The Dodger
First Grade
- Messages
- 6,065
haha
If she swimming at the beach & 6 big Sharks were swimming around her would she have screamed then? or closed her eyes? I mean real sharks. If you are scared, you are scared. She wasn't scared.
That's a poor analogy actually and no, she would not of necessarily screamed. The ocean going sharks would instill fear but would not be playing with the head. The ocean going sharks would not have the ability to gag her and stop her screaming. The ocean going sharks wouldn't care if she screamed. The ocean going sharks don't carry the same perception of having something to lose. The ocean going sharks are operating off instinct without premeditation or plan.
Not the same by a long stretch reef
IMO it would take a VERY brave girl to of attempted to stop what had already started. The assumption that she allegedly didn't say no or allegedly didn't scream does not in any way imply consent. The question wasn't asked of her as to whether any of that happened so no one here knows.
She was probably scared witless and whether or not she consented to have sex with the 2 she went back with is irrelevant to the events that allegedly took place later.
If you give a couple of people one of your prize roses it doesn't mean all their mates can come and have a rose as well. That's what it amounts to.
She didn't get PTSD (and there were reports from a psychiatrist that confirmed it) from enjoying it I can assure people of that.
This doesn't sit too well with me. I believe her.
. I was unsure about the Knights bird, she wasn't entirely convincing, or just didn't seem to genuine, not that that matters.
.
You know I can see the two sides of this story so I wont go there but
What I want to say is I'm disapointed .
Disapointed that my club has been dragged through this crap !! - And it wasn't a secret I knew about it back then as it was reported in the media , so what does that say about the media reporting ? Is it just that now people crave more sensationalism ? Why such a BIG story in 2009 when it was reported in the media in 2002 ?
I'm disapointed that a man of 30 married with a kid could get involved in this type of scenario , call me old fashioned , but that's my beliefs . That is the crime - right here folks !!
Like Carch I just can't comprehend getting the old fellar out and stroking it in front of other males - NO WAY !!
I'm disapointed that this media report is focussing on just one guy , Why ?
The timing of this is terrible for the sharks given everything else going on and that pi**es me off.
I can't see how John's can continue on the footy show or in any media , I don't necessarly think thats the correct course of action , but media pressure will force him out .
Well it does matter for Dane Tilse , I would actually believe his side of the story that he was only tickling her , but either way stupid to go into her room .
Well that is it right there. A failure to speak or to struggle does not constitute failure to consent and so the question of why she didn't scream is irrelevant..
Anyone remember why Firman was in NZ, but not picked for the side. He played for the Saints in 2002? Was this the reason Firman was given a release?
TEAMS ANNOUNCED FOR WARRIORS VS SHARKS TRIAL
Saturday 16 Feb 2002 11:34
by Michael Garbutt
The teams have been announced for today's trial between the New Zealand Warriors and the Cronulla Sharks in Christchurch. A crowd of 12000 is expected to attend what should be a well-contested battle.
The teams for the match are:
CRONULLA SHARKS
Team: David Peachey (c), Colin Best, Chris McKenna, Paul Mellor, Matthew Reick, Matthew Johns, Preston Campbell, Danny Nutley, Dean Treister, Andrew Pierce, Paul Gallen, Karl Lovell, Nick Graham
Reserves: Brett Kimmorley, Sam Isemonger, Dean Bosnich, Nick Paterson, David Tangata-Toa, Pat Gibson, Michael Sullivan, Paul Franze.
I'd be interested to see on what grounds the NZ police found it reasonable to not press charges. Must be something?
For what? Charges for what. This is the problem with all this PC krap this current generation is being brainwashed with.
You say there must be something. I say there was nothing. Absolutely nothing. If there was the slightest hing that she might have even just wanted to say NO or STOP but forgot how, they would have laid charges & commenced an investigation.
The players co-operated & were truthful & everything matched.
She was the town bike & is now looking for the bling bling.
matty matty bling bling.
Yes Frenzy that is the name I've heard come up a couple of times today - did it make the media at the time?
I'd be interested to see on what grounds the NZ police found it reasonable to not press charges. Must be something?
Maybe we need Dave Q in here to explain NZ law. Maybe in NZ law they can't lay charges without a complainant?
I don't know. Just speculating
A failure to scream or yell for help whilst in a public place is relevant.
A failure to say no, is relevant.
A failure to say stop, is relevant.
A failure to attempt to leave is relevant.
A failure to tell police was she forced into something, not to speak, not to move, or to not leave etc is relevant.
A failure to stop participating actively, is relevant.
She was up for it 110% & has now learnt that maybe there is some dollars in it. I wonder who her manager is?
This is the problem with all this PC krap this current generation is being brainwashed with.