Beau Donaldson will plead guilty

[1GrizNation]

No where in any document does it say she was drunk. She had been drinking but the amount wasn't large and she stayed there with a girlfriend after being talked into it by other people there and because they both trusted Beau. Also, he didn't call her. She called him with the police in the room.

There's nothing wrong with being a year off on your facts. But, you're a year off on your facts.

"According to JD ... she was sleeping at his residence after consuming alcohol at a house party. Donaldson was a person she had been friends with for years ..."

This happened "on September 25, 2010, ... according to JD ... the following day, ... he admitted the accusation and apologized."

"On December 23, 2011, in a telephone conversation ... monitored by Missoula Police Detectives, ... he apologized repeatedly ....".

Source: Charging Affidavit.

Make up what you want, I was referring primarily to the charging document and consistent statements from students who know them.

How can I be a year off on my dates when I never stated a date? Both times he apologized were after being contacted by her. And you proved my exact point with the quote about drinking. Consuming alcohol and being drunk are not the same thing. I'm going to let you to continue to twist the affidavits words and state "facts" from students who, like you, weren't there. When November 13 comes you will realize everything I just stated was in fact true...

 

[UMGriz75]

No where in any document does it say she was drunk. She had been drinking but the amount wasn't large and she stayed there with a girlfriend after being talked into it by other people there and because they both trusted Beau. Also, he didn't call her. She called him with the police in the room.

There's nothing wrong with being a year off on your facts. But, you're a year off on your facts.

"According to JD ... she was sleeping at his residence after consuming alcohol at a house party. Donaldson was a person she had been friends with for years ..."

This happened "on September 25, 2010, ... according to JD ... the following day, ... he admitted the accusation and apologized."

"On December 23, 2011, in a telephone conversation ... monitored by Missoula Police Detectives, ... he apologized repeatedly ....".

Source: Charging Affidavit.

Make up what you want, I was referring primarily to the charging document and consistent statements from students who know them.

How can I be a year off on my dates when I never stated a date? Both times he apologized were after being contacted by her. And you proved my exact point with the quote about drinking. Consuming alcohol and being drunk are not the same thing. I'm going to let you to continue to twist the affidavits words and state "facts" from students who, like you, weren't there. When November 13 comes you will realize everything I just stated was in fact true...

Both times he apologized were after being contacted by her.

According to the Charging Affidavit, "Donaldson came to JDs home the following day ...". That indicates he made the initial contact the following day. You are making things up.

Well, you're invested in something here. I guess you're claiming that she had been drinking but was OK to drive and was convinced by her friends not to because she was stone cold sober. The affidavit doesn't state that either of them were either stone cold sober or slobbering drunk. However, for those who have lived real lives in college, not driving after drinking is a good policy even if people like you contend that she was just fine and "chose" not to drive anyway. I am sure it was why she woke up and "discovered" they were already having sex.

Apparently your experiences have been somewhat on the dull side and you never realized what was happening until well into the experience despite the fact that you were "just fine" to drive.

My point was: alcohol was involved on both sides. Be careful. Bad things happen.

I have no idea what you are trying to "justify" or "excuse."

 

[ranco]

[quote} Just because he will plead guilty, does not mean he is guilty.

Truly one of the most amusing things I've ever read on here. Right up there with the massive "he won't be found guilty" thread.

That dude was dirty from the start and a perfect example of the entire program over the last number of years. He'll now have his brutal actions to taint his entire life.

GOOD![/quote]

Up to your post I thought Growler had the dumbest post. You are a complete idiot. The "he wont be found guilty" thread is about JJ, who by the way, will not be found guilty. In fact, the charges will be dropped before the trial ever starts.

 

[1GrizNation]

No where in any document does it say she was drunk. She had been drinking but the amount wasn't large and she stayed there with a girlfriend after being talked into it by other people there and because they both trusted Beau. Also, he didn't call her. She called him with the police in the room.

There's nothing wrong with being a year off on your facts. But, you're a year off on your facts.

"According to JD ... she was sleeping at his residence after consuming alcohol at a house party. Donaldson was a person she had been friends with for years ..."

This happened "on September 25, 2010, ... according to JD ... the following day, ... he admitted the accusation and apologized."

"On December 23, 2011, in a telephone conversation ... monitored by Missoula Police Detectives, ... he apologized repeatedly ....".

Source: Charging Affidavit.

Make up what you want, I was referring primarily to the charging document and consistent statements from students who know them.

How can I be a year off on my dates when I never stated a date? Both times he apologized were after being contacted by her. And you proved my exact point with the quote about drinking. Consuming alcohol and being drunk are not the same thing. I'm going to let you to continue to twist the affidavits words and state "facts" from students who, like you, weren't there. When November 13 comes you will realize everything I just stated was in fact true...

