NationStates Jolt Archive

Meet the dirty little whore who one year ago decided to try and wreck the lives of three boys by pretending they raped her.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0411071duke1.html

That face should spend the next few years looking out through barred windows.

This makes my brown eyes blue.

Oh good, another woman-hating thread on this exact same subject. Yes, let's all just assume she lied, that she's malicious, and of course that she wasn't raped. She was a stripper, so probably if she had sex she asked for it. Hey look, she was caught drunk driving too, how scummy!

Your nauseating hate-gasms make me want to vomit.

Eh.. is this going to get ugly?

A good number of people believe pretty strongly in "rape shield" laws, and that accusers in rape cases should not be named no matter the outcome, etc.
I'd say it's best to forget about the case, rather than invite flaming.

This makes my brown eyes blue.
I don't follow. Unless you're saying that the green backdrop of that website caused your contacts (which were colored) to fly out and bounce off your monitor.

Meet the dirty little whore who one year ago decided to try and wreck the lives of three boys by pretending they raped her.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0411071duke1.html

That face should spend the next few years looking out through barred windows.

Bitch.

Oh joy. Yet another person who never bothered to read up on the case. We've been over this. She was A: almost certainly raped by someone, even if not those, and B: mentally ill.

Eh.. is this going to get ugly?

A good number of people believe pretty strongly in "rape shield" laws, and that accusers in rape cases should not be named no matter the outcome, etc.
I'd say it's best to forget about the case, rather than invite flaming.

I support keeping rape victims' identities protected, but this isn't a rape victim, this is a dirtbag who lied about being a rape victim and got a whole lot of publicity and made life very difficult for some innocent people.

There are, as an activist of some sort blathered about a year ago, both legal and "community consequences" for actions.

She meant it in the sense of harassing and ostracizing the wrongly accused lacrosse players, but if it is good for the goose then it is good for the gander, and little ms. mangum can drink up the community consequences until she chokes.

What this person did was heinous, and the long term consequences of her villainy will fall most heavily on real rape victims. Despicable.

Oh joy. Yet another person who never bothered to read up on the case. We've been over this. She was A: almost certainly raped by someone, even if not those, and B: mentally ill.

Insane asylums have barred windows don't they?

All the same to me.

This is truly excellent. We really needed another thread like this. Absolutely. What? No, I'm not being sarcastic. Not one little bit.


[/sarc]

Oh joy. Yet another person who never bothered to read up on the case. We've been over this. She was A: almost certainly raped by someone, even if not those, and B: mentally ill.

I hate to admit having paid a little attention to the case, but I recall the entire team being DNA tested.. meaning that though several varieties of DNA were found in the stripper, none of the kids on the team apparently put it there. So, if she was raped by anyone, it was either before or after she met the team, making her claim more than a little dubious, since she specified certain members at a specific time..

In any case, I'm strongly in the "let it die" camp, in wanting to forget about this case. However, even if you're well-read on the facts, it's still an unquestionably bizarre set of events.

I support keeping rape victims' identities protected, but this isn't a rape victim, this is a dirtbag who lied about being a rape victim

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12541717&postcount=7

Read your own thread.

Or hey, read Wilgrove's thread which is basically the exact same thing.

Why, the fact that you felt the need to create a second thread on the same subject with the same view and the same tired, incorrect points makes me think that you just want to get a whole lot of publicity.

Eh.. is this going to get ugly?

A good number of people believe pretty strongly in "rape shield" laws, and that accusers in rape cases should not be named no matter the outcome, etc.
I'd say it's best to forget about the case, rather than invite flaming.

I agree with such laws, however I also feel that due to the 'no smoke without fire' and the severe negative effects facing a man accused of rape the accused should also be protected in a similar way until he is found guilty.

However I also feel that if a woman can be proven beyond reasonable doubt to be lying under oath that she should be able to be prosecuted. Note - A 'not guilty' on the mans rape trial would NOT be enough to show the woman lied, all it says is that there was not enough evidence to convict beyond reasonable doubt.

I feel the DA isn't getting sufficient blame here. This case should've never gone to court. From what I understand, there's no evidence any of the accused were involved in anything illegal with the stripper. From what I understand, there's not much evidence they were involved in ANYTHING with the stripper, other than perhaps watching her.

I support keeping rape victims' identities protected, but this isn't a rape victim, this is a dirtbag who lied about being a rape victim and got a whole lot of publicity and made life very difficult for some innocent people.

You can't prove she wasn't a rape victim.. it's better to err on the side of not destroying a woman's reputation.

