Only in California - Sexual Activity First Needs "Affirmative Consent" From Sober Parties

[Rhea]

I'm surprised that a colonoscopy was performed without any anesthesia as any patient movement could be detrimental. I *think* I was mostly awake for mine, and watching it on the screen, actually.

What you have "heard of" is patients who will decline being "put under" , meaning full sedation. However patients who decline full sedation will be administered Valium or equivalent to Valium in order to keep them relaxed and prevent any anxiety factor.

Kind of a derail and maybe a mod wants to split it off to the lounge?

But yes, there is indeed an option to not use any sedative or anesthesia. Zero. Some of us hate that shit. I get my teeth drilled without novocaine also. When I was younger, I did not realize this was an option. A friend once said she didn't use it and I was amazed, "you can say no?" Sure enough, you can. I found out the same about colonoscopies. You really can say "no" to all of the medications and drive yourself home 10 minutes after the procedure.

Loren said he was fine after a few hours using meds, but you are instructed to not drive ALL DAY, so it would have been wrong and dangerous for you to do so. I picked up my husband after his, and while he was "fine" he was still incredibly susceptible to suggestion and very compliant. I got him to cheerfully stop at a furniture store with me, which he would never have wanted otherwise. Next time, I'm taking him dancing because I'm not going to waste such an opportunity again! ( )

 

[Loren Pechtel]

In your obsession to prove rape you overlooked the fact that your article says she refused to cooperate for a long time despite giving three interviews to the police.

My "obsession to prove rape"?????? Are you kidding me? How could you conclude from what I communicated that I am "obsessed with proving rape"? You have absolutely no opinion on my part regarding whether I think a rape occurred or did not occur. Keep your mind reading based inflammatory crap out of this discussion, Loren.

But you're taking the side of arguing that more rape is happening.

This sounds to me like the cops didn't believe her so she waited until there would be no repercussions if the university didn't, either.

Actually, charges were not pressed against Winston by the SA because of lack of evidence supporting her claim. Which is still the current position of the State Attorney for Leon County. FSU has no choice but proceed with Article 9 and that despite of no criminal charges having been filed against Winston. However, FSU could still conclude from their investigation that Winston violated the Code of Conduct established by FSU. FSU having heavily cracked down on drunk hook ups of any suspicious nature. Their cracking down had started with the expulsion of a large fraternity due to the repeated occurrence of passed out drunk female students during the parties held at the said fraternity. They saw it coming as the disastrous formula for unconscious females to be sexually exploited.

Mind you that such issue is far from being under control on and around the FSU campus.

The point is that she refused to talk to them after getting rebuffed by the police. That sounds like someone who knows their case is weak and doesn't want any consequences.

Now she's beyond the reach of the university, no harm in talking to them.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Loren said he was fine after a few hours using meds, but you are instructed to not drive ALL DAY, so it would have been wrong and dangerous for you to do so. I picked up my husband after his, and while he was "fine" he was still incredibly susceptible to suggestion and very compliant. I got him to cheerfully stop at a furniture store with me, which he would never have wanted otherwise. Next time, I'm taking him dancing because I'm not going to waste such an opportunity again! ( )

I didn't drive.

And neither time my wife was done would I have been allowed to "pick her up". The rule was stay there.

 

[Toni]

What you have "heard of" is patients who will decline being "put under" , meaning full sedation. However patients who decline full sedation will be administered Valium or equivalent to Valium in order to keep them relaxed and prevent any anxiety factor.

Kind of a derail and maybe a mod wants to split it off to the lounge?

But yes, there is indeed an option to not use any sedative or anesthesia. Zero. Some of us hate that shit. I get my teeth drilled without novocaine also. When I was younger, I did not realize this was an option. A friend once said she didn't use it and I was amazed, "you can say no?" Sure enough, you can. I found out the same about colonoscopies. You really can say "no" to all of the medications and drive yourself home 10 minutes after the procedure.

