Posts: 15,842
Threads: 95
Joined: May 2025
macphanatic wrote:
[quote=rz]
[quote=August West]
Are you implying that if a woman has had consensual sex with an individual, the individual cannot commit an act of rape against the woman in the future?
But the problem is, it happened the other way around. I am not saying I doubt her account of what happened. What has me puzzled is why, after having been allegedly been raped by Lauer, did she enter a consensual relationship with him? To me, that defies logic.
Exactly.
NewtonMP2100 wrote:
.....indeed....probably low self-esteem.....
Or was she using Lauer to advance her career?
I am in no way defending Lauer or his behavior. I just don't understand how someone who has been victimized continues to have a relationship with their attacker.
Basically you are asking the same question that is asked about women in abusive relationships, the answer is for many varied reasons. Many of those reasons are related to the continuing power imbalance dynamic between men and women.
Posts: 48,066
Threads: 9,823
Joined: Dec 2021
Reputation:
0
she eventually left NBC in 2018 with a seven figure payout so could money be her motivation....???
just curious, you people say 7 figure payout, is it closer to 1,000,000 or 9,999,999?
Posts: 28,821
Threads: 209
Joined: May 2025
space-time wrote:
she eventually left NBC in 2018 with a seven figure payout so could money be her motivation....???
just curious, you people say 7 figure payout, is it closer to 1,000,000 or 9,999,999?
Could be anywhere within that range. I'm sure no one here is privy to the actual amount.
Posts: 8,608
Threads: 63
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
August West wrote:
[quote=Bill in NC]
[quote=Lemon Drop]
[quote=Bill in NC]
Nothing more...in a legal sense...is going to happen to Lauer.
He'll just have to console himself with his remaining $60 million (that's after his divorce settlement)
That's what Harvey Weinstein (who has a lot more money) thought. He's out of on bail awaiting a January criminal trial on five sex crimes, one dates back to 2006.
Did any of Weinstein's accusers admit to multiple consensual encounters, even if only quid pro quo as Nevils alleges?
I'm a little unclear on your question, Bill. Are you implying that if a woman has had consensual sex with an individual, the individual cannot commit an act of rape against the woman in the future? That the woman's "No" actually forever more becomes "Yes?"
Just pointing out an allegation of one non-consensual encounter in an otherwise consensual relationship won't be sufficient to interest a prosecutor, setting aside the jurisdictional issues involved.
Lauer will continue to successfully represent himself as just another lecher running a casting couch, all the while "bemoaning" the impact of his behavior on his family, i.e. "I'm so very, very sorry...that I got caught."
Posts: 17,873
Threads: 325
Joined: Mar 2024
Bill in NC wrote:
Just pointing out an allegation of one non-consensual encounter in an otherwise consensual relationship won't be sufficient to interest a prosecutor, setting aside the jurisdictional issues involved.
Lauer will continue to successfully represent himself as just another lecher running a casting couch, all the while "bemoaning" the impact of his behavior on his family, i.e. "I'm so very, very sorry...that I got caught."
I think Matt Lauer is going to survive criminal investigation, but it has more to do with the time passed since the assault and a lack of forensic evidence than their relationship, which is legally immaterial (if politically relevant) to a decision to indict.
To reiterate that she can't be a viable victim because she had consensual sex with him elsewhen is harmful, stigmatizing, and reinforces damaging stereotypes about sex and gender (s lut shaming/victim blaming).
Posts: 25,452
Threads: 2,519
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
rjmacs wrote:
[quote=Bill in NC]
Just pointing out an allegation of one non-consensual encounter in an otherwise consensual relationship won't be sufficient to interest a prosecutor, setting aside the jurisdictional issues involved.
Lauer will continue to successfully represent himself as just another lecher running a casting couch, all the while "bemoaning" the impact of his behavior on his family, i.e. "I'm so very, very sorry...that I got caught."
I think Matt Lauer is going to survive criminal investigation, but it has more to do with the time passed since the assault and a lack of forensic evidence than their relationship, which is legally immaterial (if politically relevant) to a decision to indict.
To reiterate that she can't be a viable victim because she had consensual sex with him elsewhen is harmful, stigmatizing, and reinforces damaging stereotypes about sex and gender (s lut shaming/victim blaming).
I haven't heard anything about this victim trying to press criminal charges, but I think the main issue is that the incident took place in Russia. Lauer knew what he was doing. Russia does not take violence against women all that seriously and even if they did, there is no extradition between the countries. There was no chance that he'd get in trouble for this by committing this violence against a woman in Russia.
