• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Krakauer getting defensive?

I wasn't at the forum, but two things struck me from the report in the Missoulian:
First, Krakauer is reported as saying if a complaining witness in a rape case is accused of lying, that is as bad as, or worse than, convicting a defendant in such as case who is actually not guilty of the crime. What an outrageous statement. A person convicted of sexual intercourse without consent in Montana faces a lengthy term of incarceration, restitution to the complaining witness, and a lifetime of registering as a sex offender, all of which are well-deserved IF the person is guilty of the crime. And, no sane person would minimize the consequences to a rape victim being accused of lying and having to go through the crucible of a criminal trial. But it's difficult to understand how any objective person could equate the consequences of convicting an innocent person with the consequences of being accused of lying. That's why the constitution only allows criminal punishment when the prosecution has proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt. It's acknowledged that this constitutional principle allows guilty people to go free, not just in rape cases but even in cases of homicide. But the framers of the constitution thought this was an important limitation on the power of the government. It's one of the bulwarks of our freedom, and we should think long and hard about the consequences of eroding its protections.
Second, K figured he didn't need to talk to anybody about the way rape cases are handled in the justice system, but he would have benefited from a conversation with an experienced prosecutor about the prosecution function. Prosecutors are required to exercise sound discretion in the conduct of their duties. They are not obligated to charge and take to trial every case in which there is probable cause to believe that a person committed a crime. The standard at trial is proof beyond a reasonable doubt, which is a much higher burden than mere probable cause. If the prosecutor does not believe the evidence will support proof beyond a reasonable doubt, as, for example, where the complaining witness does not clearly recall the crime, or there is substantial evidence contradicting her version of the crime, a prosecutor may properly decide, based on sound judgment informed by substantial experience, not to charge a case., That's what happened in the notorious "gang rape" situation. K, based on nothing more than his own subjective opinion, thinks every case that CAN be charged MUST be charged and MUST be tried, regardless of the judgment of the prosecutor. If he'd bothered to check his uninformed opinion with an experienced prosecutor, he would have found out that the approach he advocates does not exist in the real world, with rape cases or any other kind of felony charge. If he wants to take on the responsibility of making charging decisions, he should go to law school and then get elected prosecutor.
A less respected writer would have a tough time getting away with this kind of stuff.
 
In the "notorious gang rape situation," there was clear video evidence that the victim was lying. In fact it could be argued she was the actual rapist taking advantage of several drunk men (boys.) How she managed to become a "victim" again is beyond me. How Krakauer ignored that in his research is beyond me.

The JJ situation is the bugger, Krakauer danced around it in the book. For some reason he decided to retry it at the meetin'

The Jury got it right. That doesn't mean the university "court" got it wrong. There were and should be two different sets of standards when it comes to providing a safe environment for all students. You just don't change standards mid stream
 
Every guy that did not pull it out AFTER she said no is guilty? Of what?
Never ever did these Lib feminists have decent sex but they don't get it!
Having daughters that were all taught all through their life the behaviors of beer and sex it is lower than hell to listen to the females talk about the "new" revelation that Krak brings them. Some dried up females that fall into the "NEW" way of thinking NEVER had a good sex experience and drag down the many females that end up enjoying sex!
 
tnt said:
In the "notorious gang rape situation," there was clear video evidence that the victim was lying. In fact it could be argued she was the actual rapist taking advantage of several drunk men (boys.) How she managed to become a "victim" again is beyond me. How Krakauer ignored that in his research is beyond me.

The JJ situation is the bugger, Krakauer danced around it in the book. For some reason he decided to retry it at the meetin'

The Jury got it right. That doesn't mean the university "court" got it wrong. There were and should be two different sets of standards when it comes to providing a safe environment for all students. You just don't change standards mid stream
Click to expand...

Thought I might never agree with everything in one of your posts, but I think it just happened. Saw Krak, Florio and an accuser having a late lunch today. Said hi from egriz. Ha.
 
PlayerRep said:
tnt said:
In the "notorious gang rape situation," there was clear video evidence that the victim was lying. In fact it could be argued she was the actual rapist taking advantage of several drunk men (boys.) How she managed to become a "victim" again is beyond me. How Krakauer ignored that in his research is beyond me.

The JJ situation is the bugger, Krakauer danced around it in the book. For some reason he decided to retry it at the meetin'

The Jury got it right. That doesn't mean the university "court" got it wrong. There were and should be two different sets of standards when it comes to providing a safe environment for all students. You just don't change standards mid stream
Click to expand...

Thought I might never agree with everything in one of your posts, but I think it just happened. Saw Krak, Florio and an accuser having a late lunch today. Said hi from egriz. Ha.
Click to expand...
Oh nooooo!!!
 
