'Good Day New York' Host Greg Kelly Accused of Rape

Discussion in 'Off The Beaten Track' started by Rex, Jan 26, 2012.

  1. MacMadame

    MacMadame Internet Beyotch

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    15,956
    Well I also think she wasn't implying it. I think she wanted to know what I thought. But she'll come along soon enough and tell us what she meant, I'm sure.
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2012
  2. Civic

    Civic New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Messages:
    6,262
    IMO, it doesn't matter what she planned to do with him when she suggested they go to her office. What matters is what happened once they were there. Women have the right to say no to sex even if they've behaved seductively with a guy earlier. Having written the above, I freely admit that I don't know what happened between them. I don't know who is lying.
  3. agalisgv

    agalisgv Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Messages:
    23,897
    I think she was showing the necessary implication of your statement in this particular case. I guess you can dance around that if you want, but to me it seemed quite clear.
    BigB08822 and (deleted member) like this.
  4. cruisin

    cruisin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    17,390
    Bat is a typo, I meant to write But. :) Damn spell check! :D

    I was exaggerating there. I was trying to express how difficult it would be to actually know if someone is drunk enough to be incapable of making a decision, short of stumbling drunk or passing out.

    But, doesn't that go both ways? If you are drinking, isn't it stupid to have sex with someone you don't know? People do stupid things when they drink. The drive, an act for which they are held entirely accountable. How do we then say that the person who choses to go with a stranger and have sex is completely incapable of making a decision and is therefore not responsible (in part) for their choice? Again, if they go willingly and are not incapacitated. What if they are both drunk? Is a man responsible for his drunk actions, but a woman is not?

    I cannot stress more, that a woman should not ever be forced to have sex. But, is making a decision, to have sex with a stranger, after you've been drinking, which you may later regret, rape?
  5. gkelly

    gkelly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2003
    Messages:
    10,512
    I do not have enough information on this particular case to draw any conclusions one way or another.

    But for hypothetical purposes, I can use my imagination, and I can imagine plenty of reasons why a woman might invite a man she was having drinks with to her office without intending to "go all the way"

    *To chat and get to know him better (first part of a first date) in a quieter environment if the bar was too noisy to hear each other
    *To make out without progressing to full intercourse
    *To show him something in or about the office that's notable and worth bonding over -- a great view, a great piece of art, family photos on her desk, etc.
    *To pick up something she had left there and needed to go back for before heading home, without cutting short the time spent with this guy
    *To give him a copy of her resume, etc., if she thought he could help her professionally

    Some of those don't even presume that the relationship was already in "date" mode

    Again, it sounds like this situation was, but it's not necessary to read that into the mere fact that she invited him to her office

    This makes legal sense if the person who initiates the sex is sufficiently sober and the person who allows him (or her) to proceed is too drunk.

    But what if both participants are too drunk to give legally valid consent and both make poor judgment to engage in ill-advised sex? Can they be said to mutually rape each other?

    If one initiates the sex and the other merely drunkenly agrees/doesn't protest, then is the initiator guilty and the agreer not?

    If one participant is male and the other female, is the male necessarily the guilty one, even if neither can remember who started it?

    In a same-sex scenario, if both were too drunk to legally consent and both were too drunk to remember exactly what happened, is it less possible to consider rape than in a male-female scenario?
    At least pregnancy wouldn't be a consideration in that case though.
  6. cruisin

    cruisin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    17,390
    The first two are still not smart. I don't think it's a good idea to bring someone you don't know to a private place, like an empty office building.

    The 3rd point is rather unlikely, though, I suppose possible.

    The 4th & 5th are more legitimate reasons, but still not a good idea if you don't know the guy.

    But, none of the reasons would explain why she said nothing until she got caught, or why she continued to test him asking why he hadn't called.

    Totally agree. Determining that someone is incapable of making a decision, because of alcohol consumption gets tricky. It's something that cannot be proven, after the fact. And something that is too variable - how much is too much? How drunk is too drunk? If both are drunk, who is more to blame?

