What's Wrong With ...

What's Wrong With ... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DaddySatyr -> What's Wrong With ... (5/2/2016 7:14:48 PM)
... this? I'll give you a hint (but you'll have to read the whole article to get what I'm driving at): quote: ORIGINAL: http://theadvocate.com/news/neworleans/neworleansnews/15668200-106/records-city-of-new-orleans-paid-40000-to-cabbie-who-videotaped-local-lawyers-sex-plea Since his call to 911 shortly after the fare — “She whipped out my penis and was trying to give me oral sex and I said no” — Farrell has maintained he was a victim of Gaubert’s drunken aggression. He quickly filed a civil claim against Gaubert, whose radio show on WGSO, “Law Out Loud,” ended shortly after the cab ride. So ... I ask, again: What's wrong, here? Michael

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: What's Wrong With ... (5/2/2016 7:31:06 PM)
quote: What's wrong, here? pretty much everything, well except for the fact that the guy won in the end.

thompsonx -> RE: What's Wrong With ... (5/2/2016 7:39:26 PM)
ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr ... this? I'll give you a hint (but you'll have to read the whole article to get what I'm driving at): ORIGINAL: http://theadvocate.com/news/neworleans/neworleansnews/15668200-106/records-city-of-new-orleans-paid-40000-to-cabbie-who-videotaped-local-lawyers-sex-plea Since his call to 911 shortly after the fare — “She whipped out my penis and was trying to give me oral sex and I said no” — Farrell has maintained he was a victim of Gaubert’s drunken aggression. He quickly filed a civil claim against Gaubert, whose radio show on WGSO, “Law Out Loud,” ended shortly after the cab ride. So ... I ask, again: What's wrong, here? I give up mikey...what's wrong here?

Wayward5oul -> RE: What's Wrong With ... (5/2/2016 8:56:34 PM)
She should have been arrested. He is pursuing it as a civil case when it should be prosecuted as a criminal case of sexual assault.

DaddySatyr -> RE: What's Wrong With ... (5/2/2016 9:01:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul She should have been arrested. He is pursuing it as a civil case when it should be prosecuted as a criminal case of sexual assault. Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner! Take ten interwebz out of petty cash! The over/under on how many hours it would take for a *male* accused of similar behavior to be shackled and perp-walked is 24. The cops dropped the ball, based upon the information, here. No "Attempted Rape". No "Sexual Assault". Not even a little "Molestation" charge. Michael

tj444 -> RE: What's Wrong With ... (5/2/2016 9:52:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr ... this? I'll give you a hint (but you'll have to read the whole article to get what I'm driving at): quote: ORIGINAL: http://theadvocate.com/news/neworleans/neworleansnews/15668200-106/records-city-of-new-orleans-paid-40000-to-cabbie-who-videotaped-local-lawyers-sex-plea Since his call to 911 shortly after the fare — “She whipped out my penis and was trying to give me oral sex and I said no” — Farrell has maintained he was a victim of Gaubert’s drunken aggression. He quickly filed a civil claim against Gaubert, whose radio show on WGSO, “Law Out Loud,” ended shortly after the cab ride. So ... I ask, again: What's wrong, here? Michael He apparently called 911 but did he file a statement with the police that he had been assaulted by her? it doesnt seem clear from the article if that is what he did or not.. I dont believe the cops can do anything unless they have a formal complaint..if the cabbie wanted to do that & was serious about having her charged then yeah, she should have been arrested.. but if all he decided to do was to file a civil action (perhaps thinking that would be punishment enough?) then that was his choice.. Its probably a good thing he turned her down cuz she had been drinking all night, and having sex with someone that is drunk (therefore could not give consent) could have been grounds for her to have him charged with assault/rape..

Lucylastic -> RE: What's Wrong With ... (5/3/2016 1:17:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul She should have been arrested. He is pursuing it as a civil case when it should be prosecuted as a criminal case of sexual assault. this.

