So where does one protest seeing this on the front page? There's no way in the blog to flag it as offensive. I'm really amazed.
You have a problem with him or his sources? In most cases I'd say you have a reasonable argument, but he is drawing from studies (which you conveniently did not quote). If you have a counter, source it. edit - as I fully read Bill's blog, I see that he claims to have posted an affidavit about an interview and subsequent research about the trial. I am certainly not an expert, but it seems legit to me. And it should be known that I don't have a love for Bill.
What you are quoting is an affidavit filed by an FBI Special Agent who has dedicated his life to investigating and prosecuting sex crimes, as well as teaching other FBI agents the skills and procedures necessary to do so. It's not some crackpot claim proffered by a Big Soccer poster. It's a court document filed by an FBI expert in the field of sex crime investigation and prosecution, who cites the studies he referenced. I hope this clarification quells your misguided indignation.
It is a bit odd for him to post that material without any reference to the issues with it including the rather obvious one Lynn points out.
What I found offensive is that this is a soccer website. If I wanted to hear someone's hair-brained theories on rape convictions, there are alot of other sites to choose from. Many that would be quite happy to discuss the particulars of this case, and would love every twist and turn. But this website is supposed to keep the political away from the soccer. So I don't expect to see it on the front page. Also, people who are trying to quote statistics don't say things like "vary between 8 and 46% because they'd be laughed at. I thought that was obvious -- Jitty got it. And the idea that someone should come on and attempt to "prove" that almost half of rape cases are false/made-up? Or think that they could use that as evidence in another rape case? Well phooey on that. It looked like one of those fake documents you get in the mail -- the ones that look all official on the outside and then you open them up and find out that they're really trying to sell you something.
So I saw the thread title, read the thread, read some of Archer's post, and couldn't figure out why this thread was all about big women. I mean, nobody said anything about weight or obesity or anything like that. I was completely baffled. Then a couple days later I suddenly figured it out.
Yes - and I make no comment on it. Only that I can understand Lynn's annoyance at 'expert material' containing two of the most common rape memes. * She was drunk * Women lie about rape Both those memes are hotly contested - and that Affidavit is highly misleading at best.
A piece that defends rapists and discredits the victims and it's not in the Manure forum? Does not compute...
It is? I'd say most of what Bill's had to post since he started his blog is political to quasi-political in nature, specifically CONCACAF & FIFA. That is, when he's not trolling Toronto fans
And prosecutorial misconduct never happens: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joyce_Gilchrist http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Jeffrey_Pierce.php http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Curtis_McCarty.php http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Timothy_Durham.php http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Arvin_McGee.php http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Thomas_Webb.php It's not as if the Innocence Project has no reason to exist. Who's defending a rapist (alleged) and discrediting a victim? Everything I've ever read about the case focuses a lot more on the ineptitude of the police and/or corruption and possible prosecutorial/judicial misconduct.
Then wouldn't it be more apt to comment in the thread with the quote rather than run off to Customer Service with what could be construed as a request to censor?
Yes, well I tried with the Duke Lacrosse team crack, but my other comments were deemed unsuitable and offensive. But if we're going to allow "Big Women Are Sluts Who Lie About Rape .com", then I think we're already past the point of good taste.
I think it is fair to complain about a front page piece on BIGSoccer about rape. I also think the highlighted portion of somewhere between 8 and 45% of reported rapes are false or unsubstantiated to be ludicrous. That cannot be presented as fact by anyone who wants to be taken seriously. Scholarly research asks for what 90% confidence level at minimum? Between 8 and 45? We cannot narrow it any further? If you want to buy this t-shirt the price is $8. No wait. It is $45. Apart from that, most rapes go unreported and 1 in 6 women will be sexually assaulted in their life time. The vast majority of them wont be reported to the police.
Because I don't want to give the blog airtime. I want BS customer service to think about what they're allowing to be printed. And they censor all the time.
Well... yeah. And this is a highly publicised soccer-related news item. And the evidence of this fellow is expert testimony and pivotal to the ongoing case. If you disagree with what the expert says in the quoted affidavit, that's fine. But it's not really a reason why it shouldn't be reported on. Honestly, if you don't like reading stuff you disagree with then you should probably stop reading blogs. Especially ones written by Bill Archer.
Complaint noted. The rest of creation disagrees, specifically since it involves a former MLS draftee who was convicted with some questionable investigation/prosecution. Your T-Shirt strawman aside, I suggest you revisit the case of the Duke Lacrosse team and the rush to judgement there and corrupt prosecution that cost the DA his job, not to mention Duke a sizeable amount of money by assuming guilt w/o any shred of credible evidence. Also, you might want to visit the innocence project links I posted and other cases on that site. There are a growing number of "convicted" rapists that are being exonerated due to various DNA issues, but also numerous cases of withholding evidence by the prosecution. While I think it's still rare, the fact that it exists is troubling and any possibility of new evidence should always be reviewed and the prosecuting judge should never be the one making that decision. And we give an awful lot of deference to claims of rape, sometimes too much, as in the case of the wrongfully convicted who are exonerated.
They're allowing a blogpost about the questionable conviction of a soccer player. I don't see the problem. I also recall a long blog roll about some EPL players that essentially gangbanged an otherwise incapacitated girl a few years ago and the subsequent investigation and the public derision for those players. Did you complain about that? Or are you just interested in the Frimpong case? They do? I don't recall any of the bloggers losing their minds because BS rejected any of their topics. I think you just made that up.