    Again, not blaming a woman, here, but it's never a good idea to drink so much that you don't know what you're doing, when you're with someone you don't know (female or male). It's never a good idea to go someplace, alone, with someone you don't know, especially if you've been drinking. People make poor choices when they drink - one big one is unprotected sex.
  7. MacMadame

    MacMadame Internet Beyotch

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    15,956
    Me too. I was somewhat mystified by the comment that she had clearly brought him to her office to have sex. That wasn't in the linked article and I know the last place I'd take someone if I wanted to have sex was to my workplace.

    Then I think it's like when two kids who are too young to consent have sex. Regrettable, but no crime has been committed.

    You'd think that based on some postings. ;)

    But the thing is, something can be wrong without being illegal. If both have been drinking, but one knows the other is too drunk to know what they are doing and takes advantage of that, that is wrong. You most likely aren't going to get arrested for it, let alone convicted, but that doesn't mean it's not wrong. And, again, it doesn't matter what the amount of alcohol is or whether the other person is over some legal limit. If you are in a situation where you even suspect the other person is too drunk to know what they are doing and you have sex anyway, you need to question your moral compass.
  8. soxxy

    soxxy Guest

  9. BigB08822

    BigB08822 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2003
    Messages:
    20,745
    No surprise, there!

    Can he sue her? The damage is done and she probably did file a false report. Although, I suppose all the things that make this hard to prove in her favor also make it hard to prove in his favor if he files against her. You don't want to start setting a precedent that if a woman is raped and there is a lack of evidence that she should fear being counter sued by the rapist. That would be awful but at the same time you can't go around crying rape because you got caught cheating. Slippery slope...
  10. Sasha'sSpins

    Sasha'sSpins Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2006
    Messages:
    3,726
    3 months? Some times it can take a victim YEARS before they can speak of an assault, let alone report it. I do grant that taking so long to report it will make it very hard for her to seem credible. Obviously any evidence of the alleged assault likely has been compromised/long gone.
  11. BigB08822

    BigB08822 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2003
    Messages:
    20,745
    Yes, this has been stated so many times I can't even remember. Thank you.
  12. Sasha'sSpins

    Sasha'sSpins Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2006
    Messages:
    3,726
    It is also the dissecting of the events, the doubting thomases that some times cause an alleged victim to recant-or not ever report an assault to begin with due to her actions leading up to the alleged rape being questioned - 'she went drinking with him', 'she barely knew him', etc.

    Well put. It's quite chilling really-like going back to the '70s where the alleged victim's sexual activities prior to a rape are dragged through a courtroom as 'proof' that she deserved it, or was asking for it by being dressed provocatively, etc.

    We've come a long way baby-NOT. :shuffle:

    You seem to be saying 'don't put yourself in that situation, being alone with a stranger-otherwise you deserve it'. You also seem to be saying 'I'm better than that woman'. Or maybe I'm reading you wrong. :blah:

    What I do know is that 2 years ago a little girl walking to school alone was snatched up by 2 men, taken to an abandoned house they once lived in and raped her. This horrific nightmare happened to that little girl just 3 houses down from where my parents live. She didn't 'ask' to be raped by those men just because she was walking to school alone. Nor did her parents whom I believe worked such hours that they could not walk or drive their child to school. A lot of children are in that latchkey position. It's not okay to be raped by anyone just because you dress a certain way, are intoxicated, or happen to be alone with a stranger, or are walking alone trying to get somewhere. That stranger has NO RIGHT to touch you. None. Poor judgement is no excuse to rape someone either, not EVER.

    With all due respect I'd be scared to have anyone who is prejudiced or judgemental in such a way on a jury box.

    ETA: I just read a bit more through the thread-so the prosecutors are not going to charge him. It is unfortunate for him if this was a false report. I agree with those who have stated that the damage probably has been done.
  13. Sasha'sSpins

    Sasha'sSpins Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2006
    Messages:
    3,726
    I'm sorry I haven't gone through the whole thread-I was just stating facts as I know them and was not aware of how many times this has been stated prior to my own posts.
  14. cruisin

    cruisin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    17,390
    ^^ No one is saying don't put yourself in that situation or you deserve to be raped. Two separate things are being discussed.