I agree that she caused trouble for those kids, who would certainly have been convicted if they weren't wealthy - if it were you or me, we'd both be in prison right now. But as someone mentioned, she may have been ill or drugged or both, and may have created a false memory. Unlikely, sure.. but you can't discount the possibility.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12541717&postcount=7

Read your own thread.

Or hey, read Wilgrove's thread which is basically the exact same thing.

Why, the fact that you felt the need to create a second thread on the same subject with the same view and the same tired, incorrect points makes me think that you just want to get a whole lot of publicity.

I've been on the phone with the Times and the Post for an hour trying to get their best reporters to cover this thread.

Sy Hersch is already here in my study with me, working furiously to get a write-up on this thread into the next issue of the New Yorker, and Bob Woodward is texting me asking what the book about it should be called.

:rolleyes:

Little Ms. Mangum is who needs the publicity.

You can't prove she wasn't a rape victim.. it's better to err on the side of not destroying a woman's reputation.

I agree that she caused trouble for those kids, who would certainly have been convicted if they weren't wealthy - if it were you or me, we'd both be in prison right now. But as someone mentioned, she may have been ill or drugged or both, and may have created a false memory. Unlikely, sure.. but you can't discount the possibility.

Her reputation (as well as her freedom, ideally) were destroyed the moment she decided to lie about being raped by three lacrosse players at duke university a year ago.

In a sane world, she would be in prison right now on some felony conviction, or else confined to an asylum.

I feel the DA isn't getting sufficient blame here. This case should've never gone to court. From what I understand, there's no evidence any of the accused were involved in anything illegal with the stripper. From what I understand, there's not much evidence they were involved in ANYTHING with the stripper, other than perhaps watching her.

From what I understand, the DA is shielded from criminal liability for his actions as DA. His being disbarred and his career being ruined permanently is sufficient. He has faced public shaming for a long time now.

You can't prove she wasn't a rape victim.. it's better to err on the side of not destroying a woman's reputation.
But destroying the reputations of a few men, that's just dandy.
Not that I'm saying the woman needs to publicly attacked, on the contrary, I think that the laws protecting the identity of alleged rape victims should be expanded to shield the identity of alleged rapists.

Christ.

I've been staying out of discussions on this topic, since it hits a little too close to home for me, but this thread is just a little too much for me to ignore. It's bad enough that people can't grasp the concept that "insufficient evidence" means "insufficient evidence," not "sufficient evidence to say that one side was completely lying, so there." It's bad enough that people keep forgetting that these poor, "innocent" boys are fairly demonstrably and admittedly complete assholes, even if they're not rapists. But now, apparently, we have to post pictures of a girl who very probably was raped by someone and rant about what a filthy-dirty-bitch-whore-slut she is.

Honestly? People like this OP are exactly why I never reported my assault. Getting treated as subhuman by one guy was more than enough, thanks.

Little Ms. Mangum is who needs the publicity.

Right, it couldn't be that she was actually raped. No, she's a woman, a stripper with a DUI on record no less, so she must have been asking for it. Let's all join in on sharing our precious little feelings about how angry she makes us feel. Let's spam the forum with useless hate and make sure, never, ever to read anything anyone else writes... that might take the edge off what is otherwise a highly productive emotion.

I try to be outraged about this, but somehow I can't muster the effort.

Let me try.

Someone was wrongly accused in a rape case? Never! This is unprecedented in US legal history.

I am shocked, shocked that there is gambling going on in this establishment.

Bitch.
Mysoginist.

She might well have been raped, there's not enough evidence to prove anything to do with this case, all things considered. She's just dropping her case because a) it's probably expensive and she'll be on a shoestring budget and b) since she's mentally ill, she'd never win the case anyway.

OTOH since you're a bigoted 13 year old, that might be a bit hard for you to comprehend.

Christ.

I've been staying out of discussions on this topic, since it hits a little too close to home for me, but this thread is just a little too much for me to ignore. It's bad enough that people can't grasp the concept that "insufficient evidence" means "insufficient evidence," not "sufficient evidence to say that one side was completely lying, so there." It's bad enough that people keep forgetting that these poor, "innocent" boys are fairly demonstrably and admittedly complete assholes, even if they're not rapists. But now, apparently, we have to post pictures of a girl who very probably was raped by someone and rant about what a filthy-dirty-bitch-whore-slut she is.

except, I believe, she kept changing her story. from Rape, to harrasement, back to rape, to who knows what.

