blkexec wrote:Who is dismissing rose rape case? Anybody? Seems like this threads points to somebody that don't exist....

No one. The purpose of this thread appears to be about the OP staking his claim that he once only complained about Melo non-stop and now he will be performing double duty complaining about Melo AND Rose non-stop.

ChuckBuck wrote:

ESOMKnicks wrote:Can you explain a couple of points from the messages?

1) Which friend is she losing and why?
2) Why is the taxi cab # important?
3) Why does she need to see the taxi that was waiting outside of Rose's house?
4) Why is her home her work? What type of work does she do at her home?
5) How did she miss an important day at work if her home is her work?
6) Why does she complain to Rose about all sorts of things EXCEPT feeling that she was sexually taken advantage of by him and his friends?

1)Room mate used to be on good terms was a coworker and her tenant, now they're on bad terms. She moved out and is now the key witness for the defense
2)Rose uses car service to either shuttle her to him or to send her home from his place. Taxi cab has record of time, driver as witness, what state was she in, was she passed out, was she drunk?
3)Taxi records can corroborate her story as far as records go
4)Some people work from home from time to time or use it for work related things. Says in the thinkprogress article she was in property management the time she met Rose.
5)Most people have to report to someone at an office if you aren't a boss. Guessing that day she had to show up.
6)She thought she knew him. She thought they had simpatico and didn't realize the extent of his scumbaggery.

1) In the thinkprogress interview she says that she was not really friends with her roommate, though for some reason the roommate ends up being the first person to whom she confides the thought that she was raped. Her story is very jumbled and confusing on this point, like on most other points
2) and 3) Or perhaps it is important in the context of a $200 taxi bill, and her wanting to prove that the taxi driver indeed spent a lot of time waiting for her and then helping her get up to her apartment, hence the high bill
4) and 5) Most people do some work at home, when they do not finish on time at work, or bring the work home to be near their family, etc. This does not make their home their work. And she clearly had to go to an office. So the complaint to Rose about her home being her work is still not clear. How is that his problem? Perhaps she was complaining because due to the party her home became a mess (i.e., vomit in the bathroom, condoms, etc.). But then she was not expecting to have a business function at her home the next day. Neither had that consideration stopped her from drinking vodka at her home the night before on her own initiative.
6) The morning after, she complained to Rose about her home being her work, she complained about her roommate with whom she had had a difficult relationship all along, she complained about a taxi bill, she asked for money for the sex belt (which she later said she got as a "gift from a friend", some friends), yet not once did she say: "You guys took advantage of me while I was helpless, I did not want this, you guys did a horrible thing". So why did she keep bringing up all those inconsequential things and ignore the most important one?

Her attorneys started out really well, I actually started getting a lot of sympathy for this woman, but the more she and they speak to the media, and the more details are coming out, the more it looks like she has routinely lied, and the more unclear and confusing explanations of some very unsavory facts come out, making her look like she is taking turns and bends to hide or obscure something. She is losing credibility fast. Not surprisingly, it is HER legal team that makes public statements about this case having to get settled as soon as possible.

I hope that at some point the judge steps in to stop this infamy and to force the sides to negotiate a reasonable settlement. Everyone in this situation looks bad, but it is Rose with the money, so, fairly or not, he should end up paying up.

ChuckBuck wrote:Actual Deposition from the rape victim's roommate a couple days after the shock of being raped:

Actual text from the rape victim to Rose in trying to find out why her on/off boyfriend acted like a scumbag moral-less scoundrel, since she thought she knew him:

Doesn't sound very hoe-like.

Welpee wrote:

dk7th wrote:i read as much of the texts and whatnot as i could stomach. liable or not-- the whole thing is sordid, sickening, and shameful and i cannot believe rose is bringing this shyte to the knicks. he is a pariah even before playing a single minute for the knicks and has to settle.

I bet that kinda **** is already on the Knicks, we just may not know about it. Did we already forget about Derrick Williams, Cleanthony Early and the case against O'Quinn? Let's not pretend Rose is joining a choir boy squad. This IS the NBA you know. The Knicks are probably no better or worse than any other team in terms of morality.

o'quinn accused of assault and pending, so yes that is apples to apples, although o'quinn's situation lacks the star power, noteriety, and sordidness of rose's situation.

cleanthony was shot at a nightclub he should not have been in, williams gets his jewelry stolen. both were stupid but the key is they were victims. not apples to apples.

callmened wrote:WOW. SO I JUST READ MORE OF THIS CASE...

listen, i dont know what happened that night...NONE of this do but ive concluded a couple of things:
- yikes D.Rose - that is ******* behavior (basically he said, I'll only continue to be your boyfriend if you allow my boys to have sex with you too)
- yikes D. Rose - you sound like an idiot (he doesnt know what 'consent' means)

i wish i didn't read this. again, i dont know if they raped her or not. but it just showed me how ignorant D. Rose was. i mean its hard to stomach or root for a guy like that

You'd be surprised at what you don't know about many pro athletes, musicians, actors etc. until their personal business is put out in public we don't really know any of them. I would say don't base your opinion on the limited info that comes out in the media.

People have been executed based on evidence and later found to be innocent. So called evidence can lead you astray, especially when Lawyers present it a certain way. None of us were there and none of us knows the whole story. It looks bad on both sides cuz her behavior wasn't exemplary either. Bad decisions all the way around.

callmened wrote:WOW. SO I JUST READ MORE OF THIS CASE...

listen, i dont know what happened that night...NONE of this do but ive concluded a couple of things:
- yikes D.Rose - that is ******* behavior (basically he said, I'll only continue to be your boyfriend if you allow my boys to have sex with you too)
- yikes D. Rose - you sound like an idiot (he doesnt know what 'consent' means)

i wish i didn't read this. again, i dont know if they raped her or not. but it just showed me how ignorant D. Rose was. i mean its hard to stomach or root for a guy like that

seems to me he is going to lose the case, based on a small section of this article from the NY times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/16/sports/basketball/ny-knicks-derrick-rose-rape-lawsuit.html?ref=basketball

"In a civil trial, the burden of proof for a jury to find for a plaintiff is only that his or her story be more believable than not. “O.J. Simpson was acquitted,” said Daniel Medwed, a criminal law professor at Northeastern University, referring to Simpson’s criminal trial on murder charges. “But he lost his civil suit. The bar is much lower.”"

this may be why rose and/or his lawyers are going on the offensive: defaming or calling the woman's character into question is the only strategy they have at their disposal, ie is she such a lowlife that she is not credible.

of course if rose uses that strategy, then what is good for the goose is also good for the gander. rose has already exposed himself in his deposition, as you pointed out.

CrushAlot wrote:

callmened wrote:WOW. SO I JUST READ MORE OF THIS CASE...

listen, i dont know what happened that night...NONE of this do but ive concluded a couple of things:
- yikes D.Rose - that is ******* behavior (basically he said, I'll only continue to be your boyfriend if you allow my boys to have sex with you too)
- yikes D. Rose - you sound like an idiot (he doesnt know what 'consent' means)

i wish i didn't read this. again, i dont know if they raped her or not. but it just showed me how ignorant D. Rose was. i mean its hard to stomach or root for a guy like that

Ned, are you getting your info from here? http://thewhitebronco.com/2016/09/the-derrick-rose-sexual-assault-trial-primer/
It has everything that has been presented in court without opinions or lawyer slants from either side.