Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Admirer or Stalker?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

But, 4Reason I wanted to bring something else up. You said this...

You said, "very nearly" raped you and you are confused if he was trying to or not.

Why is that? What did he do exactly? Did he hit you, or push on the ground or something? Because you need to be able to recall that in full to the ADA or whoever you are going to see. Because, looking at the way you presented the story it seems like the details are really vague and usually cops use that as a way to indicate that your are lying about it, or aren't telling the full truth.

In Mammon's defense, I think he asks an excellent question. What are the facts, as opposed to 4Reason's vague, admittedly confused, and uncertain conclusory statements of this allegation? The facts go to the root of the advice everyone is offering here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
In Mammon's defense, I think he asks an excellent question. What are the facts, as opposed to 4Reason's vague, admittedly confused, and uncertain conclusory statements of this allegation? The facts go to the root of the advice everyone is offering here.

Todd, I'm going to disagree strenuously. The specific facts of the incident are relevant if she wants to file some sort of charge here. Short of that, I think RB's advice is relevant regardless of what the facts are.

This action, and his subsequent action is so far over the line of "misunderstanding" that it's stunning to me.

What actions would you change based upon differences in the details?

Edited by KendallJ
Link to post
Share on other sites
The facts go to the root of the advice everyone is offering here.

He may well have an excellent question, however, I don't think this forum is the appropriate investigative device for her.

With regards to her 'confusion', I read her question to more mean "Is this really happening to me?" It is not uncommon for victims of traumatic incidents to look at what is happening or has happened to them in a state of disbelief. Most people just "can't believe" that this is happening to them.

Certainly either interpretation could be valid.

Edited by RationalBiker
Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, I'm not trying to defend the guy. He obviously did something to 4reason that she thought was inappropriately physical. That's enough to be wary of him and to go to the police. That he did this out in the open (on a walking trail) after talking with her for maybe an hour seems suspicious --I mean, why not wait until they can be alone together? Why not go out on a date first? etc. And I don't think 4reason needs to go into more details with us on this forum. Tell it to the local police and try to find out who this guy is and what his intentions are (via the police). Follow the rest of the advise that Rational Biker presented, especially since he is a police officer.

I don't think we need to grill 4reason to find out if it was actually attempted rape or assault or neither. She's worried about this guy hanging around based on what he did, and based on her thinking he's the one leaving the roses. That's enough to tell the guy to BACK OFF!

A romantic relationship is based on trust (rationally verified) and this guy most definitely blew it with the way he acted with 4reason. She did not want his advances; it's as simple as that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
What actions would you change based upon differences in the details?

Hi Kendall,

Mammon points out that 4Reason’s story, as written, does not have the ring of plausibility.

4Reason felt safe on “the trail that runs along the river behind the restaurant, it was a beautiful day, and it's a public trail.” So she was “nearly raped” in broad daylight on a public trail a half mile (maybe less) from their cars at the restaurant? Then kicking a would-be rapist in the nuts to get away, losing her shoes, and running away for dear life without them, she runs to her car and drives away but not to where people are (e.g., back to the restaurant) and doesn’t call the police at the time?

Sometime later she again sees the same man who "nearly raped her," this time at a restaurant where he knew she would be meeting a group of people she knows, but writes: “I didn't notice him until I was walking out, but I was nervous as hell walking back to my car and driving the long drive home.” What about turning around on the spot and asking one of the other people she knows there to walk her out to her car? Or even escort her home? No, 4Reason doesn’t do that, but continues to bravely walk out to her car alone and drives home alone after being “nearly raped” by the person.

Cross-examination and examination of detail is a powerful engine for elucidating the facts.

If the story turns out to be untrue, I would recommend that instead of going to the police, she go to see a counselor.

If the story is true, my sincere apologies to 4Reason for questioning it, but it does seem vague and questionable as relayed to us so far. Perhaps that was just inadvertant.

Edited by Old Toad
Link to post
Share on other sites
Then kicking a would-be rapist in the nuts to get away, losing her shoes, and running away for dear life without them, she runs to her car and drives away but not to where people are (e.g., back to the restaurant) and doesn’t call the police at the time?

