Surprise, surprise! "Mattress Girl" was (very likely) not raped after all.

[dismal]

Surprise surprise. Another hobby horse thread.

Surprise surprise, Derec accusing a woman of lying.

Being unable to prove a rape is not the same thing as her lying about it.

Good to see the thread content police out in force.

Tip: There's another poster here who makes a lot of posts about the police. Please keep a close eye on that.

 

[barbos]

What is she studying to get a credit for running around with a mattress?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

P.S.: Do you guys still think "Mattressgirl" is insulting? Should I start referring to her as "Lopsided Ass Girl" instead?

You know, I always hope you are right about these cases because otherwise, your posts could reflect extremely poorly on you.

It is ironic that you think false accusation of rape is a serious charge (like an accusation of rape), yet seem to accuse women of it so easily.

 

[Toni]

A couple years ago, the gamers on my favorite server started using the phrase "well, fuck me running!" to express surprise or humorous disbelief. Sometimes they shortened it to just "Fuck me!" So I'd really, really like to see the whole quote, with a date and in context, because I suspect she wasn't actually telling him to fuck her in the butt right before he fucked her in the butt.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure you're right about that.

 

[Derec]

It is ironic that you think false accusation of rape is a serious charge (like an accusation of rape), yet seem to accuse women of it so easily.

Not easily, but these latest revelations make it very probable that it was a false allegation. Probable enough that she should get expelled instead of getting college credit for harassing Paul with her mattress stunt.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It is ironic that you think false accusation of rape is a serious charge (like an accusation of rape), yet seem to accuse women of it so easily.

Not easily...

Seriously?

...but these latest revelations make it very probable that it was a false allegation.

This is hardly the first time you've made the accusation.

 

[thebeave]

Surprise surprise, Derec accusing a woman of lying.

Being unable to prove a rape is not the same thing as her lying about it.

Good to see the thread content police out in force.

Tip: There's another poster here who makes a lot of posts about the police. Please keep a close eye on that.

Well, from what I've observed here, hobby horses are OK if they conform with your ideology or perceptions. Otherwise, they are to be discouraged and shamed.

 

[Derec]

This is hardly the first time you've made the accusation.

Toward Mattressgirl? I don't think so. What I've been saying before is that there was no evidence that she was raped. Now, with new evidence, the preponderance of evidence (at least) is that she lied.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

This is hardly the first time you've made the accusation.

Toward Mattressgirl? I don't think so.

So when you say "Surprise, Surprise" in the OP Title, that meant you didn't already suspect her of lying?

 

[laughing dog]

I think the sticking point is giving her course credit for her mattress stunt and him being excluded from certain campus activities because of her (very dubious) accusations. But I think she personally should have been sued as well.

If I read the article correctly, Columbia did not exclude him from any campus activity - he just felt uncomfortable going to these things. As for the campus credit, that is literally none of his business. I am not a lawyer, but this appears to be a frivolous lawsuit.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I think the sticking point is giving her course credit for her mattress stunt and him being excluded from certain campus activities because of her (very dubious) accusations. But I think she personally should have been sued as well.

If I read the article correctly, Columbia did not exclude him from any campus activity - he just felt uncomfortable going to these things. As for the campus credit, that is literally none of his business. I am not a lawyer, but this appears to be a frivolous lawsuit.

But defamation of character is a crime. If a student was going around stealing cars and the university allowed him to get course credit for the car thefts, then the people who's cars were stolen would have a civil case against the university for helping to encourage the continuing car thefts.

When an institution actively supports and encourages criminal behaviour then the victims of that behaviour have a case against the institution. If the university had ignored her and not commented when she was lugging the mattress around, then there wouldn't be any liability. When they gave her course credit for doing it, they became associated with the criminal endeavour.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

If I read the article correctly, Columbia did not exclude him from any campus activity - he just felt uncomfortable going to these things. As for the campus credit, that is literally none of his business. I am not a lawyer, but this appears to be a frivolous lawsuit.

But defamation of character is a crime. If a student was going around stealing cars and the university allowed him to get course credit for the car thefts, then the people who's cars were stolen would have a civil case against the university for helping to encourage the continuing car thefts.

When an institution actively supports and encourages criminal behaviour then the victims of that behaviour have a case against the institution. If the university had ignored her and not commented when she was lugging the mattress around, then there wouldn't be any liability. When they gave her course credit for doing it, they became associated with the criminal endeavour.