Lucylastic -> RE: What's Wrong With ... (5/3/2016 1:19:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr ... this? I'll give you a hint (but you'll have to read the whole article to get what I'm driving at): quote: ORIGINAL: http://theadvocate.com/news/neworleans/neworleansnews/15668200-106/records-city-of-new-orleans-paid-40000-to-cabbie-who-videotaped-local-lawyers-sex-plea Since his call to 911 shortly after the fare — “She whipped out my penis and was trying to give me oral sex and I said no” — Farrell has maintained he was a victim of Gaubert’s drunken aggression. He quickly filed a civil claim against Gaubert, whose radio show on WGSO, “Law Out Loud,” ended shortly after the cab ride. So ... I ask, again: What's wrong, here? Michael He apparently called 911 but did he file a statement with the police that he had been assaulted by her? it doesnt seem clear from the article if that is what he did or not.. I dont believe the cops can do anything unless they have a formal complaint..if the cabbie wanted to do that & was serious about having her charged then yeah, she should have been arrested.. but if all he decided to do was to file a civil action (perhaps thinking that would be punishment enough?) then that was his choice.. Its probably a good thing he turned her down cuz she had been drinking all night, and having sex with someone that is drunk (therefore could not give consent) could have been grounds for her to have him charged with assault/rape.. this too.

Termyn8or -> RE: What's Wrong With ... (5/3/2016 1:42:54 AM)
So some of what respectmen says is true. There is a difference in treatment by law. And this does not even deal with the draft. Hey, I think the guy spouts off too much about this shit and really does nothing else for the place, but those last couple posts should have him creamin his jeans. Pest, annoyance at times and all that. You know now he can quote you... "Larf" ! (not at you, jussayin) T^T

PeonForHer -> RE: What's Wrong With ... (5/3/2016 2:33:58 AM)
quote: So some of what respectmen says is true. There is a difference in treatment by law. Yes, but our RM would have it that all we 'lefties/femininazis' would support it. We don't. I certainly don't.

Wayward5oul -> RE: What's Wrong With ... (5/3/2016 4:07:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or So some of what respectmen says is true. There is a difference in treatment by law. And this does not even deal with the draft. Hey, I think the guy spouts off too much about this shit and really does nothing else for the place, but those last couple posts should have him creamin his jeans. Pest, annoyance at times and all that. You know now he can quote you... "Larf" ! (not at you, jussayin) T^T Personally, I think the attitude is a lot of 'its a guy, it shouldn't have bothered him', which is an attitude perpetrated by other males. It would have been helpful to know the gender of the cops, DA, etc. This could also be interpreted as 'he is not traumatized enough by this to press charges or demand that she be prosecuted, but he is traumatized enough to go for the money, so is he exploiting this opportunity to try and get some money out of it'. Then there is the argument that prosecuting her means he would have to go through a trial, and his reputation would be put on the stand, and he would be slut-shamed, and he couldn't handle that (which is why many rapes go unreported) so he just decided to get justice another way. The civil trial process would seem less invasive than a criminal court process, perhaps. So if that is the motive here, I can't argue that. I would think though that having a criminal conviction behind it would make a civil case stronger. Regardless, IMO, she should be charged and prosecuted fully. And yes, he was smart to stop it and get police involved. Had he not, who knows what could have happened had she sobered up the next day and had fuzzy memories about it. She could have turned it all around on him. And that would have been tragic.

thompsonx -> RE: What's Wrong With ... (5/3/2016 4:19:28 AM)
ORIGINAL: tj444 Its probably a good thing he turned her down cuz she had been drinking all night, and having sex with someone that is drunk (therefore could not give consent) could have been grounds for her to have him charged with assault/rape.. Are you saying that if I go to a bar and pick up/get picked up and have sex I am the assaulter/rapist because I was sober and she was not?

thompsonx -> RE: What's Wrong With ... (5/3/2016 4:21:47 AM)
ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul She should have been arrested. He is pursuing it as a civil case when it should be prosecuted as a criminal case of sexual assault. I understand that assault can be defined in a rather broad manner. This would be at the extreme edge of that broadness.

thompsonx -> RE: What's Wrong With ... (5/3/2016 4:23:04 AM)
ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner! Take ten interwebz out of petty cash! The over/under on how many hours it would take for a *male* accused of similar behavior to be shackled and perp-walked is 24. The cops dropped the ball, based upon the information, here. No "Attempted Rape". No "Sexual Assault". Not even a little "Molestation" charge. You don't get laid very often do you mikey?