It is quite common for real victims of sexual assault to avoid calling the police, and to avoid going to other people, particularly strangers. Typically, if they go to anyone, it's someone they know and trust. Many real of sexual assault do not behave in the most rational manner following the assault.

So that part 'can' be fishy, but it may be entirely in line with someone who has just been the victim of an attempted sexual assault. As you recognize, more facts are needed before someone should be charged with anything.

Cross-examination and examination of detail is a powerful engine for elucidating the facts.

Most assuredly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Taking in everything that's been said, let me clarify what I meant.

If she meet the guy, like I said earlier, do it in a highly crowded and public place. The best place for this would be a mall on a Saturday, and even better at this time of the year because everyone is Christmas shopping. Take three friends with her, one big male, one female and another one to sit with them, perhaps even take a cop with her as well. Have the meeting somewhere open but with shops so the two friends can hide, giving the guy the impression that she is wide open, so he might feel safe enough to say his piece, while the third can listen in on their conversation and act as a witness. Then let him explain himself, and explain that he needs to clear this up because the police will get involved if he doesn't stop "stalking" her. Then after they have reach some kind of agreement, she walks off, around the corner and meets with her friends who drive her to a safe location, away from her home. Stay there for a few hours, then leave. This will ensure that he couldn't follow her back to her house after seeing her again for a second time.

Since one friend was there to act as witness, if the guy continues they can go to the cops and they would have all the evidence they need for the police. Perhaps bringing a recorder will help out a great deal too, so the conversation can be recorded and anaylized independently and objectively.

This does take into account the alleged prior physical assault. This why she brings friends and has the meeting in an open space with a lot of people walking around in case she needs to scream out for help or something. Bringing mace and a handgun would be optimal as well. This way, the guy had some sort of warning or chance before the police get involved and this goes on his permenant public criminal record, AND this would give the cops all the evidence they need in case she goes back to talk to the cops.

Going off what Old Toad is, I am concerned about the way she presents the story. But, this is because if she said it in the same way she did here, the cops might believe her. It's not that I don't believe her, but I want her to be prepared to flesh out all the details to make her case before she has to do it in front of a judge, an ADA or magistrate or whomever.

Link to post
Share on other sites
He might just be attempting to apologize. Meeting him in person, with protection of course, and letting him say his piece might get him to

You said, "very nearly" raped you and you are confused if he was trying to or not.

Why is that? What did he do exactly? Did he hit you, or push on the ground or something? Because you need to be able to recall that in full to the ADA or whoever you are going to see. Because, looking at the way you presented the story it seems like the details are really vague and usually cops use that as a way to indicate that your are lying about it, or aren't telling the full truth.

I don't think I owe him the right to apologize. Even if he did mean no harm, the fact that he made me as uncomfortable about the whole matter is enough for me to want to keep my distance. If he meant no harm than it should make no difference to him whether he's able to apologize or not because, either way, I am not interested. He can write it off to poor judgment, if indeed that is the case, and back off. But he can do that on his own. No need for me to be involved.

As for the details of the incident, the details I've posted are vague, yes, but what I told the cops was not. It was the explicit truth, right down to the big scratch I got in a very uncomfortable, internal place. The cops are, in fact, the only ones I have told all the details to. I couldn't even bring myself to write it down in my journal. I don't want to go into all the details, but let it suffice to say he came up to me from behind, jammed his wrist in my mouth and pulled me back so hard I was swung sideways down to the ground. I couldn't scream because he kept his hand over my mouth. His hand was so large it also mostly covered my nose, so even when his hand did slip a little, my first thought was to take a breath in first, and by the time I had done that, the opportunity to scream was already lost again. He kept one hand on my mouth, with his elbow digging into my chest, and his weight keeping me to the ground while he got himself situated. He managed to only get me partially undressed, but undressed enough to give me a pretty good internal scrath with what must have been a jagged fingernail, I don't know. What really saved me was the fact I was wearing tight jeans that day that proved tricky for him to try an d really manipulate with one hand. That, and my knees just happened to end up in the right spot and the right time and I was able to "grind" his goods with due force between my knees as I slid them past one another. That must have hurt, because he rolled off and I ran off. As far as I am concerned, his intentions were pretty clear. One could take the Roark/Dominique scene out of context and say it sounds somewhat similar, but we all know it's not logical to pull things out of context. Besides, those characters had a mutual understanding, developed by several encounters before they actually got to that point. This guy and me, as is more than clear by now, did not have any such understanding. Even if he was trying to act like that, he skipped so many steps it could cause me nothing but confusion and fear.