Loren said he was fine after a few hours using meds, but you are instructed to not drive ALL DAY, so it would have been wrong and dangerous for you to do so. I picked up my husband after his, and while he was "fine" he was still incredibly susceptible to suggestion and very compliant. I got him to cheerfully stop at a furniture store with me, which he would never have wanted otherwise. Next time, I'm taking him dancing because I'm not going to waste such an opportunity again! ( )

Where I underwent my procedure, one was required to provide proof that you had someone to drive you home or else you would not be allowed to undergo the procedure. My husband insists I was probably not really awake. I do think I really did watch the video feed but no: I couldn't have mustered the will to protest anything or to assert anything and I know there are gaps of time there.

 

[Toni]

My "obsession to prove rape"?????? Are you kidding me? How could you conclude from what I communicated that I am "obsessed with proving rape"? You have absolutely no opinion on my part regarding whether I think a rape occurred or did not occur. Keep your mind reading based inflammatory crap out of this discussion, Loren.

But you're taking the side of arguing that more rape is happening.

This sounds to me like the cops didn't believe her so she waited until there would be no repercussions if the university didn't, either.

Actually, charges were not pressed against Winston by the SA because of lack of evidence supporting her claim. Which is still the current position of the State Attorney for Leon County. FSU has no choice but proceed with Article 9 and that despite of no criminal charges having been filed against Winston. However, FSU could still conclude from their investigation that Winston violated the Code of Conduct established by FSU. FSU having heavily cracked down on drunk hook ups of any suspicious nature. Their cracking down had started with the expulsion of a large fraternity due to the repeated occurrence of passed out drunk female students during the parties held at the said fraternity. They saw it coming as the disastrous formula for unconscious females to be sexually exploited.

Mind you that such issue is far from being under control on and around the FSU campus.

The point is that she refused to talk to them after getting rebuffed by the police. That sounds like someone who knows their case is weak and doesn't want any consequences.

Now she's beyond the reach of the university, no harm in talking to them.

No, Loren. That's only an explanation you dreamed up in your own mind because like the police, apparently you cannot conceive of the idea that an athlete would actually rape someone instead of just grabbing one of the hoards of admiring fans of either gender. There was no complaint filed because the police did not investigate, refused to answer the calls of the victim, refused to collect evidence, refused to interview witnesses in a timely manner, refused to review video recordings of the assault and of the events just prior to the assault and so on. Despite the fact that during the initial interview with the police, visible bruising began to appear, the police refused to consider that she was actually raped.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...egations-against-fsu-jameis-winston.html?_r=0

 

[Sabine Grant]

My "obsession to prove rape"?????? Are you kidding me? How could you conclude from what I communicated that I am "obsessed with proving rape"? You have absolutely no opinion on my part regarding whether I think a rape occurred or did not occur. Keep your mind reading based inflammatory crap out of this discussion, Loren.

But you're taking the side of arguing that more rape is happening.

This is what I had stated :

Plenty of opportunities were given to Winston (FSU Seminoles quarterback and rising star within College football) last year to respond to an inquiry initiated by FSU regarding an allegation of rape brought against him by a female FSU student. Winston persistently refused to appear. Which of course left the FSU student community scratching their head as to why he would evade the opportunities to speak for himself and defend himself. The story was pretty much "swept under the carpet" until a few days ago when, due to the same community of students questioning why Winston could evade that inquiry process, FSU launched an official investigation. At this point, Winston will have to respond escorted by his lawyer.

which was "greeted" by your mind reading based inflammatory crap that I am obsessed with proving rape. You now pursue in the same path by attempting to justify and rationalize that inflammatory crap by claiming that the above comes down to my "taking the side that more rape is happening". I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that such gross misrepresentation of the content of my remarks was not intentional but the product of a lack of reading comprehension on your part.

