Commuter cleared of false rape accusations

[ChickenLover9T9]

"He walked by me, and some of the air from his movement blew on me! RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPE!"

This sounds ridiculous but it's pretty much the way we're going. I think every man in the UK should consider recording any and every interaction with a woman, no matter how small. Implementing this however is such an inconvenience not to mention practically impossible. Every single day I go out I walk past women, as the man in the OP did. I can't remember to or pay for the huge data requirements of recording 12 hours a day every day.

Maybe I will find some middle ground and start recording all my approaches from start to finish. I used to think this was lame, you know like certain PUAs like to post their approach videos to promote their products. Now all of us may be forced to do it just to remain free.

 

[WarMachine]

I would say you are all not far off the truth.

The other truth is any heterosexual man is a threat now, so we must act accordingly.

 

[VincentVinturi]

They really hate us. They hate men, especially the idea of groups of men meeting in real life. Even if they are just talking about game and shooting the shit, the idea of men getting together is seen as a potential threat. It's true. It's really true, or they wouldn't mobilize the way they do.

They fear the potential ramifications of a group of conscientious men --- men of action who are fed up with this shit already --- gathering together and finding ways to undermine the establishment and to restore some semblance of sanity to their reality.

Even if it's ostensibly just a happy hour, when smart men gather they think of smart things.

That's what they're afraid of and that's why they try to nip it in the bud.

The hierarchy looks like this:

- Lob accusations on Twitter and write hit pieces
- Manufacture bullshit "news" stories
- If your target is still alive, syndicate the stories far and wide (repeat a life enough times...)
- Get governments/police/citizens involved on the basis of these lies to threaten physical safety

Women understand that MEN are in possession of the ultimate trump card: violence.

It's only through the violence of OTHER men towards their fellow man that women can enforce their whim...uh, I mean will.

They'd like nothing better than to have Hitlary as president so she can further exonerate them of all responsibility for anything, ever, and to beat men down into a state of cowardice, weakness, lack of reason and submissiveness through punitive laws, courts and social constructs.

They've already come this far.

You think they're just going to let men take away the privilege of being able to act like amoral slobs?

And you think the media is going to sit back and let the men who have the minerals to restore some dignity to this world organize unmolested?

Like Roosh said, this has been a good dry run.

It shows us what kind of machine we're up against, and with whose interests neomasculinity conflicts.

Namely:

- The cowards in the mainstream media (barring rare exceptions)

- Liberalissimo Silicon Valley tech companies who use their clout as a means to push their agendas (and silence detractors)

- The government-industrial complex

- Hollywood

- Academia

- Pussies, weaklings, homos, LGB-whatevers, perpetual victims, lazy bums and government cheese-eaters everywhere

We joke a lot about conspiracy theories around here.

Well, if the media can lie about one man and deliberately misrepresent what he stands for, we have to ask ourselves: why?

Are they just whoring themselves out with shocking headlines for pageviews, truth be damned? Probably.

Are they being handed down orders from the likes of Rupert Murdoch and his ilk? Probably.

Are they mostly lazy pot-smokers with college degrees who have never done a legitimate piece of journalism in their whole life? All signs point to yes.

 

[Tim in real life]

State-endorsed false rape accusations in the UK are throwbacks to Victorian England, especially when false Jack the Ripper accusations are precursors to what we are witnessing right here, right now.

Seriously, this is why the Anglosphere is gynocentric, especially since Victorian England.

 

[WarMachine]

I commute in London everyday and to think I could be in line for something like this is quite frankly concerning. My demeanor has noticeably changed over the last few months. I observe female body language more than ever, as I get my fair share of female attention being as tall as I am with presence, I am starting to tell the cunts from the "sane" women. It's a skill I recommend we all develop.

But what to do about this?

Do we have to exert a silent strong frame to ward off any chance of a woman thinking she could do something like this?

