Date: October 2nd, 2026 7:36 PM Author: Thirsty Odious Tank Mood
1. Her disappointed response to getting disinvited to her rapists' party at their rape dungeon the following week: "I knew this was going to happen.The woman will always get the short end of the stick."
2. "everyone needs to grow up cause sexuality and sex and s---is changing and stuff like this is going to become more common, I'm also really open minded tho, I love you king."
3. A couple weeks later, but still before she made a police report, the young man told her that he was concerned he'd been "labeled an assaulter" and she responded "I haven't said anything but I do know people are changing the narrative because like in any sexual scenario w one woman and many men the woman was probably the victim."
Ibid.
4. She trxted the guy "non[e] of the sexual stuff was illegal."
Snapchat messages exchanged during the alleged assault in a group chat titled "Chi Phi Actives" include a photo of then-student Jane Doe in a room at the fraternity house, according to images of the chain obtained by CNN.
The conversations taking place on the fast-erasing messaging app suggest other photos or videos might have been recovered had there been a more thorough criminal investigation, according to a source close to the case.
CNN has previously reported messages in the group chat that stated "free p*ssy" upstairs and asked, "Shop still open?"
One reportedly sent Doe a text message which said: "I just wanted to apologize for how things went down the other night." The sender said he and another male who was allegedly involved felt terrible and too under the influence of drugs and alcohol to "shut it down and kick people out before it got way out of hand."
Date: October 2nd, 2026 7:40 PM Author: wonderful senate
She said it herself that it wasn't, multiple times to multiple people. She later changed her interpretation after her reputation tanked. If you read the account the DA gave in his released statement of the police report, plus all of the texts she sent, plus the accounts the frat boys gave you'd have to be insane to think a rape occurred. You know it wasn't rape, you admitted it earlier. You just want to troll cons.
Date: October 3rd, 2026 7:15 PM Author: ponyboy curtis (If I May, tp)
There’s an ocean of difference between the Duke Lacrosse boys who, at worst, made racist comments toward the black strippers who showed up after they ordered white girls, and running train on a girl stoned out of her mind on booze and ketamine. Texting your whole frat that there’s “free pussy upstairs” and to “you just come in and whip it out” is fucking dirtbag behavior. In the former, the accused are truly innocent. The latter may not be guilty of rape, but they’re scumbags who deserve everything else that’s coming to them.
Date: October 3rd, 2026 4:13 PM Author: Mind-boggling charcoal skinny woman hall
Running train on a drugged out girl is degenerate behavior. I’m fine with those guys facing consequences for their degeneracy. Taking advantage of an insecure mentally disturbed girl who showed up for an MMF is evil.
xo cons are maladjusted contrarians who hate women. of course if there's any ambiguity they're gonna assume it was totally consensual and she changed her mind later. of course they'll ignore how sick it is that a heavily intoxicated girl was advertised to a group chat of 50+ men as "free pussy" and that Occam's razor would say anyone who showed up in response to that text obviously came expecting an incapacitated woman.
Date: October 3rd, 2026 5:54 PM Author: wonderful senate
You are describing the consensual account as an inference motivated by ideology, when there is a direct contemporaneous or near contemporaneous evidence from the woman herself supporting that account. Text messages to the guys sent days after the encounter, by her describe it as consensual, and her statements to police do too. It isn't just interpretive inference from ambiguity. The complainant initially describes it as consensual and later gives a materially different account.
she could've lied to herself in the aftermath that it was consensual because she was in denial that she was taken advantage of. or she could've lied to herself later that it was rape because she was in denial that she did something really slutty. that's what i mean by ambiguity. i don't think YOUR take is motivated by ideology; you know i think you're a good person and stuff. but i think a lot of other poasters are coming from the place i described.
Date: October 3rd, 2026 5:57 PM Author: wonderful senate
But isn't this speculation unless there is independent evidence supporting it? I'm not even totally against it. I think there are some oddities worth looking at. Like in her texts she explicitly says "nothing that happened was illegal", which is an odd thing to bring up if nothing sketchy at all happened. It suggests she was conflicted and thought there was at least a question whether it was.
yeah it's all speculation because there's evidence that it was consensual and evidence that it wasn't. the initial police statements are evidence that she thought it was consensual. the recent filing is evidence that she thinks it was rape. the apology text from the guy is evidence that he thought what they did was wrong. the "haha leave out the other 5 billion guys next time" text is evidence that she wouldn't have agreed to involving more guys than the initial one/two in her right mind, or maybe didn't even in her state of intoxication. and yeah exactly there was definitely some kind of internal conflict like you said.