If you wish to pursue to justify your initial mind reading based inflammatory crap, I will ask you to detail your reasoning while quoting which parts of my remarks reflect my " obsession to prove rape" and where I "take the side that more rape is happening". Needless to say that if you dismiss that challenge or fail to meet its terms, I will take it that now it is not a matter of reading comprehension on your part but as evidence of your resorting to flame other posters.

This sounds to me like the cops didn't believe her so she waited until there would be no repercussions if the university didn't, either.

Actually, charges were not pressed against Winston by the SA because of lack of evidence supporting her claim. Which is still the current position of the State Attorney for Leon County. FSU has no choice but proceed with Article 9 and that despite of no criminal charges having been filed against Winston. However, FSU could still conclude from their investigation that Winston violated the Code of Conduct established by FSU. FSU having heavily cracked down on drunk hook ups of any suspicious nature. Their cracking down had started with the expulsion of a large fraternity due to the repeated occurrence of passed out drunk female students during the parties held at the said fraternity. They saw it coming as the disastrous formula for unconscious females to be sexually exploited.

Mind you that such issue is far from being under control on and around the FSU campus.

The point is that she refused to talk to them after getting rebuffed by the police. That sounds like someone who knows their case is weak and doesn't want any consequences.

Now she's beyond the reach of the university, no harm in talking to them.

Once more, your opinions are not based on any evidence you have presented, but on you drawing conclusions based on your own assertions. Whereas what I mentioned above is a demonstrated reality that the State Attorney for Leon County concluded that no charges should be filed against Winston based on lack of evidence. I am not about to personally engage in reading the alleged victim's mind or Winston's mind and draw conclusions (as you did) based on such personal mind reading.

I have no opinion whatsoever as to whether a crime may or may not have happened. However, Winston's initial refusal to answer questions goes against the due process of facilitating the accused student's right to defend themselves. Derec's persistent complaint being that accused male students are not given such due process. In this specific case, Winston was given several opportunities but declined them. That is why I brought it up. In its initial inquiry, FSU asked Winston to attend interviews regarding his alleged involvement in a sexual encounter with the said female student. Which he declined to attend. A process giving a voice to the accused student was facilitated by FSU but with, at the time, an uncooperative accused male student.

Mind you that those interviews were scheduled BEFORE the conclusion of the criminal investigation and the SA decision to not press charges due to lack of evidence supporting the alleged victim's claim.

As to this (and again mind reading based) conclusion :

That sounds like someone who knows their case is weak and doesn't want any consequences.

Now she's beyond the reach of the university, no harm in talking to them.

What do you mean by "she's beyond the reach of the university, no harm talking to them"?

The Article 9 triggered investigation by FSU is separate from the decision by the SA to not press charges based on lack of evidence. Mind you that the SA decision to not press charges was not based on any conclusion on the SA's part that there was no violation of the FSU students Code of Conduct but that there was not enough evidence or there was a lack of evidence to prosecute Winston by pressing any criminal charges.

 

[Sabine Grant]

But you're taking the side of arguing that more rape is happening.

This sounds to me like the cops didn't believe her so she waited until there would be no repercussions if the university didn't, either.

Actually, charges were not pressed against Winston by the SA because of lack of evidence supporting her claim. Which is still the current position of the State Attorney for Leon County. FSU has no choice but proceed with Article 9 and that despite of no criminal charges having been filed against Winston. However, FSU could still conclude from their investigation that Winston violated the Code of Conduct established by FSU. FSU having heavily cracked down on drunk hook ups of any suspicious nature. Their cracking down had started with the expulsion of a large fraternity due to the repeated occurrence of passed out drunk female students during the parties held at the said fraternity. They saw it coming as the disastrous formula for unconscious females to be sexually exploited.

Mind you that such issue is far from being under control on and around the FSU campus.

The point is that she refused to talk to them after getting rebuffed by the police. That sounds like someone who knows their case is weak and doesn't want any consequences.

Now she's beyond the reach of the university, no harm in talking to them.