The cops got ALL the details, and even though they sympathized with my experience they said I had no proof. What kind of proof they need exactly, other than the rape itself being completed (which it wasn't), I'm still not sure about. Hopefully I won't have to worry about that, as I am hoping to resolve this whole matter without having to bury myself in a legal nightmare.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Kendall,

Mammon points out that 4Reason’s story, as written, does not have the ring of plausibility.

4Reason felt safe on “the trail that runs along the river behind the restaurant, it was a beautiful day, and it's a public trail.” So she was “nearly raped” in broad daylight on a public trail a half mile (maybe less) from their cars at the restaurant? Then kicking a would-be rapist in the nuts to get away, losing her shoes, and running away for dear life without them, she runs to her car and drives away but not to where people are (e.g., back to the restaurant) and doesn’t call the police at the time?

Sometime later she again sees the same man who "nearly raped her," this time at a restaurant where he knew she would be meeting a group of people she knows, but writes: “I didn't notice him until I was walking out, but I was nervous as hell walking back to my car and driving the long drive home.” What about turning around on the spot and asking one of the other people she knows there to walk her out to her car? Or even escort her home? No, 4Reason doesn’t do that, but continues to bravely walk out to her car alone and drives home alone after being “nearly raped” by the person.

Cross-examination and examination of detail is a powerful engine for elucidating the facts.

If the story turns out to be untrue, I would recommend that instead of going to the police, she go to see a counselor.

If the story is true, my sincere apologies to 4Reason for questioning it, but it does seem vague and questionable as relayed to us so far. Perhaps that was just inadvertant.

I didn't realize I had to go into explicit detail in the forum. I was just hoping for legal definition and explanations that others had since I felt I did not get treated well by my local police. I just posted some of the details in my previous post moments ago, and that's about all the deatil I want to share. Was I naive? Yes. But I've only ever dated and been involved with one man before, so I didn't and still don't have a lot of experience to make good judgments all of the time when it comes to men and their intentions (as this incident clearly indicates). All this happened about 1.5 miles away from my house. My car was closer to me after the incident than was the restaurant, so that's where I went first. In hindsight, a public place might have been great, but that's hindsight. My fight or flight response kicked in and I just wanted to get out of there; to get as far away from him as possible. As to the restaurant Iw as at with a group after the incident, the restaurant was rounded and he was sitting about five tables behind me. I was talking with everyone at the table, so I wasn't looking over my shoulder every few minutes so I had no idea he was there until I was already walking out with someone. I didn't tell that person I was walking with because, again, I just wanted to keep walking and get out of there. Maybe that's stupid, I don't know. But I was not walking alone! And I didn't feel like explaining the whole matter and asking someone to drive 27 miles out of their way to drive me home all while that man was not that far away from me.

No wonder attempted rape and anything like it is so hard to prove; everyone always wants to say the victim did something wrong. Where does that mentality come from? I tried to do everything I thought best, and am still trying to do that. That's why I wanted advice. Sorry if that sounds bitter, but I just find it really annoying. That's about all the detail I want to go into; I'll save the rest for an investigation if need be. I just felt obligated to defend myself a little; It took me 26 years to really find myself and to live 100% honestly, so I'm sorry if I take great offense.

Edited by 4reason
Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't want to go into all the details, but let it suffice to say he came up to me from behind, jammed his wrist in my mouth and pulled me back so hard I was swung sideways down to the ground.

That's definitely assault, if not sexual assault. Do not go anywhere near this guy. Given these details, I don't think it was passion, at least not rational passion. He should never have done that.