Does it matter what the man looks like, whether she is attracted to him whether she would do this? If he is a smaller guy, does she feel she is above him in stature so he can easily be victimized? Would she dare do this to a jacked 6'3 dude who she perceives as "dominant" or "Alpha"?

Would be interested discussion on the possible psychological elements to this so wo can holistically break this down from source and create a plan of action, or awareness.

Thoughts?

 

[debeguiled]

If this unnamed woman is a celebrity, it is very likely that she is still acting like people should recognize her and move out of her way instinctively.

The fact that this guy walked past her, maybe brushed against her like she was nothing more than a pylon, well in the mind of the celebrity-hamster, there is no higher insult than this, and if on top of it she was attracted to the guy, well, that would be salt in a wound.

So, taking into account girl-logic, I could see how she FELT violated on some level. And we all know how a woman's feelings can be the realest thing in the world, and we also know how a woman's negative feelings can never be her fault, and how she has to project the blame onto something out in the world, outside of herself.

It's like how sometimes when a girl is attracted to you, she is also pissed off at you because you aren't the sort of person she wants to be attracted to.

For me, the real crux of the situation is the question of whether she knowingly made up the sexual assault charge to make the guy pay for her bad feelings, or if she actually convinced herself that it was true.

Of the two, the second one is far scarier, because it means that this woman, and many others out there, have a mentality that can be put in the same category as self hypnosis, and that many things they believe have all the veracity of the person at the stage hypnosis show who is running around believing they are a chicken, or the unhappy woman in her 50s "recovering" memories of childhood abuse to make herself feel better.

And here's the kicker: These zombies are allowed to vote, and call the police just like the rest of us. They are a massive sleeper cell of uncoordinated chaos.

 

[debeguiled]

This is coming from Dean Esmay, so let's call it a possibility.

They have found the woman who accused this poor guy (Edit. But don't click on this faggoty link):

http://deanesmay.com/2016/02/08/sou...-belongs-in-jail-falserape-fakerape-rapeliar/

Actress Souad Faress, who has appeared in Game of Thrones, My Beautiful Laundrette, and the radio show The Archers is a false rape accuser. She nearly destroyed the life of a man named Mark Pearson, who was recently completely exonerated.

My sources for this information are unimpeachable. UK law would prevent anyone UK-based from putting out this information, however.

She looks like this:

Paul Elam video here:

 

[C-Note]

She will be in Game of Thrones Season 6.

 

[godfather dust]

Don't give that Dean esmay faggot clicks. I clicked the link, and the actress is identified, but one of the related articles is slandering Roosh.

 

[WarMachine]

fucking hell

:fuckthat:

 

[ChickenLover9T9]

The fact that this guy walked past her, maybe brushed against her like she was nothing more than a pylon, well in the mind of the celebrity-hamster, there is no higher insult than this, and if on top of it she was attracted to the guy, well, that would be salt in a wound.

....

It's like how sometimes when a girl is attracted to you, she is also pissed off at you because you aren't the sort of person she wants to be attracted to.

The first point you made is very astute. This is the only remotely rational explanation I can find for this.

The second point I have encountered a few times on dates with girls who in hindsight had major issues. She is there, and in a way interested, but very uncomfortable. Being calm, putting her at ease etc. which often works does not work on this type, in fact it makes her anxiety worse. She hates that she is so bothered and you are even cooler. Sometimes these women outright insult me, petty insults about the smallest things, but then start saying how good they look on a friday night and how I should see them then. If I say something about myself that would usually impress a hot girl, it just makes them angrier. Some of them just want to get away and I lose them. I try to filter out this type of girl and it helps to go for the hotter ones who don't have outward signs of mental illness (tattoos, piercings, neon hair) but you can't avoid them entirely if you're approaching a lot. Some women just get triggered by men to whom they feel inferior, and there is nothing you can do. I'm not saying I don't get rejected by women who are genuinely not interested, but from experience I can tell the difference between that and this strange phenomenon. In long-term partners even comparatively "sane" girls often choose average guys from their social circle because they are more comfortable around them on a regular daily basis, and not so worried about whether he will hurt them etc.