She's still a nasty piece of work of course. But lets put the blame where it belongs here: the legal profession and its sociopathic members.

Her reputation (as well as her freedom, ideally) were destroyed the moment she decided to lie about being raped by three lacrosse players at duke university a year ago.

In a sane world, she would be in prison right now on some felony conviction, or else confined to an asylum.

In a sane world, no one would rush to judge a young woman at the center of high-profile rape trial and condemn her to prison or an asylum without a second thought.

Christ.

I've been staying out of discussions on this topic, since it hits a little too close to home for me, but this thread is just a little too much for me to ignore. It's bad enough that people can't grasp the concept that "insufficient evidence" means "insufficient evidence," not "sufficient evidence to say that one side was completely lying, so there." It's bad enough that people keep forgetting that these poor, "innocent" boys are fairly demonstrably and admittedly complete assholes, even if they're not rapists. But now, apparently, we have to post pictures of a girl who very probably was raped by someone and rant about what a filthy-dirty-bitch-whore-slut she is.

Honestly? People like this OP are exactly why I never reported my assault. Getting treated as subhuman by one guy was more than enough, thanks.

I sympathize with you, as I'm sure do all sane and decent people.

The actions of this creep hurt people like you the most in the long run by eroding trust in sexual assault allegations.

People shouldn't have be put in prison and declared rapists and sex offenders for being 'complete assholes.' Wrong is wrong, and what the DA and Ms Mangum did was wrong. Criminal or insane, she should be put away for a while.

Mysoginist.

She might well have been raped, there's not enough evidence to prove anything to do with this case, all things considered. She's just dropping her case because a) it's probably expensive and she'll be on a shoestring budget and b) since she's mentally ill, she'd never win the case anyway.

OTOH since you're a bigoted 13 year old, that might be a bit hard for you to comprehend.
She is not dropping the case - the judge or prosecuter (I forget which) dismissed the case.


I think it is clear beyond reasonable doubt that it was not these men who raped her.

We have:

DNA matched different men.
The other striper there said she was not raped.
Her story changed all the time.

Wasn't one of the guys even proven to be several miles away at the time by CCTV or somethint too?

In a sane world, no one would rush to judge a young woman at the center of high-profile rape trial and condemn her to prison or an asylum without a second thought.

I would hardly say the events of the last year constitue "rushing to judgement" or a reasonable reaction to her heinous actions to be condemnation without a "second though."

In a sane world, no one would rush to judge a young woman at the center of high-profile rape trial and condemn her to prison or an asylum without a second thought.

Ah, but she isn't in the center of a high-profile rape trial and never was.

Wasn't one of the guys even proven to be several miles away at the time by CCTV or somethint too?

He was filmed by an ATM camera taking money out of a bank on the other side of town during the time period she alleged the attack took place.

But destroying the reputations of a few men, that's just dandy.

Men being falsely accused of rape is supposedly exceedingly rare. Some feminists have argued that the presumtion of innocence should be suspended in cases of male-on-female rape. I wouldn't go so far as to advocate a "guilty until proved innocent" standard, but in the court of public opinion, that's how it is, and there's no way to suppress that in sensational cases like this last one.

The actions of this creep hurt people like you the most in the long run by eroding trust in sexual assault allegations.

NONSENSE.

It sickens me that you're trying to act like you give a shit about rape victims. You don't. She was raped, just because the defedants were found not guilty does not change this fact.

Yet you call her a "dirty little whore." You want her to be "publically shamed" for daring to lose a case.

People like you make it nearly impossible for a rape victim to report the crime. People like you are why so many rapes go unreported. Here's a hint NG... STFU.

Right, it couldn't be that she was actually raped. No, she's a woman, a stripper with a DUI on record no less, so she must have been asking for it. Let's all join in on sharing our precious little feelings about how angry she makes us feel. Let's spam the forum with useless hate and make sure, never, ever to read anything anyone else writes... that might take the edge off what is otherwise a highly productive emotion.

I'd like you to point out where I said anything along the lines of "No, she's a woman, a stripper with a DUI on record no less, so she must have been asking for it" or else apologize.

What we have here is not a bad woman but a bad person. This isnt any different from someone who tries to blame a crime on "a black guy."
False accusations are a very serious offense.

The three boys from duke will get along just fine, the bulk of this creep's victims will be women who are sexually assaulted and have their stories doubted on her account. Even worse are the ones who, because of the mistrust this creep has generated, won't report it at all.

Mysoginist.


Oh, so now not liking a woman who ruined kid's reputations is sexist?