    1. That the woman's story falls apart for several reasons. Most obvious, the texts that were sent to Kelly after the alleged rape.

    2. That women need to be safe. Bad things can happen anyway, but we need to make decisions that do not put us at risk. That is just common sense, not blame.

    Anyway, it is moot. The courts have exhonorated Kelly. Now, it remains to be seen if he gets his job back. If he doesn't, maybe he should sue.
  15. WindSpirit

    WindSpirit OmnipresentAdmeanistrator

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Messages:
    7,938
    Funny how a "separate" thing was being discussed while rape in general was branded off topic in this thread. :rofl:

    BTW, including that "separate" thing in a thread about rape accusations does make it seem like it's about judgement and blame, and that's why many people have taken it as such.
  16. cruisin

    cruisin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    17,390
    I disagree. We can discuss rape and still discuss ways to lessen our vulnerability. Women and men never deserve to be raped. Nor should they ever be blamed for being raped. However, it behooves us to keep ourselves safe. There are things we can do to lessen our vulnerability. By discussing those things, we do not assign blame, we offer suggestions for limiting putting yourself in an unsafe position. As I said, bad things can happen regardless of the precautions we take. But we should still take them.

    That said, I think this discussion would have been different if this woman seemed more credible. I hate to doubt the victim. But her actions, especially after the alleged rape, seemed very questionable. Clearly the courts agree with that. As much as women can be raped, women can also lie. We may never know exactly what happened here. But, it seems that, in this case the victim is Kelly.
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2012
  17. Andora

    Andora Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2002
    Messages:
    10,632
    Crusin, I get that you're not trying to assign blame TO women who, in your view, "don't take care of themselves," but it still takes blame away from the actual attackers.

    In general, I'd agree, but considering even in here people were immediately suspicious, I wonder if his reputation really is THAT damaged-- in this case, anyways. An untrue rape accusation is a very damaging thing.
  18. cruisin

    cruisin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    17,390
  19. cruisin

    cruisin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    17,390
    Andora, it is what I've been saying. You just can't seem to get it through your little head. Stop leaving nasty, ignorant rep messages. I don't care if you agree with me. I don't care if you don't like me. But, behave like an adult. Stop telling me what I really mean. Put me back on ignore.

    So, let me ask you. When I respond to your comments am I asking for your ugly, obnoxious comments? Or is that totally your responsibility? You like to hide behind the rep option. You twist opinions to serve your own warped interpretation. You have no interest in what I actually mean, you simply like to attack me for everything I say.
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2012
  20. Beefcake

    Beefcake Guest

    Fixed. (Sorry.) This was a false report, clearly now. And I look forward to this woman's name and other dirty laundry (including, perhaps, that she never really did get pregnant) being released. Kelly had to endure some dirt digging, and you know what, he came up very clean. Her turn.

    Too bad she won't be charged with a false report, though, but at least her reputation can be tarnished as retribution to the damage she caused Kelly and - importantly - people who truly have been sexually assaulted and need their claims to be trusted.
  21. Beefcake

    Beefcake Guest

    :sekret: What's the over/under that buzzard Gloria Allred be calling a press conference by week's end to announce she's representing "this brave victim standing beside me"? And just in time ... the bones from Allred's last meal, er "case," are probably picked white clean, by now.
  22. Karina1974

    Karina1974 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    2,574
    I agree. And your wish is the NY Post's command (with photo):

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/kelly_cleared_FOBlFSHbhcWQLIpc0fax8L

  23. Anita18

    Anita18 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2001
    Messages:
    11,058
    That was the clincher for me personally. You can take someone back to your office for some shady reason and still be raped, I have no doubts about that. But to continue sexting him after even a date rape? Hellooo, reasonable doubt.
  24. Rex

    Rex Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Messages:
    25,850
    I'm glad Kelly isn't being prosecuted, but the damage remains. There will always be those who actually think that he did it.
  25. Sasha'sSpins

    Sasha'sSpins Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2006
    Messages:
    3,726
    Um thanks I guess. English is not my first language but I do the best I can. No one is perfect. :rolleyes:

    If he can prove his reputation has been damaged by a false report from this alleged 'victim' I hope he can sue that woman for damages.
  26. cruisin

    cruisin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    17,390
    I am glad that Kelly has been cleared. I hope that this does not continue to damage his life. I do hope that he sues her or that there are some serious consequences for this woman. Not just because of the harm she has caused for an innocent man, but because she has contributed to the problem of women not being believed when they report rape.