No, Loren. That's only an explanation you dreamed up in your own mind because like the police, apparently you cannot conceive of the idea that an athlete would actually rape someone instead of just grabbing one of the hoards of admiring fans of either gender. There was no complaint filed because the police did not investigate, refused to answer the calls of the victim, refused to collect evidence, refused to interview witnesses in a timely manner, refused to review video recordings of the assault and of the events just prior to the assault and so on.

Just to correct here but it was not about the detectives refusing to "review video recordings of the assault". By the time one of the 2 present on location witnesses revealed that he had videoed the sexual encounter on his cell phone, he also stated that he had already erased it. To alos note that the witness in question testified that the encounter was consensual. Meaning that there was not such a thing as ""video recordings of the assault".


As to the surveillance camera footage in the bar, that is where a procedural failure occurred. Because the assigned detective did not even think for a moment to request the tape and by the time he did, the tape had been erased.

It is not a matter of the "police refusing to..."

Despite the fact that during the initial interview with the police, visible bruising began to appear, the police refused to consider that she was actually raped.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...egations-against-fsu-jameis-winston.html?_r=0

Considering she did not report the alleged assault within days but delayed it, I am a bit skeptical about defensive trauma being "visible", defensive trauma such as "bruising began to appear".

 

[Loren Pechtel]

No, Loren. That's only an explanation you dreamed up in your own mind because like the police, apparently you cannot conceive of the idea that an athlete would actually rape someone instead of just grabbing one of the hoards of admiring fans of either gender. There was no complaint filed because the police did not investigate, refused to answer the calls of the victim, refused to collect evidence, refused to interview witnesses in a timely manner, refused to review video recordings of the assault and of the events just prior to the assault and so on. Despite the fact that during the initial interview with the police, visible bruising began to appear, the police refused to consider that she was actually raped.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...egations-against-fsu-jameis-winston.html?_r=0

I fully realize athletes rape. I'm just saying her behavior makes me think she wasn't raped. It's the same issue as always--you think all reported rapes are real.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

which was "greeted" by your mind reading based inflammatory crap that I am obsessed with proving rape. You now pursue in the same path by attempting to justify and rationalize that inflammatory crap by claiming that the above comes down to my "taking the side that more rape is happening". I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that such gross misrepresentation of the content of my remarks was not intentional but the product of a lack of reading comprehension on your part.

The basic difference is that I'm looking for problems with both sides of the story, not just with his side.

Her actions look more like those of somebody afraid of repercussions from a false allegation than a real rape victim.

Once more, your opinions are not based on any evidence you have presented, but on you drawing conclusions based on your own assertions. Whereas what I mentioned above is a demonstrated reality that the State Attorney for Leon County concluded that no charges should be filed against Winston based on lack of evidence. I am not about to personally engage in reading the alleged victim's mind or Winston's mind and draw conclusions (as you did) based on such personal mind reading.

In other words, you're not about to question her story. She says she was raped, that's that, she was raped.

I have no opinion whatsoever as to whether a crime may or may not have happened. However, Winston's initial refusal to answer questions goes against the due process of facilitating the accused student's right to defend themselves.

You blame him for not answering questions but you don't blame her for not answering questions. You're proving my point that you're only after convictions, not justice.

 

[Toni]

No, Loren. That's only an explanation you dreamed up in your own mind because like the police, apparently you cannot conceive of the idea that an athlete would actually rape someone instead of just grabbing one of the hoards of admiring fans of either gender. There was no complaint filed because the police did not investigate, refused to answer the calls of the victim, refused to collect evidence, refused to interview witnesses in a timely manner, refused to review video recordings of the assault and of the events just prior to the assault and so on. Despite the fact that during the initial interview with the police, visible bruising began to appear, the police refused to consider that she was actually raped.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...egations-against-fsu-jameis-winston.html?_r=0

I fully realize athletes rape. I'm just saying her behavior makes me think she wasn't raped. It's the same issue as always--you think all reported rapes are real.