Had this been in the US I think she'd have little trouble getting a prosecutor to charge Lauer. There are no statutes of limitations on first degree sex crimes in New York and for second degree it was just increased to 20 years. You don't have to have physical evidence for a rape charge. Criminal laws do not outline minimum requirements for evidence.
Posts: 8,608
Threads: 63
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
Lemon Drop wrote:
[quote=rjmacs]
[quote=Bill in NC]
Just pointing out an allegation of one non-consensual encounter in an otherwise consensual relationship won't be sufficient to interest a prosecutor, setting aside the jurisdictional issues involved.
Lauer will continue to successfully represent himself as just another lecher running a casting couch, all the while "bemoaning" the impact of his behavior on his family, i.e. "I'm so very, very sorry...that I got caught."
I think Matt Lauer is going to survive criminal investigation, but it has more to do with the time passed since the assault and a lack of forensic evidence than their relationship, which is legally immaterial (if politically relevant) to a decision to indict.
To reiterate that she can't be a viable victim because she had consensual sex with him elsewhen is harmful, stigmatizing, and reinforces damaging stereotypes about sex and gender (s lut shaming/victim blaming).
I haven't heard anything about this victim trying to press criminal charges, but I think the main issue is that the incident took place in Russia. Lauer knew what he was doing. Russia does not take violence against women all that seriously and even if they did, there is no extradition between the countries. There was no chance that he'd get in trouble for this by committing this violence against a woman in Russia.
Had this been in the US I think she'd have little trouble getting a prosecutor to charge Lauer. There are no statutes of limitations on first degree sex crimes in New York and for second degree it was just increased to 20 years. You don't have to have physical evidence for a rape charge. Criminal laws do not outline minimum requirements for evidence.
Not 5+ years later, after admitting later encounters were consensual, and the amount of alcohol involved, which would raise questions about the reliability of her recollection, even within the DA's office.
The latter would want to see multiple victims come forth as with Cosby or Weinstein to pursue such a "he said/she said" case. Time will tell...
Posts: 17,873
Threads: 325
Joined: Mar 2024
Lemon Drop wrote:
[quote=rjmacs]
[quote=Bill in NC]
Just pointing out an allegation of one non-consensual encounter in an otherwise consensual relationship won't be sufficient to interest a prosecutor, setting aside the jurisdictional issues involved.
Lauer will continue to successfully represent himself as just another lecher running a casting couch, all the while "bemoaning" the impact of his behavior on his family, i.e. "I'm so very, very sorry...that I got caught."
I think Matt Lauer is going to survive criminal investigation, but it has more to do with the time passed since the assault and a lack of forensic evidence than their relationship, which is legally immaterial (if politically relevant) to a decision to indict.
To reiterate that she can't be a viable victim because she had consensual sex with him elsewhen is harmful, stigmatizing, and reinforces damaging stereotypes about sex and gender (s lut shaming/victim blaming).
I haven't heard anything about this victim trying to press criminal charges, but I think the main issue is that the incident took place in Russia. Lauer knew what he was doing. Russia does not take violence against women all that seriously and even if they did, there is no extradition between the countries. There was no chance that he'd get in trouble for this by committing this violence against a woman in Russia.
Had this been in the US I think she'd have little trouble getting a prosecutor to charge Lauer. There are no statutes of limitations on first degree sex crimes in New York and for second degree it was just increased to 20 years. You don't have to have physical evidence for a rape charge. Criminal laws do not outline minimum requirements for evidence.
Quite true, LD.
There are no minimum requirements (or any requirements) for physical evidence in a sexual assault case, and no victim should ever fail to report an attack because physical evidence is lacking.
An unpleasant truth of our criminal legal system is that prosecutors often fail to pursue cases aggressively, if the evidence (physical, circumstantial, etc.) makes the case more challenging. We shouldn't accept this, but it is empirically true.
Posts: 40,656
Threads: 1,025
Joined: May 2025
I'm pretty sure if I raped some woman in Russia that wouldn't go well for me if she told the police.
Posts: 8,463
Threads: 878
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
vision63 wrote:
I'm pretty sure if I raped some woman in Russia that wouldn't go well for me if she told the police.
I’m sure you might not.
However if you were a world famous, multimillionaire, highly respected news personality and the allegation included statements about intoxication, willingly going to the accused’s room, twice, and the woman telling the accused ‘yes’ she liked it, that might shift the odds a teensy bit in your favor.
Maybe even two teensies.
|