Having seen the picture of this hag, is that not evidence enough in itself that this man is innocent? I mean how many men would actually risk their freedom to touch that? Heck you would have to pay me a six figure sum for me to be willing and even then I would probably be traumatized for life. The mere thought of fucking 60 year old hags is disgusting. I don't care how old I am, hot fertile 18 year olds is where it's at. You would have to be mentally ill to be willing to touch that woman. Why is it that false rape accusers are nearly always the women who are least likely to actually be raped on account of being fat/old/ugly/mentally ill?

 

[Paracelsus]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/its-time-we-stopped-treating-all-men-as-sex-pests/

Don't give page clicks, it's MSM. Relevant excerpts are all below.

The author of this op-ed is the former editor of Loaded. Interesting. Although I still doubt this is much more than someone at the Tele realising "Hey, maybe we can get some pageclicks from all those guys who were going to go to the Roosh V meetups!"

Which begs the bigger question: why, despite having seen the CCTV evidence (there were also no witnesses nor forensic evidence), did the Crown Prosecution Service still see fit to push for prosecution?

Pearson’s acquittal topped off a bad week for the CPS – and a terrible one for men – following a damning report in which HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate concluded that “poor” decision-making in London rape cases was leading to innocent suspects being wrongly charged in an attempt to raise the number of convictions.

That's significant. The CPS Inspectorate I would guess is sort of like the Ombudsman of the DPP, meant to ensure that they're not going off their trees or turning into a political arm.

So why is what’s been described as a CPS “witch hunt” against men happening?

Increasingly, there is a sense that the courts are becoming the judicial hammer for the anvil of the CPS’s Violence Against Women And Girls strategy. It's also hard to avoid the argument that innocent men like Mark Pearson are seeing their day in court because the most prolific and evil sex offender of them all – Jimmy Savile – escaped his.

Perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised that the highest courts in the land merely reflect an endemic mindset that tells us all men are potential sex offenders.

While only the battiest radical feminist still opines “all men are rapists,” there's a strong social presumption – fuelled in part by the vocal campaigning of groups such as the Everyday Sexism Project – that men are desperate to grope women on the tube. Jeremy Corbyn echoed that nonsense with his absurd and misandric proposal for women-only Tube carriages – an idea that was thankfully derailed by common sense.

We also see the poisonous mindset that male sex pests are everywhere in the NUS’s misplaced war on “lad culture” and exclusion of “cisgendered men” from “safe spaces”.

We see it in YouTube videos where sexual harassment of women by men incites reaction but violence against men is ignored.

The demonization of men is now an entire industry where lucrative academic, journalistic, charity and even governmental careers are forged. And top of the tree is the CPS’s Director Of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders, who has long been accused of a systematic “witch hunt” against men.

Saunders has been under fire over a series of high-profile Operation Yewtree failures to convict ageing TV stars Bill Roache, Jimmy Tarbuck and Freddie Starr and DJs Paul Gambaccini and Dr Fox.

Perhaps sensing that celebrity scalps were drying up, last January Saunders turned her campaign against male sex offenders to the general public. She introduced tough new affirmative consent rules designed to protect drunken women – and increase convictions against men. This culminated in the farcical, false rape case brought against history student Louis Richardson, 21, which was thrown out of Durham Crown Court after just three hours of deliberation last month.

...

Are the CPS terrified of not prosecuting even the feeblest of cases for appearing to be siding “against” women accusers? Are they so headlight-frozen with cowardice they are deferring to juries the work they should be doing at the outset? Or are they after high-profile PR, where men like Pearson and Richardson are the poster boys of shame?

At ground level, men are being made to feel increasingly hated by a society and legal system that seems to say “all men are capable of evil – if only you look hard enough”.

