, this is the worst nightmare come true, from when people were first discussing this- they will get off , AND they will stay in the country.

or they are innocent but they will be deported.

They are not innocent. The girl is 14. She spoke to one of the two about having sex.
Prosecutors say the older forwarded pictures to the other and they planned to rape her the next day.
Do you think a 14 year old WANTS to be sodomized by two 17/18 year olds at the same time? On the toilet?
Anyone should be ashamed for thinking that. There is a difference between fantasizing about sex, and being gang raped on a toilet.

Are they innocent from a moral stand point? Maybe not. But legally, yes, they are, from a legal standpoint, innocent if the girl consented -- &, like it or not, according to MD law, a 14-year-old can consent to sex with one (or multiple) 17/18-year-olds. Whether or not you or I agree with the law is irrelevant.

What are you talking about? "Innocent, if she consented?" The point here is, that she had apparently flirted with ONE of the guys ahead of time. And that, and nothing more, is already cited as her downfall. Perhaps she even did text him about WANTING to have sex. The next day she walks with him, yes, but guess what, when TWO guys show up and push her into a toilet stall, she CHANGES her mind, she ASKS THEM TO STOP! (This is how the prosecutors see it) Telling someone you want to have sex, is not a Carte Blanche for eternity. People are allowed to say stop. Girls are allowed to change their minds the next day, or even the next minute! Yes, read that again. They obviously didn't stop there.
Until our justice system catches up with the notion, that girls must not be forever available, and forsake all their human rights, once they flirt or show interest, girls will continue to be at a severe disadvantage in a crime like this.

The system totally failed the (14 year old!) victim here. Shameful!

Are we sure the 14 year actually "consented" to a 3-way in a toilet, than included anal, while she was having her period?

-because that's the exact argument used by the boys' lawyers to get the rape charges dropped.

Do YOU believe the 14 year old consented?

I think she consented to boy #1. You don't think girls have sex on their period?

What are you implying? That if she said yes to the first boy, then who cares if the second man forced himself on her.

If she didn't consent to BOTH males, a rape occurred.

what I am saying is she consented to boy #1, on her period (which you seem to think is some huge deal)

I think she was raped by boy #2 and if you care to get a rape conviction you should demand a full audit of the state's attorney's office who clearly is incompetent.

The same justice system that let the RM rapist out on bond and did NOT revoke his visitation with his children and step-children.

It's not just about this one case, it's about all the cases. She was raped and a girl from RM was raped.

Tons of girls are raped every year.