Maybe you could have the police finger print the hood of your car -- it's a long shot, but you never know, he might have left evidence. And if he touched your buttons, there might be finger prints on them and maybe DNA evidence; though I don't know if the local police would go through all of that trouble. They do on the CSI shows, but that's television. None of that would prove assault, but it might help to identify him.

Of course, we haven't heard his side of the story, but I'd say he was definitely in the wrong based on what you said.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a shame that the police are unwilling or unable to pursue this guy because it is quite likely that he has done something like this before. The good news is that this guy will probably move on. The bad news is he will probably move on to someone else.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Kendall,

Mammon points out that 4Reason’s story, as written, does not have the ring of plausibility.

4Reason felt safe on “the trail that runs along the river behind the restaurant, it was a beautiful day, and it's a public trail.” So she was “nearly raped” in broad daylight on a public trail a half mile (maybe less) from their cars at the restaurant? Then kicking a would-be rapist in the nuts to get away, losing her shoes, and running away for dear life without them, she runs to her car and drives away but not to where people are (e.g., back to the restaurant) and doesn’t call the police at the time?

Sometime later she again sees the same man who "nearly raped her," this time at a restaurant where he knew she would be meeting a group of people she knows, but writes: “I didn't notice him until I was walking out, but I was nervous as hell walking back to my car and driving the long drive home.” What about turning around on the spot and asking one of the other people she knows there to walk her out to her car? Or even escort her home? No, 4Reason doesn’t do that, but continues to bravely walk out to her car alone and drives home alone after being “nearly raped” by the person.

Cross-examination and examination of detail is a powerful engine for elucidating the facts.

If the story turns out to be untrue, I would recommend that instead of going to the police, she go to see a counselor.

If the story is true, my sincere apologies to 4Reason for questioning it, but it does seem vague and questionable as relayed to us so far. Perhaps that was just inadvertant.

Well, Todd, these are two different things. Knowing more of the truth to better advise is what you implied the first time. This time, the concern seems to be validating the truth of what has already been given. While it is a potential concern, and certianly the veracity of 4reason's story should be validated, I think RB's advice is still the best. This forum isn't really a place to do that. A local magistrate or someone else is probably in a better position to do that. Questioning the truthfulness of the witness, seems futile given that the only person we're getting information from is the witness herself. We can neither survey the scene, nor talk to anyone else in the issue. Basically, it ain't gonna get fleshed out here...

Link to post
Share on other sites

4reason, I think you put to rest any question as to whether this was a case of assault or not. The guy is a thug.

No wonder attempted rape and anything like it is so hard to prove; everyone always wants to say the victim did something wrong. Where does that mentality come from?

Keep in mind that the victim can be a guy falsely accused, either from a girl overreacting or a girl lying. The Duke Lacrosse team case springs instantly to mind. Anyway, your further explanation makes it clear that you were assaulted and it's very reasonable for you to be concerned.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Keep in mind that the victim can be a guy falsely accused, either from a girl overreacting or a girl lying. The Duke Lacrosse team case springs instantly to mind. Anyway, your further explanation makes it clear that you were assaulted and it's very reasonable for you to be concerned.

As frustrated as I was with the police when I did speak to them, they did allude to this same idea. They said you can't just accuse someone without proof, otherwise everyone would do it. While I did have to recognize that there is some truth to that -- for there have been cases where women have made false accusations for their own purposes -- I will still tell you it is INCREDIBLY frustrating once you find yourself caught up in such a difficult issue. I know where their skepticism comes from; I used to be one of those "well, what did she do?" type thinkers, but recent events have certainly caused me to rethink that. I think it is important to approach the situation without judgment; it should be investigated from both sides. Look at what's there: what happened, what's the context... using reason to deduce the reality of it all.