Bullshit, Loren. B.U.L.L.S.H.I.T.

You have ZERO idea what I think. It is insulting and an ongoing issue with you to tell people what they 'always think' and intellectually dishonest.

Everything I read makes it seem more than plausible that she was raped--that she was far past the point of being able to consent or to understand what was going on, she reported to the police who declined to believe that the star athlete which the entire community had a great deal invested in, was capable of needed and choosing to target a girl to drunk to consent. The bruising makes it sound quite a bit rougher than just drunk sex. His room mate's testimony that the solution to a lost key or broken door was to break the door--the fact that videorecording went missing two days after the assault tells me that the guys knew that they were in trouble. The fact that the police did not even request to see video footage from the bar--and there were lots of cameras installed for exactly this reason--tells me they simply preferred to believe their prejudice and were not interested in the facts.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Everything I read makes it seem more than plausible that she was raped--that she was far past the point of being able to consent or to understand what was going on, she reported to the police who declined to believe that the star athlete which the entire community had a great deal invested in, was capable of needed and choosing to target a girl to drunk to consent. The bruising makes it sound quite a bit rougher than just drunk sex. His room mate's testimony that the solution to a lost key or broken door was to break the door--the fact that videorecording went missing two days after the assault tells me that the guys knew that they were in trouble. The fact that the police did not even request to see video footage from the bar--and there were lots of cameras installed for exactly this reason--tells me they simply preferred to believe their prejudice and were not interested in the facts.

You're taking her word for the situation.

I have a big problem with her not cooperating with the investigation. I can understand someone not coming forward (but in such a case I don't think there normally can be enough certainty to convict) but she did talk to the police and they didn't feel rape could be proven.

Either that means a lack of evidence or that they aren't buying her story. If it's just a lack of evidence there would be no harm in going through the school's procedures. That makes me think there's a problem with her story.

 

[Toni]

Everything I read makes it seem more than plausible that she was raped--that she was far past the point of being able to consent or to understand what was going on, she reported to the police who declined to believe that the star athlete which the entire community had a great deal invested in, was capable of needed and choosing to target a girl to drunk to consent. The bruising makes it sound quite a bit rougher than just drunk sex. His room mate's testimony that the solution to a lost key or broken door was to break the door--the fact that videorecording went missing two days after the assault tells me that the guys knew that they were in trouble. The fact that the police did not even request to see video footage from the bar--and there were lots of cameras installed for exactly this reason--tells me they simply preferred to believe their prejudice and were not interested in the facts.

You're taking her word for the situation.

I have a big problem with her not cooperating with the investigation. I can understand someone not coming forward (but in such a case I don't think there normally can be enough certainty to convict) but she did talk to the police and they didn't feel rape could be proven.

Either that means a lack of evidence or that they aren't buying her story. If it's just a lack of evidence there would be no harm in going through the school's procedures. That makes me think there's a problem with her story.

When did she not cooperate?

Why didn't the police actually conduct an investigation? If they didn't believe her, why didn't they believe her? Even of they thought her story was unlikely, they had a duty to investigate. Their inaction meant that valuable evidence which would have either supported her claims of proved them to be impossible was lost.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

The police were probably too busy working out freshman rooming assignments. They left the investigation of this to the experts at the college administration office.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You're taking her word for the situation.

I have a big problem with her not cooperating with the investigation. I can understand someone not coming forward (but in such a case I don't think there normally can be enough certainty to convict) but she did talk to the police and they didn't feel rape could be proven.

Either that means a lack of evidence or that they aren't buying her story. If it's just a lack of evidence there would be no harm in going through the school's procedures. That makes me think there's a problem with her story.

When did she not cooperate?

Why didn't the police actually conduct an investigation? If they didn't believe her, why didn't they believe her? Even of they thought her story was unlikely, they had a duty to investigate. Their inaction meant that valuable evidence which would have either supported her claims of proved them to be impossible was lost.