thompsonx -> RE: What's Wrong With ... (5/3/2016 4:27:41 AM)
ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul Personally, I think the attitude is a lot of 'its a guy, it shouldn't have bothered him', which is an attitude perpetrated by other males. It would have been helpful to know the gender of the cops, DA, etc. This could also be interpreted as 'he is not traumatized enough by this to press charges or demand that she be prosecuted, but he is traumatized enough to go for the money, so is he exploiting this opportunity to try and get some money out of it'. Then there is the argument that prosecuting her means he would have to go through a trial, and his reputation would be put on the stand, and he would be slut-shamed, and he couldn't handle that (which is why many rapes go unreported) so he just decided to get justice another way. The civil trial process would seem less invasive than a criminal court process, perhaps. So if that is the motive here, I can't argue that. I would think though that having a criminal conviction behind it would make a civil case stronger. Regardless, IMO, she should be charged and prosecuted fully. And yes, he was smart to stop it and get police involved. Had he not, who knows what could have happened had she sobered up the next day and had fuzzy memories about it. She could have turned it all around on him. And that would have been tragic. On the other hand think how this plays to his g/f. The drunk was certainly not fugly, and fully ready to play. He cites his g/f and his commitment to her as his reason for truning her down. His shit is golden from here on out.

Wayward5oul -> RE: What's Wrong With ... (5/3/2016 5:29:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: tj444 Its probably a good thing he turned her down cuz she had been drinking all night, and having sex with someone that is drunk (therefore could not give consent) could have been grounds for her to have him charged with assault/rape Are you saying that if I go to a bar and pick up/get picked up and have sex I am the assaulter/rapist because I was sober and she was not? The law says yes. and not to fan the flames or anything but I'm not sure just how much the law would take into account how much you yourself had had to drink.

Wayward5oul -> RE: What's Wrong With ... (5/3/2016 5:31:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul She should have been arrested. He is pursuing it as a civil case when it should be prosecuted as a criminal case of sexual assault. I understand that assault can be defined in a rather broad manner. This would be at the extreme edge of that broadness. If roles were reversed no one would argue that this was clearly sexual assault it should be in this case as well.

DaddySatyr -> RE: What's Wrong With ... (5/3/2016 12:36:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul If roles were reversed no one would argue that this was clearly sexual assault it should be in this case as well. I believe that he *did* "report" this to the police. I took: quote: ORIGINAL: http://theadvocate.com/news/neworleans/neworleansnews/15668200-106/records-city-of-new-orleans-paid-40000-to-cabbie-who-videotaped-local-lawyers-sex-plea Since his call to 911 shortly after the fare — “She whipped out my penis and was trying to give me oral sex and I said no” — Farrell has maintained he was a victim of Gaubert’s drunken aggression. He quickly filed a civil claim against Gaubert, whose radio show on WGSO, “Law Out Loud,” ended shortly after the cab ride. the words in red to be a direct quote from his 911 call (since it's in quotation marks and all). If we reverse the genders, the cops *abso-fucking-lutely* would have (at minimum) found him, cuffed him, and asked him to come to the police station for a "little chat". They wouldn't even have to talk to the prosecutor about an arrest warrant. It's S.O.P. Nothing in the article suggests that her being "charged" with the small-potatoes crap charges included an arrest (doubtful. She was also a bit of a "local celebrity") or an interrogation. I would bet a dollar to a doughnut that the reason for the civil suit was because the police/prosecutors refused to move on this. Your point about knowing the gender of the police and prosecutor is well taken, as well. Michael

thompsonx -> RE: What's Wrong With ... (5/3/2016 1:26:06 PM)
ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul ORIGINAL: thompsonx Are you saying that if I go to a bar and pick up/get picked up and have sex I am the assaulter/rapist because I was sober and she was not? The law says yes. and not to fan the flames or anything but I'm not sure just how much the law would take into account how much you yourself had had to drink. Would you link me to that law please? I would be sober...I like to be able to remember if I had a good time and not have to depend on bystanders to remember for me.[;)]

thompsonx -> RE: What's Wrong With ... (5/3/2016 1:30:03 PM)
ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul She should have been arrested. He is pursuing it as a civil case when it should be prosecuted as a criminal case of sexual assault. I understand that assault can be defined in a rather broad manner. This would be at the extreme edge of that broadness. If roles were reversed no one would argue that this was clearly sexual assault it should be in this case as well. I woud argue, most vociferously, that it was not but then as I said the definition of the word assault can be stretched...Assault legally is verbal so if you tell a cop to kiss your ass that "technically" is an assault. A public defender might get you off with a fine, a real lawyer would get a public appology and a large cheque.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625