I feel like the police are doing the right thing by not just taking me at my word (if they did that, we wouldn't have moved very far from the Salem witch trials). But yet, I still feel like there should be some sort of attempt to look into it further. I don't know if my wanting their assistance in that matter is asking them to step outside their proper role. How do you peel apart the pieces of a situation like mine to determine what happened and what laws were violated? Are misunderstandings criminal? Do I have the right to seek legal protection simply because I'm scared? It is a very complex issue. I really don't know where to begin, or where anyone who does have to make legal decisions in these matters begins. I can sympathize with the police in a way; they probably do have a lot of cases that waste their time. But when you find yourself having to constantly look over your shoulders, you can't help but wonder if the process couldn't be improved in some way to help everyone involved, the accusers and the accused, so that we can truly identify the real victims.

Link to post
Share on other sites
They said you can't just accuse someone without proof, otherwise everyone would do it. While I did have to recognize that there is some truth to that -- for there have been cases where women have made false accusations for their own purposes -- I will still tell you it is INCREDIBLY frustrating once you find yourself caught up in such a difficult issue.

Well, philosophically and logically (and therefore properly legally), the onus of proof is on he who asserts the positive. We don't know you personally, though given the posts you've written I do think you are truthful, but we don't have much to go on aside from your say so. The police are in the same position, and they can't just go by the rather obvious fact that you were frightened -- rightly or wrongly. I do think they should have taken you more seriously, like try to find out who the guy was, if nothing else to get his statement. The police should not think about other cases where someone has been falsely accused; they should go by the facts as they know them, and look for more facts. From what you related, this was a brutal assault, and they shouldn't just brush it off.

But when you find yourself having to constantly look over your shoulders, you can't help but wonder if the process couldn't be improved in some way to help everyone involved, the accusers and the accused, so that we can truly identify the real victims.

Especially after what happened to me, I definitely agree. I mean, I realize the police can't be everywhere, and that not all police departments are like the CSI crime scene stories; but my story was basically brushed off.

What was I supposed to do -- record my entire life during that time period?

Part of my problem in dealing with my incident is that I knew I would need evidence, but had nothing to offer the police. But had I gone to them earlier -- even with those hoodlum's threats that I had broken the law -- it may not have gone as far as it did. When those guys showed up at my place of work and I was talking normally and some guy on the broadcast radio was answering me, I should have dialed 911 immediately. But it never crossed my mind. By that time, they had been at it for several weeks to maybe a month. I wasn't getting much sleep and I was a nervous wreck. I think they knew that and that they did that deliberately to get me into that state of mind where they had me where they wanted me.

My parents compare it to psychological terrorism, and I have to agree.

So it is quite understandable to me that the first thing 4reason wanted to do was to go somewhere she thought she'd be safe -- i.e. home. And I can understand her not wanting to talk to complete strangers; in such a state of terror, you don't want to leave yourself vulnerable to anyone.

When I finally called the police and told him I thought I was being spied upon, you know what he told me?

"Well, if you're not doing anything wrong or immoral, then don't worry about it."!!!!

Ah, yeah...way to build my confidence in the police!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if I can really articulate this properly - perhaps RB can weigh in - but 4reason's situation and response is just about textbook. I mean, that is a completely typical response of a normal person to a situation like that. Most people are just not at all cognizant or remotely prepared for crime, criminals, how they operate, or how to react to it. People just don't think about it at all, and so if faced with it suddenly are floored, and as a result don't always react in the kind of way that would be best for the situation.

I mean, even after escaping the immediate danger, she didn't know how to even begin thinking about what to do next. Again, I think most people don't. They just didn't think it would ever happen to them.

Of course the criminals count on this.

But a lot of people from good neighborhoods just go through life with a kind of naive sense of invincibility. They grew up around basically reasonable folks and just assume that certain things - violent crime that is - are just not possible in the adult world. They happen on television or in ghettos - not in the "real" world. Of course, they are possible.

I was quite frankly offended by a few of the posters here who questioned 4reason's story. "Well, why did you do this? Why wouldn't you have done that? Why didn't you immediately go tell," etc, etc. But that is in fact the reaction that the vast majority of untrained people will have: to be paralyzed, even after escaping the immediate danger. Telling themselves "this can't be happening... can it?" while it is in fact happening and they just wasted their one chance to escape it.