The linked article says what happened. It's in there.

As for the police, we don't know what happened there as we are only seeing her side of the story.

Since they didn't take action that leaves a possibility that they concluded she was lying and got her to drop the matter--that's how the police generally handle a false rape allegation. That would also explain her delay in talking to the university.

 

[Rhea]

Since they didn't take action that leaves a possibility that they concluded she was lying and got her to drop the matter--that's how the police generally handle a false rape allegation.

That's how they generally handle true rape allegations, too.

That would also explain her delay in talking to the university.

Yes, many actual victims of rape have been dissuaded from thinking it is reasonable to report a rape. They've been told they asked for it, that it wasn't "rape" because they knew the guy, that they have no case because they wore red lipstick, or just that their life will become more miserable if they say anything.

Do you think this is a good habit, Loren?

 

[bigfield]

Since they didn't take action that leaves a possibility that they concluded she was lying and got her to drop the matter--that's how the police generally handle a false rape allegation. That would also explain her delay in talking to the university.

They handle a false rape allegation by not investigating?

That means they have no way of confirming whether or not it was actually false.

They're either corrupt or incompetent.

 

[Derec]

Yes, many actual victims of rape have been dissuaded from thinking it is reasonable to report a rape. They've been told they asked for it, that it wasn't "rape" because they knew the guy, that they have no case because they wore red lipstick, or just that their life will become more miserable if they say anything.

Criminal prosecutions require a great deal of evidence. That's why investigators must aggressively separate wheat from chaff (false allegations and true allegations with little or no evidence behind them). That may appear as police/prosecutors being unsympathetic but they must ask difficult questions and show skepticism.
Which is why college kangaroo courts are so popular with feminists. There is very little evidence required and male students are prevented from mounting an effective defense by capriciously excluding exculpatory evidence.

 

[Derec]

I do not recall "several FRDB/TF posters" who "have argued that the Universities are not required to provide due process". What I do recall though is that there was some confusion among some posters as to the difference between Code of Conduct violations and resulting penalties and the actual process addressing Article 9 where even if the accused student is deemed innocent for an accusation of sexual assault or rape, the said student may still incur penalties related to the University Code of Conduct. That I definitely recall.

Like when there is no evidence that the female was "too drunk to consent" (or even plenty of evidence that she was definitely sober enough to consent like text messages and her being able to walk around campus under her own power) but somehow her having consumed any alcohol is deemed sufficient to expel the male student anyway, but not the female student that is guilty of the same thing (having sex with someone who'd been drinking).
Unrealistically strict "code of conduct" (no sex with anyone who has been drinking any amount of alcohol at any time even if you weren't with her) that a large percentage (if not the majority) of the student body is guilty of coupled with inconsistent and sexist (only males are being expelled for it) enforcement is one of the big reasons why the system is broken. The "ok it was not rape but it still violated code of conduct" dodge is not making anything better. Quite the opposite.

I am predicting that the investigation launched by FSU on Jamie Winston will not lead to any other conclusion than Winston did not rape that female student. However, due to Winston's very high profile and being the current "face" of FSU during this now started football season, he will be placed on a very tight leash by the athletic depart. regarding his choice of "social" activities. The messenger of the tight leash being none other than Coach Jumbo Fisher.

So you are saying that even if he is innocent he should still be punished? Because he is a jock or because he is a male? Should female athletes (like female rowers) be under the same level of additional scrutiny? But no, under the current system it's always the male that gets expelled!

 

[Toni]

When did she not cooperate?

Why didn't the police actually conduct an investigation? If they didn't believe her, why didn't they believe her? Even of they thought her story was unlikely, they had a duty to investigate. Their inaction meant that valuable evidence which would have either supported her claims of proved them to be impossible was lost.

The linked article says what happened. It's in there.

As for the police, we don't know what happened there as we are only seeing her side of the story.