    Interesting that they did not release her name, initially. Now that Kelly has been cleared, I guess it's fair game. Maybe that is her consequence, her name becoming public.
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2012
  27. Aceon6

    Aceon6 Get off my lawn

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    6,049
    In my state, names of sexual assault victims are not released. Since there was no assault, the record can be opened. Guess she didn't think about that part when she filed.
  28. GarrAarghHrumph

    GarrAarghHrumph I can kill you with my brain

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2001
    Messages:
    15,996
  29. MacMadame

    MacMadame Internet Beyotch

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    15,956
  30. Civic

    Civic New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Messages:
    6,262
    I hope not. A lot of legitimate rape cases aren't prosecuted because the D.A. doesn't think he or she can obtain a conviction. The victims didn't lie about their attacks but they were under the influence of drugs/alcohol and their memories are hazy or they didn't report the rape right away so there isn't any physical evidence. I don't want those women to not report their rapes for fear of the rapist suing them. Do you?

    P.S. I'm not saying this is what happened in Kelly's case.
  31. BigB08822

    BigB08822 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2003
    Messages:
    20,745
    But if it can be proven that she filed a false report, shouldn't he sue her? I understand you don't want women afraid to come forward but you can't allow women free range to report false rapes just because they have regret or got caught in an affair. What message is that sending? Sometimes people are so worried about protecting future rape victims that they forget there are other victims (wrong accused), too.
  32. Japanfan

    Japanfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2002
    Messages:
    12,772
    I don't know if he can sue her.

    It's important to note out that false rape accusations are rare in comparison to the the number of actual rapes that are never reported. Interestingly, they do get a lot of press and IMO that press tends to trivialize the occurrence and seriousness of rape.

    It is very stupid to advance a false rape charge because it usually doesn't work.
  33. Angelskates

    Angelskates Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Messages:
    12,791
    Is she being charged?
  34. cruisin

    cruisin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    17,390
    No, that would be horrible. But, what you are saying and what BigB08822 says, below, are both valid. If someone is victimized, there should be consequences. And while I would not want a situation where future rape victims are afraid to come forward because a DA feels there is not enough to prosecute, is it fair for this woman to get away with what she has done? I think that she has caused damage to future rape victims. By lying, she effects the credibility of women who are actually raped. This is such an ugly situation.

  35. MacMadame

    MacMadame Internet Beyotch

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    15,956
    Yeah, there should be consequences, but why is it always: he should sue her! The legal system is good for some things but it's not the cure for everything.

    Anyway, the story linked above is very clear that she won't be charged because she's sticking to her story that she was too drunk to give consent. Note that she isn't saying that Kelly violently raped her, but that he took advantage of her not being in full control of her faculties (one of the scenarios we discussed here).

    There is no way that can ever be disproven so there is no way she'll be prosecuted for filing a false police report. Particularly as one of the interviewed police officers said something along the lines of "she thinks she's telling the truth". As in, they don't think she's lying on purpose for malicious motives but telling her version of events, which may or may not match what other people would say happened if they had been there, but it's her reality that she firmly believes in.

    This is one reason why I said it's dumb to have sex with someone you don't know very well if one or more of you have been drinking. Maybe at the time she was a full participant or maybe she wasn't and he took advantage of that. Maybe he was too drunk to realize she wasn't really into it. But, if he'd decided not to have sex with her because they were both drunk, he wouldn't be in this mess and the same with her. If she had a general rule: I don't have sex with strangers when I'm drunk, she wouldn't now be in hot water with her boyfriend and have people all over the country saying bad things about her.