You disgust me.

Also, I don't know you guys who are saying that she wasn't lying and we should stop identifying her and saying what a disgusting bitch she is. You're the same people who identified the innocent and went on about what disgusting bastards they are.

You guys have no right to call anyone sexist.

It sickens me that you're trying to act like you give a shit about rape victims. You don't. She was raped, just because the defedants were found not guilty does not change this fact.


So that guy who she said raped her but was actually filmed at an ATM miles away at that time, does he have that x-man power where he can be in more than one place at once?

I'd like you to point out where I said anything along the lines of "No, she's a woman, a stripper with a DUI on record no less, so she must have been asking for it" or else apologize.

No. Your little blog article nonsense gleefully pointed out her DUI, as if that has anything to do with it. And you endorse it, you linked to it, and you are using it to fuel your hate. I'll apologize when you stop blaming rape victims, how about that?

Even worse are the ones who, because of the mistrust this creep has generated, won't report it at all.

Yeah, you mean like women who don't want to be "publically shamed" or labelled "dirty little whores" if there isn't enough evidence to convict their rapists.

YOU are generating that all on your own.

I would hardly say the events of the last year constitue "rushing to judgement" or a reasonable reaction to her heinous actions to be condemnation without a "second though."

Really, so how long did it take you to carefully weigh the evidence presented over the last year and settle on taking away her freedom? Did you consider a possible fine at first, or was jail really the only option that seemed sensible as it appeared that the rape charges were wrong? Let us in on the process that made her, in your mind, a "dirty little whore, despicable, dirtbag, scum", and generally someone unworthy of freedom.

So that guy who she said raped her but was actually filmed at an ATM miles away at that time, does he have that x-man power where he can be in more than one place at once?

So if she wasn't raped by X, she wasn't raped at all? What a lovely and interesting variety of logic you have. Do you have the x-man power for your brain to be in more than one place at once?

I don't particularly like or see the need for this thread.

NONSENSE.

It sickens me that you're trying to act like you give a shit about rape victims. You don't. She was raped, just because the defedants were found not guilty does not change this fact.

Yet you call her a "dirty little whore." You want her to be "publically shamed" for daring to lose a case.

People like you make it nearly impossible for a rape victim to report the crime. People like you are why so many rapes go unreported. Here's a hint NG... STFU.


Found not guilty? Lose a case? What are you talking about? What world are you living in?

The falsely accused were not found not guilty, because there was not a trial, because there was not a case, just false accusations and despicable misconduct by a prosecutor who was not cut out morally for the job.

I don't have any inclination to use gender-neutral language. I happily refer to men as bastards and sons-of-bitches, and women by analagous insults. It contributes, you know, to the vibrancy of our English language.

I resent your despicable lie that I do not care about rape victims. I just dont care about rape victims who happen to be lying creeps. Nothing is a free pass for wrongdoing, and what Ms Mangum did was wrong.

Men being falsely accused of rape is supposedly exceedingly rare.
3%, I think, but that doesn't excuse these sorts of reputation destroying media circuses. Even if they did do it, they deserve better than to be targeted by the likes of Nancy Grace before they've even had a chance to be tried.
Some feminists have argued that the presumtion of innocence should be suspended in cases of male-on-female rape.
Yes, but they're crazy and paranoid.
I wouldn't go so far as to advocate a "guilty until proved innocent" standard, but in the court of public opinion, that's how it is, and there's no way to suppress that in sensational cases like this last one.
They managed to sit on the name of the woman who made the accusations until the trial was over, what would be so hard about extending the same courtesy to a few more people, at least until after the conviction?

This makes my brown eyes blue.

All the bullshit the media fed you about this case finally being drawn away?

No. Your little blog article nonsense gleefully pointed out her DUI, as if that has anything to do with it. And you endorse it, you linked to it, and you are using it to fuel your hate. I'll apologize when you stop blaming rape victims, how about that?



Yeah, you mean like women who don't want to be "publically shamed" or labelled "dirty little whores" if there isn't enough evidence to convict their rapists.

YOU are generating that all on your own.


I posted a link to very well known thesmokinggun.com, which isn't a blog, but is a site that publicizes primary sources relating to things in the news. I linked to that site because it had her photo, I wasn't aware of anything having to do with a DUI until you mentioned it.

Now that I've looked into, the only reason a DUI is mentioned is because that photo is from a DUI arrest. I for one have never seen a photo of her before, and I do not think that they are easy to come by. Purely coincidental, you read ridiculous things where they aren't.