In my work as an educator on internet pornography safety, I see confusion and often genuine terror in teenage boys’ (and girls’) eyes when I tell them about Saunders’ guidelines on affirmative consent.

I just don't see how Saunders' position as DPP is tenable anymore. If literally all there was in evidence was just the complainant plus CCTV footage that was not consistent with her story there is no way that case should have gone to trial.

 

[Paracelsus]

Double post, but still worth noting: the original article was updated on the Tele to reflect the fact that the CPS tampered with the original CCTV footage so Pearson looked like he had more time to commit the crime than he did.

The defence had to get a video firm to re-speed the footage to its original speed and then produce a storyboard (the annotated pictures you've seen) of him and the "victim".

The changes made in the CPS's version of the video were critical because the case hinged on whether Mr Pearson could have committed the assault in that amount of time - and the CCTV gave the impression the window was twice as long as it was in reality.

The lawyer said: "Before the trial this storyboard was served to the CPS with a request that they review their decision to go ahead with the prosecution. They went ahead anyway.

"If we had not taken the steps we had, the CCTV would have been presented to the jury at that amended speed.

"In the end, the prosecution did not rely on the CCTV at all, except to show that my client was at the station.

"The jury was only shown the CCTV as part of our case.

"The first time the alleged victim saw the CCTV was in court, and her reaction was 'That can't be me in the CCTV'."

What. The. Living. Fuck. This is well beyond just letting a case go through to the keeper, it's positive tampering with evidence. Imagine the "convict all fuckers charged with rape" pressure that must be going on at that office for a prosecutor to take this sort of risk with a jury.

 

[spokepoker]

How much did all this cost?

 

[Foolsgo1d]

So some semi-famous actress willingly participates in a blockbuster television series full of rape, sex, murder, corruption and my soggy knee, has the audacity to cry rape on an innocent man who, according to the available evidence did not even recognise her, nor acknowledged her existence.

And it gets to court no less!

It would be hilarious if not for the pathetic tragedy this turned into for a man and potentially devastating results for other men in future.

I read last year some man was accused of rape by some fat lard arse and he wasn't even in the same town as when it took place. CCTV places him in another town miles away but his information was leaked and had the shit kicked out of him by white knight male sympathizers.

She got away with a slap on her wrist.

 

[ChickenLover9T9]

What. The. Living. Fuck. This is well beyond just letting a case go through to the keeper, it's positive tampering with evidence. Imagine the "convict all fuckers charged with rape" pressure that must be going on at that office for a prosecutor to take this sort of risk with a jury.

My friends the cancer has now fully infiltrated the UK government. None of us is truly safe anymore. I think this will get worse before it gets better, and I am not sure it will get better.

The best any man can do in the UK is work hard in order to become location independent. Not everyone is capable of this. It is harder than it looks. But there are all sorts of places in between, from saving towards a few years' early retirement until you are forced back to the UK by lack of funds, or taking a month or two off work every year to travel.

I used to get in a rage about injustices such as this in the UK, false sex-related charges against men in order to satisfy the rabid public thirst for demonization of men, the lucrative industry of the protection of women and simultaneous persecution of men, the conviction quotas, the tampering with evidence, the mental torture endured by many of these falsely accused men...

But there comes a time where you must simply accept it as part of the environment in which you currently live, and plan and take action accordingly.

 

[debeguiled]

Here's a radio interview from the BBC with the victim guy:

 

[BlurredLines]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/its-time-we-stopped-treating-all-men-as-sex-pests/

Don't give page clicks, it's MSM. Relevant excerpts are all below.

The author of this op-ed is the former editor of Loaded. Interesting. Although I still doubt this is much more than someone at the Tele realising "Hey, maybe we can get some pageclicks from all those guys who were going to go to the Roosh V meetups!"