Date: October 3rd, 2026 6:05 PM Author: wonderful senate
"She wouldn't have done this if sober" is an extremely weak consent criterion. People voluntarily do things while drunk that they would never do sober. If thats the standard then most of the sex I have had should count as me being raped or me and the female raping each other.
agreed. and afaict she wasn't forced to consume any of the alcohol or drugs so in NY state the whole legal story could just be "she got drunk and agreed to do shit she wouldn't have done otherwise." still disgusting and immoral that guys took advantage of her in that state, though, even if it was legal. i don't think most of your sexual encounters involved strangers being invited to participate, did they?
Date: October 3rd, 2026 6:18 PM Author: wonderful senate
Yes I agree, and I think what you point out about my encounters is relevant. But ultimately I think that still only gets you to a situation where they noticed she was more sexually willing because she was drunk and benefited from that, which can be interpreted as sleazy or exploitive, but I wouldn't call it rape. The next level down would be a situation where they believed her judgment was badly impaired but still accepted her apparent consent, and even that I still would say isn't rape, even though it is worse than the former. Rape to me would be where they knew or should have known she was incapable of meaningful consent. These different levels make all the difference, and I'm not talking legally, I'm talking about how I think of it morally. If you want to call number 1 rape, then every time a drunk girl gets drunk and has sex and regrets it she can get someone imprisoned for a heinous crime.
yeah i'm not sure what was going through their heads but with the callous language in the group chat and the offering her up to strangers, i see it as at least one level worse than the interpretation that they were just benefiting from her chemically-induced open-mindedness lol. but i'm not comfortable asserting it was legally rape or anything like that based on what we know.
i think things can be wrong and public-shame-worthy without being illegal - cheating in a relationship is an obvious example of that. and to me, whether or not this was rape-rape in NY, this is an example of people acting in a way that was wrong. not just the ones that did stuff with her, not just the ones that showed up, but all of the guys in the group chat who saw those texts go by and didn't do anything to make sure she was safe. because even if she was having the time of her life, the text thread reads to me as guys offering up an incapacitated woman.
as far as the law, i wouldn't be surprised if what they did was legal because of the voluntary intoxication thing in NY state, but that doesn't mean it wasn't wrong. they could've taken advantage of her without it counting as rape in that jurisdiction.
also, remember that evidentiary standards for rape in college are lower (preponderance of evidence) than legal standards for rape.
Date: October 3rd, 2026 6:02 PM Author: aquamarine stage quadroon
this is how it usually works but that doesnt mean it worked like that this time. that's the problem with trying to 'get justice' is women convince themselves they want to do it most of the time because they're forced into it and/or they treat overwhelming social pressure as a legitimate survival scenario (even though it's probably not) and then construe the pressure as coercion. that's why its complicated and difficult to parse unless there is evidence that the social pressure was backed by some kind of objective threat. since the "threat" is usually not objective most women just move on.
yeah i agree. there's a lot of gray area. one thing i personally think is under-discussed is how often someone will literally "take advantage of" someone else - not always man on woman btw - and it's not rape-rape or illegal but it's still immoral. and those people also deserve public shame imo.
obviously she was not raped. most states require some kind of force for rape, although i haven't checked NY specifically. in some states she may have been sexually assaulted or something, but it seems like not in NY since she voluntarily drank alcohol/took drugs that possibly rendered her unable to consent. if people in NY don't like these kinds of outcomes, they should change their statute to be more in line with other states/feds.
Date: October 4th, 2026 3:59 PM Author: Obsidian point doctorate
I’m a lib and I don’t think it even approaches rape. Regretting voluntarily participating in a drug-fueled gangbang doesn’t qualify. I get that she’s genuinely upset and concerned about her reputation. Feminists think that’s the same thing as rape. It isn’t.