People wonder why I carry. Well, it's because I don't live in a world where such things are "just impossible." None of us do, but I actually know it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Inspector,

I was quite frankly offended by a few of the posters here who questioned 4reason's story. "Well, why did you do this? Why wouldn't you have done that? Why didn't you immediately go tell," etc, etc.

As one of those posters, I am not clear on what principle you are advocating. A “damsel-in-distress” story is not open to question?

But that is in fact the reaction that the vast majority of untrained people will have: to be paralyzed, even after escaping the immediate danger. Telling themselves "this can't be happening... can it?" while it is in fact happening and they just wasted their one chance to escape it.

I grant that possibility. What about on the second occasion for escape? She noticed a person who previously nearly raped her is following her. What would a reasonable damsel in distress do? Drive home alone?

It is also a fact that some people tell stories for sympathy and other reasons.

Note that 4Reason also wrote in the story: “A little over a month ago I was dumped by my boyfriend of several years. I was devastated but took the experience as an invitation to work on my life for a little bit.”

Let’s add the fact that the person who “dumped” her is a participant on ObjectivismOnline.Net. Let’s also add the fact that we don’t know 4Reason long – her first post was about that same time, just 20 days ago, and in this short time she has already made several lengthy posts about her own psychological state, her history of deceptions to others, and a story about being nearly raped and stalked.

For example, here’s one juicy tid-bit from one of 4Reason’s first posts, of barely two weeks ago:

... My lack of confidence caused me to lie, to make myself into someone I wasn't; to "have" accolades without having ever earned them (or actually having them in reality).

The story seems questionable and so does the source. It is 4Reason herself who has opened up these questions about her credibility.

Is 4Reason writing to us or to the man who dumped her?

The facts go to the root of the advice that is being asked for and offered here, not just as to details, but as to degree and kind.

I am a generous and trusting person, and I believe many others here are, too. I would like to believe that a person who comes to this forum is trustworthy. But I don’t like being played. Mammon, apparently with nothing more than this bare story, astutely observed that it was insufficient for credibility to the police. Others jumped his case for making such a suggestion.

Before we all don our suits of shining armor to defend this damsel, I think we are right to ask a few more hard questions. The same goes for the police.

Edited by Old Toad
Link to post
Share on other sites
As one of those posters, I am not clear on what principle you are advocating. A “damsel-in-distress” story is not open to question?

I think Todd, the principle is that it is futile to try to conclusively prove anything on a forum such as this based upon the tack of trying to ferret out inconsistencies in the victims story using as one's standard what a reasonable, rational person would do.

Is it possilbe that she is lying? yes, sure. Can you prove it here? doubtful. But you chose to do damage by casting aspersions that you cannot ultimately validate. If she is telling the truth then you are just an example of those who chose to first disbelieve the victim.

It is also a fact that some people tell stories for sympathy and other reasons.

It is, but you know as well as I do the difficulty of proving any sort of psychological motivation on a forum such as this.

Note that 4Reason also wrote in the story: “A little over a month ago I was dumped by my boyfriend of several years. I was devastated but took the experience as an invitation to work on my life for a little bit.”

Let’s add the fact that the person who “dumped” her is a participant on ObjectivismOnline.Net. Let’s also add the fact that we don’t know 4Reason long – her first post was about that same time, just 20 days ago, and in this short time she has already made several lengthy posts about her own psychological state, her history of deceptions to others, and a story about being nearly raped and stalked.

For example, here’s one juicy tid-bit from one of 4Reason’s first posts, of barely two weeks ago:

The story seems questionable and so does the source. It is 4Reason herself who has opened up these questions about her credibility.

Is 4Reason writing to us or to the man who dumped her?.

Ok, so here is the particular issue I have. Todd, this is (especially the bit about her boyfriend) all information that you had but did not provide up to now. I would prefer that folks who have other informaiton that they think is relevant, that give them reason to have different starting hypothesis to either reveal that information or accept that others will not behave in the fashion that such evidence would dictate.

Don't allude to the fact that I or anyone else is a "knight in shining armor" when we don't seem to have all the facts that you do and you don't seem to be willing to bring them out. The hidden agendas here are obvious, so either bring it out or if you're not willing to then recognize that those who don't have such informaiton are going to get upset with you for casting dispersions on someone's character when there is no "obvious" basis for it.