Which begs the bigger question: why, despite having seen the CCTV evidence (there were also no witnesses nor forensic evidence), did the Crown Prosecution Service still see fit to push for prosecution?

Pearson’s acquittal topped off a bad week for the CPS – and a terrible one for men – following a damning report in which HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate concluded that “poor” decision-making in London rape cases was leading to innocent suspects being wrongly charged in an attempt to raise the number of convictions.

That's significant. The CPS Inspectorate I would guess is sort of like the Ombudsman of the DPP, meant to ensure that they're not going off their trees or turning into a political arm.

So why is what’s been described as a CPS “witch hunt” against men happening?

Increasingly, there is a sense that the courts are becoming the judicial hammer for the anvil of the CPS’s Violence Against Women And Girls strategy. It's also hard to avoid the argument that innocent men like Mark Pearson are seeing their day in court because the most prolific and evil sex offender of them all – Jimmy Savile – escaped his.

Perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised that the highest courts in the land merely reflect an endemic mindset that tells us all men are potential sex offenders.

While only the battiest radical feminist still opines “all men are rapists,” there's a strong social presumption – fuelled in part by the vocal campaigning of groups such as the Everyday Sexism Project – that men are desperate to grope women on the tube. Jeremy Corbyn echoed that nonsense with his absurd and misandric proposal for women-only Tube carriages – an idea that was thankfully derailed by common sense.

We also see the poisonous mindset that male sex pests are everywhere in the NUS’s misplaced war on “lad culture” and exclusion of “cisgendered men” from “safe spaces”.

We see it in YouTube videos where sexual harassment of women by men incites reaction but violence against men is ignored.

The demonization of men is now an entire industry where lucrative academic, journalistic, charity and even governmental careers are forged. And top of the tree is the CPS’s Director Of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders, who has long been accused of a systematic “witch hunt” against men.

Saunders has been under fire over a series of high-profile Operation Yewtree failures to convict ageing TV stars Bill Roache, Jimmy Tarbuck and Freddie Starr and DJs Paul Gambaccini and Dr Fox.

Perhaps sensing that celebrity scalps were drying up, last January Saunders turned her campaign against male sex offenders to the general public. She introduced tough new affirmative consent rules designed to protect drunken women – and increase convictions against men. This culminated in the farcical, false rape case brought against history student Louis Richardson, 21, which was thrown out of Durham Crown Court after just three hours of deliberation last month.

...

Are the CPS terrified of not prosecuting even the feeblest of cases for appearing to be siding “against” women accusers? Are they so headlight-frozen with cowardice they are deferring to juries the work they should be doing at the outset? Or are they after high-profile PR, where men like Pearson and Richardson are the poster boys of shame?

At ground level, men are being made to feel increasingly hated by a society and legal system that seems to say “all men are capable of evil – if only you look hard enough”.

In my work as an educator on internet pornography safety, I see confusion and often genuine terror in teenage boys’ (and girls’) eyes when I tell them about Saunders’ guidelines on affirmative consent.

I just don't see how Saunders' position as DPP is tenable anymore. If literally all there was in evidence was just the complainant plus CCTV footage that was not consistent with her story there is no way that case should have gone to trial.

The editor of that article Martin Daubney is probably one of the highest profile mainstream 'mens issue' focussed journalists in the UK.

He's regularly on Sky News (i have that or Bloomberg on in the background most mornings when i wake up), and over the past few months i had noted a couple of times his appearances, mainly because they seemed so out of keeping with the usual female centric fluff.

Along with Milo Yiannopoulos he's one of the good guys considering the media play he/they get on both mainstream TV and print.
I certainly see a shift in the plates regarding the general consensus and media portrayal of feminism and mens rights situation in the UK. Not a big one... but a shift nonetheless.

 

[C-Note]

The accuser's name still hasn't been mentioned in any mainstream media publication. Looks like the accused is being very careful not to say her name publicly also. How long will this last?

 

[tynamite]