Well, you're invested in something here. I guess you're claiming that she had been drinking but was OK to drive and was convinced by her friends not to because she was stone cold sober. The affidavit doesn't state that either of them were either stone cold sober or slobbering drunk. However, for those who have lived real lives in college, not driving after drinking is a good policy even if people like you contend that she was just fine and "chose" not to drive anyway. I am sure it was why she woke up and "discovered" they were already having sex.



Apparently your experiences have been somewhat on the dull side and you never realized what was happening until well into the experience.

My point was: alcohol was involved. Be careful. Bad things happen.

I have no idea what you are trying to "justify" or "excuse."

"they were already having sex" ? You mean he was already raping her... And no some people like me think that you prob shouldn't drive, even though she wasn't even the driver, after having a couple drinks. And Donaldson went to her house because she had through a mutual friend asked them to so she could confront him. You're just arguing with the wrong person. I was simply correcting your incorrect statements. I feel like people like you who don't know anything more than what the affidavit says shouldn't speculate on these type of situations. My point: alcohol didn't rape her, Donaldson did.

 

[UMGriz75]

And no some people like me think that you prob shouldn't drive, even though she wasn't even the driver, after having a couple drinks.

I am sure that makes sense to someone.

Whether your facts mean something contrary to a sworn affidavit is simply an interesting contention.

The fact is, alcohol was involved on both sides of this story. Could she have prevented this sober? Would Beau not have done this sober? You pretend to have the answers, and I think that represents a lack of life experience.

That's the problem with young people drinking, isn't it?

I don't recommend it.

 

[Ursa Major]

And no some people like me think that you prob shouldn't drive, even though she wasn't even the driver, after having a couple drinks.

I am sure that makes sense to someone.

Whether your facts mean something contrary to a sworn affidavit is simply an interesting contention.

The fact is, alcohol was involved on both sides of this story. Could she have prevented this sober? Would Beau not have done this sober? You pretend to have the answers, and I think that represents a lack of life experience.

That's the problem with young people drinking, isn't it?

I don't recommend it.

Older people rationalizing young men's behavior just because they happen to play on the football team is a problem too,

I don't recommend it either.

 

[1GrizNation]

And no some people like me think that you prob shouldn't drive, even though she wasn't even the driver, after having a couple drinks.

I am sure that makes sense to someone.

Whether your facts mean something contrary to a sworn affidavit is simply an interesting contention.

The fact is, alcohol was involved on both sides of this story. Could she have prevented this sober? Would Beau not have done this sober? You pretend to have the answers, and I think that represents a lack of life experience.

That's the problem with young people drinking, isn't it?

I don't recommend it.

You can argue will me all you want and continue to question whether I have any lack of life experience or not. At the end of the day I am not the one "pretending" to know what i am talking about and nothing I said contradicted the affidavit at all, it merely contradicted the way you interrupted it. It is blatantly obvious to anyone who truly knows what happened, for example is AT least a witness in the case, that you have zero idea what you are talking about. I also find it interesting that him being drunk is a potential excuse for him (since you are questioning if he would have done it sober), and her being drunk makes her partly responsible ( since she could have been able to prevent it). Yet, he is the one who raped her.

As for the overall issue, the problem at hand is the rapists (whether the are sober or drunk) and the people who, like you, attempt to lessen the amount of responsibility they should have to take.

 

[1GrizNation]

And no some people like me think that you prob shouldn't drive, even though she wasn't even the driver, after having a couple drinks.

I am sure that makes sense to someone.

Whether your facts mean something contrary to a sworn affidavit is simply an interesting contention.

The fact is, alcohol was involved on both sides of this story. Could she have prevented this sober? Would Beau not have done this sober? You pretend to have the answers, and I think that represents a lack of life experience.

That's the problem with young people drinking, isn't it?

I don't recommend it.

You can argue will me all you want and continue to question whether I have any lack of life experience or not. At the end of the day I am not the one "pretending" to know what i am talking about and nothing I said contradicted the affidavit at all, it merely contradicted the way you interrupted it. It is blatantly obvious to anyone who truly knows what happened, for example is AT least a witness in the case, that you have zero idea what you are talking about. I also find it interesting that him being drunk is a potential excuse for him (since you are questioning if he would have done it sober), and her being drunk makes her partly responsible ( since she could have been able to prevent it). Yet, he is the one who raped her.

As for the overall issue, the problem at hand is the rapists (whether they are sober or drunk) and the people who, like you, attempt to lessen the amount of responsibility they should have to take.

 

[1GrizNation]

And no some people like me think that you prob shouldn't drive, even though she wasn't even the driver, after having a couple drinks.

I am sure that makes sense to someone.