Where is my apology? You falsely accused me of saying or believing "No, she's a woman, a stripper with a DUI on record no less, so she must have been asking for it"

So if she wasn't raped by X, she wasn't raped at all? What a lovely and interesting variety of logic you have. Do you have the x-man power for your brain to be in more than one place at once?

Why did she accuse him then? Is she protecting her attacker?

Yeah, you mean like women who don't want to be "publically shamed" or labelled "dirty little whores" if there isn't enough evidence to convict their rapists.



You're implying that the lacrosse players raped her, which isn't true. The DA said as much when he dropped the charges against them, which were based on false accusations.

Why side with a liar against her victims?

Publiclly shaming a scumbag who makes a false rape accusation which is shown to be false is not the same as publically shaming an innocent rape victim because there wasnt enough evidence to convict her rapist.

She deserves to be shamed because she accused innocent people of raping her, not because she can't prove who did rape her.

You owe me another apology for falsely accusing me of believing or advocating the above.

I don't particularly like or see the need for this thread.

Yeah...agreed. Don't we already have a thread on this case already? Does it really need two?

So that guy who she said raped her but was actually filmed at an ATM miles away at that time, does he have that x-man power where he can be in more than one place at once?

Just because she wasn't raped by those three doesn't mean she wasn't raped at all. In fact, it's almost certain that she was raped at one point, what with the whole vaginal damage thing.

Mysoginist.

She might well have been raped, there's not enough evidence to prove anything to do with this case, all things considered. She's just dropping her case because a) it's probably expensive and she'll be on a shoestring budget and b) since she's mentally ill, she'd never win the case anyway.

OTOH since you're a bigoted 13 year old, that might be a bit hard for you to comprehend.

I comprehend! I comprehend! My white flag is raised! I fucking surrender already!

I just called her that because she started a flimsy case.

Just because she wasn't raped by those three doesn't mean she wasn't raped at all. In fact, it's almost certain that she was raped at one point, what with the whole vaginal damage thing.

And I'll say again, then why did she accuse them?

I comprehend! I comprehend! My white flag is raised! I fucking surrender already!

I just called her that because she started a flimsy case.

Bullshit. You don't give up because of one person. You fight for your views. When someone flames you and accuses you of being a misogynist, you point out the inherent sexism in thinking that just because a man is accused of rape makes him guilty.

Yeah...agreed. Don't we already have a thread on this case already? Does it really need two?

Isn't this the third?

Why did she accuse him then? Is she protecting her attacker?

Psychological trauma. See the other thread. It's likely she didn't know who raped her, so her brain pulled out people for whatever reason.

Isn't this the third?

Yes. I think the OP even started one of the others.

Psychological trauma. See the other thread. It's likely she didn't know who raped her, so her brain pulled out people for whatever reason.

This is Kafkaesque.

Psychological trauma. See the other thread. It's likely she didn't know who raped her, so her brain pulled out people for whatever reason.

IIRC the prosecuter put a bunch of Duke Lacrosse players in the ID parade (all the ID parade were from the team) and it seems she picked out three randomers.

This is Kafkaesque.

She turned into a giant bug?

The lacrosse players were the real victims here. The victims of a deliberate and vicious witchhunt perpetrated by a racist slut and eagerly perpetuated by a power greedy prosecuter who wanted his name on the front page. Both the woman and the prosecuter belong in prison. The prosecuter should in fact be de barred.

The prosecuter should in fact be de barred.

Well, at the very least, from what I understand, that's what's happening.

Bullshit. You don't give up because of one person. You fight for your views. When someone flames you and accuses you of being a misogynist, you point out the inherent sexism in thinking that just because a man is accused of rape makes him guilty.

I was never good at debate. But I'll remember that in the next thread.

Just because she wasn't raped by those three doesn't mean she wasn't raped at all. In fact, it's almost certain that she was raped at one point, what with the whole vaginal damage thing.

Actually, that appears in the police and prosecutors reports only. The hospital's report does mention "diffuse vaginal swelling" but does not mention any damage that is typically indicative of rape or that corroborates her story.

Considering that she worked for an escort service and had admittedly used a vibrator in a performance earlier that night, there is not really any credible evidence for a rape occurring.

As a Durham, NC resident who has seen all of this happening locally, I can assure you all that you don't have all the facts. I don't care what you've read or who blogged what - this is not a simple case, and assigning simple blame is aggravating and stupid.



As a NationStates Mod, I'm gonna call this one trolling, and lock the thread. You've all made your points. DON'T repost another one of these.