They would need to know that she was defaming someone though.

Did she receive credit for merely hauling a mattress or was more effort involved. I've got to think it was notably more than hauling a mattress.

 

[Trausti]

If I read the article correctly, Columbia did not exclude him from any campus activity - he just felt uncomfortable going to these things. As for the campus credit, that is literally none of his business. I am not a lawyer, but this appears to be a frivolous lawsuit.

But defamation of character is a crime. If a student was going around stealing cars and the university allowed him to get course credit for the car thefts, then the people who's cars were stolen would have a civil case against the university for helping to encourage the continuing car thefts.

When an institution actively supports and encourages criminal behaviour then the victims of that behaviour have a case against the institution. If the university had ignored her and not commented when she was lugging the mattress around, then there wouldn't be any liability. When they gave her course credit for doing it, they became associated with the criminal endeavour.

I'd add that generally a false charge of rape is considered per se defamation. Damages are presumed, proof of actual damages is not required. And a defendant could be liable for such per se defamation even if not the originator of the charge; as a reckless disregard for the truth can also impute liability. I'd side with those who feel that the university's conduct was egregious. It knew the charge lacked even a modicum of probity but knowingly let the defamation carrying on nonetheless. The only silver lining I can see is that Columbia is a private school, so any settlement or money judgment won't come out of the public coffer.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Since Columbia U. cleared him of the accusations, I find his claims rather puzzling. Short of executing his accuser, just how was Columbia supposed to shut her up?

Expel her.

If they expel men who are accused of rape it would only be fair to expel false accusers also.

- - - Updated - - -

We know the chances of her having been raped are infinetesimal. And we know all that will not deter many on here from defending her regardless.

"We" know no such thing.

I will repeat, being unable to prove that she was raped is not the same thing as her lying about being raped.

But lying about a bunch of the relevant facts makes it likely the rape claim itself is also a lie.

 

[fromderinside]

nm

nm^​nm

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I think the sticking point is giving her course credit for her mattress stunt and him being excluded from certain campus activities because of her (very dubious) accusations. But I think she personally should have been sued as well.

If I read the article correctly, Columbia did not exclude him from any campus activity - he just felt uncomfortable going to these things. As for the campus credit, that is literally none of his business. I am not a lawyer, but this appears to be a frivolous lawsuit.

When you are ostracized by a social group there's no point in going to it.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

But defamation of character is a crime. If a student was going around stealing cars and the university allowed him to get course credit for the car thefts, then the people who's cars were stolen would have a civil case against the university for helping to encourage the continuing car thefts.

When an institution actively supports and encourages criminal behaviour then the victims of that behaviour have a case against the institution. If the university had ignored her and not commented when she was lugging the mattress around, then there wouldn't be any liability. When they gave her course credit for doing it, they became associated with the criminal endeavour.

They would need to know that she was defaming someone though.

Did she receive credit for merely hauling a mattress or was more effort involved. I've got to think it was notably more than hauling a mattress.

Well, given that the premise of her thesis was "I will carry the mattress with me to all of my classes, every campus building, for as long as my rapist stays on the same campus with me. " and she had publically identified the guy as the rapist in question on numerous occasions, it's reasonable to assume that the professor could have parsed out the subtext that there was perhaps more involved in it than simply hauling a mattress around and it was in reference to the alleged actions of a particular person.

They knew exactly why she was doing it and supported her in this endeavour. That makes them liable for the damages resulting from this defamation.

 

[laughing dog]

If I read the article correctly, Columbia did not exclude him from any campus activity - he just felt uncomfortable going to these things. As for the campus credit, that is literally none of his business. I am not a lawyer, but this appears to be a frivolous lawsuit.

When you are ostracized by a social group there's no point in going to it.

How is that relevant to Columbia's culpability?

 

[laughing dog]

They knew exactly why she was doing it and supported her in this endeavour. That makes them liable for the damages resulting from this defamation.

I think you conflate "support" with "failure to completely stifle her free expression". And, of course, there is the question of whether this is really defamation.

 

[Ford]

This is hardly the first time you've made the accusation.

Toward Mattressgirl? I don't think so.

Towards women in general. You proceed from the premise that every claim of rape is false, then crow loudly the few times you are validated in this view. Never mentioned are all the legitimate claims. No, women are all liars because a few of them made a false claim.

By the way, (again) is there a subscription link where you get this stuff? He Man Woman Haters Club sends out a "daily false rape claim" update or what?