Whether your facts mean something contrary to a sworn affidavit is simply an interesting contention.

The fact is, alcohol was involved on both sides of this story. Could she have prevented this sober? Would Beau not have done this sober? You pretend to have the answers, and I think that represents a lack of life experience.

That's the problem with young people drinking, isn't it?

I don't recommend it.

Older people rationalizing young men's behavior just because they happen to play on the football team is a problem too,

I don't recommend it either.

Seriously...

 

[UMGriz75]

Well, this is typical posturing by poseurs. The fact is, alcohol was involved on both sides. From that, the automatic deduction is, "therefore the football player raped her." Well, he did. Could some common sense have prevented that? Yes.

But some older people no longer have that quality. Or perhaps they never did.

 

[UMGriz75]

The fact is, alcohol was involved on both sides of this story. Could she have prevented this sober? Would Beau not have done this sober? You pretend to have the answers, and I think that represents a lack of life experience.

That's the problem with young people drinking, isn't it?

I don't recommend it.

Older people rationalizing young men's behavior just because they happen to play on the football team is a problem too,

I don't recommend it either.

Trying to argue that it is "rationalizing" someone's behavior by advocating alcohol responsibility is a pretty low tactic. I happen to think it's disgusting. And I don't buy into the deduction that men are 100% responsible for their actions when drunk and that women are never responsible for their actions when drunk.

The fact is, when it happens drunk, the man still raped, and the women is still raped. And vice-versa. So "rationalizing" a prefabricated excuse to say that it was "football," not alcohol, that "caused" the problem, which seems to be the deranged motive of some posters, imposes an irresponsible burden for both young men and women and a pathological obsession about "football players that rape," that has nothing whatsoever to do with what happened in this case.

 

[tnt]

CNN recently reported that 85% of "men" in acquaintance rape, don't believe the "raped" Yeah alchol is a bad idea, but thousands of UM students (men) get drunk every weekend and don't rape anyone.

 

[UMGriz75]

CNN recently reported that 85% of "men" in acquaintance rape, don't believe the "raped" Yeah alchol is a bad idea, but thousands of UM students (men) get drunk every weekend and don't rape anyone.

Oh, it's "OK" then.

 

[tnt]

CNN recently reported that 85% of "men" in acquaintance rape, don't believe the "raped" Yeah alchol is a bad idea, but thousands of UM students (men) get drunk every weekend and don't rape anyone.

Oh, it's "OK" then.

Whats okay??

 

[UMGriz75]

http://www.uwec.edu/counsel/pubs/assualt/linkbetween.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[Ursa Major]

75- You really want to argue about the virtues of a soon-to-be convicted rapist or launching a modern day temperance movement on one of the marquee days of the over 100 year history of the University of Montana Football program?

Good luck!!

 

[tnt]

http://www.uwec.edu/counsel/pubs/assualt/linkbetween.htm

Yeah, but that form of "date rape" isn't what Donaldson is reportedly confessing to. He is confessing to stripping and raping a sleeping woman who trusted him to be safe, and hadn't even considered any kind of activity with a childhood friend.

The fact that one or both parties are drinking doesn't change the fact that some "men" rape and others would never consider it.

 

[UMGriz75]

http://www.uwec.edu/counsel/pubs/assualt/linkbetween.htm

Yeah, but that form of "date rape" isn't what Donaldson is reportedly confessing to. He is confessing to stripping and raping a sleeping woman who trusted him to be safe, and hadn't even considered any kind of activity with a childhood friend.

The fact that one or both parties are drinking doesn't change the fact that some "men" rape and others would never consider it.

I don't know what this quack baloney is all about. He raped a young woman; they were both drunk.

If you are suggesting it would have happened if they had both been sober, well the statistics don't support that. So,what's your ridiculous point? This is past the point of absurdity.

Now that some of you have decided you need to defend drinking, that its OK, and that "rapists" will rape drunk or sober, and so alcohol abuse has nothing to do with it for either young women who drink too much or for young men, well, good luck. I think you are twisted. The fact is young men who date rape drunk bear 100% of the responsibility for what happens and young women who get drunk at parties do not. And that is perhaps the way it should be.

 

[UMGriz75]

Yeah, but that form of "date rape" isn't what Donaldson is reportedly confessing to. He is confessing to stripping and raping a sleeping woman who trusted him to be safe, and hadn't even considered any kind of activity with a childhood friend.

That's quite a piece of mind reading. I guess that's what you guys do, based on your own experiences. As another poster claimed, he "knows!"

 

[NorthwestFresh]

Arguably the biggest OOC game in Griz history, and the biggest licker of Grizzly players' buttholes is still trying to defend an admitted rapist. :thumb:

Donaldson is a felon and a rapist. He admits it.

/end of everything regarding this raping POS.