Famous blogger, Instapundit, notes:
May 7, 2015
JON KRAKAUER GOES TO MISSOULA TO GIVE CRITICS A CHANCE TO CONFRONT HIM: When critics appeared, he “became exasperated” and walked out.
http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Click to expand...
From his link, to Professor Ann Althouse at the University of Wisconsin Law School:
So Krakauer purported to offer his critics in Missoula a chance to confront him, and he got a comfortable event to be staged somehow, through the auspices of the University of Montana, which has a big interest in shoring up its reputation. (The book is about things that happened to the university's students.) And a Missoula man shows up, prepared to confront Krakauer, but Krakauer takes no questions from the audience. When the man insists on speaking anyway, he seems like a heckler, and the huge Krakauer-friendly crowd tries to shout him down. But there are "a few others" present who, perhaps, felt burned that they showed up for what was purportedly going to be a confrontation with critics but turned out to be a well-cushioned platform for Krakauer. The "few others" and whatever they said were apparently enough to push Krakauer to start to answer, but somehow he "became exasperated." We're told the crowd got "hostile" Dove, so I guess we're supposed to be satisfied that Dove really was a heckler and that the wisdom in numbers — "the crowd" vs. the "few others" — has determined that Krakauer was justified in walking out.

I want to see the transcript.

ADDED: There's some audio here. I learned that Dove was given a microphone, but then (for some reason) Dean Abrahamson cut things off. ....

Dove isn't heckling. He has a microphone, and Krakauer endeavors to answer a few questions. Then the crowd takes up yelling and booing, perhaps to help Krakauer. Then Krakauer stomps over and snatches the mike out of Dove's hands. From the audience: a woman laughing, people booing, and a man saying "Get out of here!"

ALSO: To be fair, Dove was being boring. He had a sheaf of papers and took the liberty to read from them. That was after he'd gotten Krakauer to straight out admit he was biased and engaged in confirmation bias. That was a long enough turn for Dove, but he took advantage, like he was going to lead an inquest. That really wasn't going to work, but the way the crowd, the Dean, and the author shut him down made them all look awful. Stupid.
Click to expand...
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2015/05/jon-krakauer-semi-exposes-himself-to.html
 
Just watched the clip with the questioner and listened to his radio interview. The guy is way smarter than krakwhatever and much more civil. But most importantly he is more experienced with what constitutes real rape and how to prosecute it. He also cares more about real victims.

I wish there would have been someone polling the spectators asking them where they are from originally. These folks were not Missoulians.
 
Umista said:
Every guy that did not pull it out AFTER she said no is guilty? Of what?
Never ever did these Lib feminists have decent sex but they don't get it!
Having daughters that were all taught all through their life the behaviors of beer and sex it is lower than hell to listen to the females talk about the "new" revelation that Krak brings them. Some dried up females that fall into the "NEW" way of thinking NEVER had a good sex experience and drag down the many females that end up enjoying sex!
Click to expand...

This is a real nugget! I'll bet there's not a woman alive that has, or would ever, enjoy having sex with you. You should consider necrophilia for a pastime in your mother's basement.
 
Didn't say they shipped them in alpha. They are the new Missoula, not the real Missoula. I don't know how you explain Butte, though.
 
The AP story is so much different than what actually occurred. Dove was offered the microphone. Did he call Krakauer a liar? I mean, he can be but is that what Dove said?


MISSOULA, Mont. (AP) — A Missoula audience gave the best-selling author of a book about the city's mishandling of rape cases a standing ovation Wednesday and then booed a heckler who had elbowed his way to the stage and called Jon Krakauer a liar.



I too just listened to Doves interview with Peter. Seems like a very level headed and fair individual. I have been reading some comments from newspapers around the country people have posted after the "Heckler" article. Most are surprisingly supportive of Dove. Much more supportive than the audience was last evening.
 
Umista said:
Every guy that did not pull it out AFTER she said no is guilty? Of what?
Never ever did these Lib feminists have decent sex but they don't get it!
Having daughters that were all taught all through their life the behaviors of beer and sex it is lower than hell to listen to the females talk about the "new" revelation that Krak brings them. Some dried up females that fall into the "NEW" way of thinking NEVER had a good sex experience and drag down the many females that end up enjoying sex!
Click to expand...

Jesus you post some bizarre shit. I have no idea what any of this means.
 
Missoulian getting defensive too. Word getting around that Missoulian is not printing some letters to editors that disagree with the Missoulian's agenda and are also not posting or deleting some comments (to articles) that disagree with their agenda.
 
No big story here. Everyone knows the key to good journalism is censorship of all who disagree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top