The facts go to the root of the advice that is being asked for and offered here, not just as to details, but as to degree and kind.

I am a generous and trusting person, and I believe many others here are, too. I would like to believe that a person who comes to this forum is trustworthy. But I don’t like being played. Mammon, apparently with nothing more than this bare story, astutely observed that it was insufficient for credibility to the police. Others jumped his case for making such a suggestion.

Well, let's be careful here Todd. The facts that you specifically have in mind (whether the person is lying or not) don't go to advice as such. They go to the issue where she deserves to get advice at all.

If you really don't like getting played, then it seems that the thing to do is not play. If you don't like me or Inspector getting played that's a different issue and none of your business. If you think you or us is getting played, then the best course of action is to reveal what you know, rather than obliquely questioning in the thread, don't you think?

I have no problem with Mammon's original post and I've told him so. My issue isn't with him. It's with the particular way that certain people are behaving here. Please note there is a big difference between saying that the evidence provided thus far is insufficient to prove, and saying that the person is lying. The first can be judged on the provided data regardless of it's factuality. The 2nd requires a bit more evidence that I have yet to see. In any case, RB's advice still stands quite well. You're doing much more than defending Mammon's assertion here.

Before we all don our suits of shining armor to defend this damsel, I think we are right to ask a few more hard questions. The same goes for the police.

Given the evidence out in the open, a rational person would don his armour. The victim might be lying, but it's not my role to prove that she is. I can't do that from here. That is for the authorities. Do you have other evidence you'd like to bring out into the open?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just so folks understand where I'm coming from, here's how I see the possibilities, and why I think that supporting the assertions until one knows more or unless one is actually an authority involved in the investigation. There are 2 possible senarios (she's lying, she's not lying), and two possible responses (we believe her/we don't believe her - and act accordingly). Makes 4 possible senarios

a. She's truthful - we believe her

b. She's lying - we disbelieve her

c. She's truthful - we disbelieve her

d. She's lying - we believe her

a and b are congruent, where our response has its intended consequence, call them respectively Supporting the Victim, and Catching the Snake. But c and d have unintended consequences, call one Shunning the Victim, and the other Getting Played. I am going on the assumption that, in this forum, it will be near to impossible to conclusively prove whether or not she is lying, without extensive questioning and even then it will not be conclusive, only circumstantial.

Therefore given ignorance of the senario, our response ought to look at the downside of the unintended consequences. Which is worse here? Getting Played, or Shunning a real Victim. I guess if we're sensitive about the time spetn giving useless advice to someone who didn't deserve it, well yes that might be a big cost to us. I frankly, am not that sensitive, and would chock such a thing up to learning experience and move on. If you are however, there is an easy alternative: don't participate. You don't like getting played, don't play. However, I think that the downside of the other option is greater. If she is a real victim, and call her a liar after having come her with what appeared to be an honest desire for assistance, well then that is worse.

Again, this all assumes ignorance about the situation other than what the victim is telling us. If someone has other data that is relevant, great, bring it out. However, don't get upset with me for acting otherwise because I'm ignorant of what you know.

Id' be interested if others see the sitation the same way, or if there are other relevant considerations that need to be factored in. This seems perfectly rational and while I do take a risk of wasting some of my time on someone who might not deserve it, the damage is small.

Link to post
Share on other sites

MODERATOR NOTE:

I can see that at least one user in this thread (and a different user who contacted me by PM) claims to have pertinent information, the posting of which they seem to be reluctant to be entirely forthcoming. Whatever the personal reasons they have for strategically releasing bits of "I know something you don't know", it's not a game that will played in the open forum.

However, you might consider that not being forthcoming in this respect can also raise questions about your veracity and motivations.

Be that as it may, this thread will not become a drama played out by various factions of OO.net users. If someone has a complaint about a particular user's honesty, use the Report function and be prepared to back up that claim with facts.

At this point I'm closing the thread.

Edited by RationalBiker
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...