    Which are consequences, Brian. And they are "punishment fits the crime" consequences too. Suing would just waste the court's time and everyone's money and keep this in the news longer, which I'm pretty sure Kelly doesn't want. He can get satisfaction from the police saying there was no crime and from the fact that she now has no credibility and a tattered reputation. Why can't that be enough? I bet it is for him.
  36. BigB08822

    BigB08822 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2003
    Messages:
    20,745
    I don't think he should sue her for a lot of money or anything, but suing her is probably the only way to assure she is held responsible for her actions in a court of law. I suppose the DA could decide to prosecute her on their own if they feel she filed a false report but I doubt there is any evidence it was a false report vs. not enough evidence to prove rape. I think most of us feel it was a false report, and I am sure the police feel the same way but proving it is another thing. Anyway, since criminal charges are very unlikely, he can sue her and make sure she is held accountable. It doesn't even need to be about money. On the other hand, he did lose time at work and what if he wasn't paid? What if, being somewhat of a public figure, he had some kind of sponsorship deals? Commercials lined up? He could have lost a lot of potential income.

    I am sorry but I don't think the fact that people are talking about her is consequence enough. Would she have been satisfied if he was tried and convicted and the judge said "well, you lost your job and everyone knows you are a rapist, that is punishment enough, go back to your life." Hell no. And don't even tell me one crime is worse than the other, as far as I am concerned ruining someone's life is ruining someone's life.

    I still am baffled at this whole idea that she has a fuzzy memory which therefore must be rape. Despite her 3 months worth of texting him about meeting again. Did she suddenly remember that she didn't remember? I don't understand and it is clearly not true. She got caught in an affair, she may or may not be pregnant from that affair and now she is trying to play the victim to keep her boyfriend's love. If his memory is fuzzy did they rape each other? Come to think of it, I think I have been raped a few times in my life going by that description. There is a huge difference between having sex with a passed out person and having sex with a drunk person. Drunk people, drunk strangers, have sex ALL THE TIME. It isn't rape, no matter how much you regret it. She is responsible for how much she drinks and her actions, how can he ever know her level of intoxication unless she is to the point where she is passed out?
    Last edited: Feb 11, 2012
    millyskate and (deleted member) like this.
  37. cruisin

    cruisin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    17,390
    I have a hard time believing that she thinks she's telling the truth. If the texts that were exchanged between she and Kelly, after the night in question, were as "flirtatious" as they are said to be, I think she knew exactly what she was doing. If not for those texts, I could buy into her claim that she was taken advantage of. But, if that were the case, why did she pursue him afterward?
  38. MacMadame

    MacMadame Internet Beyotch

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    15,956
    And how exactly has Kelly's life been ruined? He still has his job, he seems to still have his fans and the media has been pretty kind to him. Basically, he was inconvenienced. And had his private business spread around. Neither of those is any fun but that's far from having a ruined life and, as far as I can tell, I don't think he's even lost any money.

    Without damages, there is nothing to sue for.

    I don't. But I have a lot of family members whose grasp on reality is thin. ;)

    Seriously, memory is a funny thing. If she only had the most fuzzy of memories than it's very easy for her to, over time, go back and "remake" her memories. People do it all the time. Watch how someone you know well tells a story over the course of a decade or so and see how that same story changes over time.

    Also think about the whole (now discredited) recovered memories movement and how people were able to plant memories into functioning adult of childhood abuse that never happened.

    I can totally see her going over and over her memories of that night and gradually filling in the blanks and making them over to be something more palatable to herself. People do it all the time.
  39. BigB08822

    BigB08822 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2003
    Messages:
    20,745
    If I shoot you and you live, does that mean I get away with it? What if I shoot at you and miss? You have no idea what his life is like now so I find it very naive to assume he will just go back to normal and never face any problems after being labeled a rapist ON THE NATIONAL LEVEL. I wasn't aware you had access to his bank account, paychecks and other information about his business ventures. :rolleyes:
  40. BigB08822

    BigB08822 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2003
    Messages:
    20,745
    What a horrible example. You do realize that as time goes on your memory gets WORSE. After years, any "filling in" you have done is almost surely false. Our memories, no matter how real they seem, are often WRONG.