Since they didn't take action that leaves a possibility that they concluded she was lying and got her to drop the matter--that's how the police generally handle a false rape allegation. That would also explain her delay in talking to the university.

Winston's attorneys allege she did not cooperate; the police officer who did not investigate--despite being given a great deal of information--says she 'stopped cooperating,' a charge which is denied. The victim did express concerns about her own safety but that is not the same thing as not cooperating. The fact is the police bungled the investigation from the beginning but not conducting an investigation.

 

[Sabine Grant]

The basic difference is that I'm looking for problems with both sides of the story, not just with his side.

Her actions look more like those of somebody afraid of repercussions from a false allegation than a real rape victim.

Is that supposed to be your justification and response to my challenge to detail your reasoning regarding your accusation of my "being obsessed to prove rape?". Let me be clear that it is not.

Once more, your opinions are not based on any evidence you have presented, but on you drawing conclusions based on your own assertions. Whereas what I mentioned above is a demonstrated reality that the State Attorney for Leon County concluded that no charges should be filed against Winston based on lack of evidence. I am not about to personally engage in reading the alleged victim's mind or Winston's mind and draw conclusions (as you did) based on such personal mind reading.

In other words, you're not about to question her story. She says she was raped, that's that, she was raped.

It must definitely be reading comprehension....

I am not about to personally engage in reading the alleged victim's mind or Winston's mind and draw conclusions (as you did) based on such personal mind reading

Your opinions regarding the alleged victim and further why no charges were pressed are based on you mind reading. My stating that the reason why the Leon County SA did not press charges against Winston is because of lack of evidence supporting her claim is based on a stated REALITY. Further my remark I quoted above emphasizes that CONTRARY to you I will not attempt to mind read Winston's motivations or hers. I have no opinion as to whether her story is true.

You are pursuing to misrepresent my remarks as my endorsing the reasoning "She says she was raped, that's that, she was raped".

I have no opinion whatsoever as to whether a crime may or may not have happened. However, Winston's initial refusal to answer questions goes against the due process of facilitating the accused student's right to defend themselves.

You blame him for not answering questions but you don't blame her for not answering questions. You're proving my point that you're only after convictions, not justice.

While you quote mined and left this out :

I have no opinion whatsoever as to whether a crime may or may not have happened. However, Winston's initial refusal to answer questions goes against the due process of facilitating the accused student's right to defend themselves. Derec's persistent complaint being that accused male students are not given such due process. In this specific case, Winston was given several opportunities but declined them. That is why I brought it up. In its initial inquiry, FSU asked Winston to attend interviews regarding his alleged involvement in a sexual encounter with the said female student. Which he declined to attend. A process giving a voice to the accused student was facilitated by FSU but with, at the time, an uncooperative accused male student.

Emphasis on :

However, Winston's initial refusal to answer questions goes against the due process of facilitating the accused student's right to defend themselves. Derec's persistent complaint being that accused male students are not given such due process. In this specific case, Winston was given several opportunities but declined them. That is why I brought it up. In its initial inquiry, FSU asked Winston to attend interviews regarding his alleged involvement in a sexual encounter with the said female student. Which he declined to attend. A process giving a voice to the accused student was facilitated by FSU but with, at the time, an uncooperative accused male student.

Double emphasis on :

Derec's persistent complaint being that accused male students are not given such due process. In this specific case, Winston was given several opportunities but declined them. That is why I brought it up.

How difficult can it be to comprehend " that is why I brought it up"? "That" referring to the initial inquiry of FSU attempting to give Winston (accused male student) his own voice and his not having his own voice certainly NOT being the product of the University not giving him a voice.

I am still awaiting for you to respond to my challenge. Pursuing to draw inflammatory conclusions of my account does not settle with me, Loren.

Considering the efforts I have deployed up to now to point you to my actual motivation, any persistence on your part to misrepresent my remarks will be considered as intentional on your part rather than a matter of poor reading comprehension on your part.