Aba & Preach: leave those cac hoes alone
- Thread starter Quek9
- Start date
On July 26th, 2017, in a pretrial hearing for a criminal case against USC student Armaan Premjee, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael Pastor told prosecutors they had not met the “minimal” burden of “reasonable suspicion,” and accordingly tossed out the case. Security footage from a nightclub showing the rape accuser leading Premjee by the hand into a car and to her hotel room played a substantial role.
Judge Pastor went on to say:
Eight months later, USC’s Office of Equity & Diversity (OED) found Premjee guilty anyway and expelled him. He had six credits left before graduation. In addition to disregarding the video evidence, USC did not allow his attorney and advisor Harland Braun to speak during administrative hearings. When Braun attempted to anyway USC showed him the door and, per a USC statement, told him to instead “send another lawyer from his firm or another individual of his client’s choosing” if Premjee wished to continue having an advisor.
This is the same USC where Title IX Coordinator Gretchen Means remarked to a colleague “Does that college motherfucker know who I am?” when another student she expelled initiated an appeal. Means’ bias was also a substantial factor in yet another case in which USC was ordered to pay $112,000 in attorney’s fees.
Now, following a hearing on December 18th, USC has reinstated Premjee. Remarkably, this reinstatement was in fact initiated by USC. The Daily Trojan explains:
Those “recent California court rulings” referred to are almost certainly the Court of Appeals ruling against USC in another case a mere seven days prior in which the Court reversed the Superior Court’s decision, granted John Doe’s writ of administrative mandate and – as in the other Doe v. USC case – awarded attorney’s costs.
Can USC be taught to play fair? Or will they, à la their neighbor California State University, soon post litigation reports in their online Board of Trustees meeting records highlighting the excessive spike in the costs of defending litigation by students wrongly disciplined for sexual misconduct?
This case is in our Legal Database.
Judge Pastor went on to say:
Eight months later, USC’s Office of Equity & Diversity (OED) found Premjee guilty anyway and expelled him. He had six credits left before graduation. In addition to disregarding the video evidence, USC did not allow his attorney and advisor Harland Braun to speak during administrative hearings. When Braun attempted to anyway USC showed him the door and, per a USC statement, told him to instead “send another lawyer from his firm or another individual of his client’s choosing” if Premjee wished to continue having an advisor.
This is the same USC where Title IX Coordinator Gretchen Means remarked to a colleague “Does that college motherfucker know who I am?” when another student she expelled initiated an appeal. Means’ bias was also a substantial factor in yet another case in which USC was ordered to pay $112,000 in attorney’s fees.
Now, following a hearing on December 18th, USC has reinstated Premjee. Remarkably, this reinstatement was in fact initiated by USC. The Daily Trojan explains:
Those “recent California court rulings” referred to are almost certainly the Court of Appeals ruling against USC in another case a mere seven days prior in which the Court reversed the Superior Court’s decision, granted John Doe’s writ of administrative mandate and – as in the other Doe v. USC case – awarded attorney’s costs.
Can USC be taught to play fair? Or will they, à la their neighbor California State University, soon post litigation reports in their online Board of Trustees meeting records highlighting the excessive spike in the costs of defending litigation by students wrongly disciplined for sexual misconduct?
This case is in our Legal Database.
Just Wow. That is why I am hard on these hoes.On July 26th, 2017, in a pretrial hearing for a criminal case against USC student Armaan Premjee, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael Pastor told prosecutors they had not met the “minimal” burden of “reasonable suspicion,” and accordingly tossed out the case. Security footage from a nightclub showing the rape accuser leading Premjee by the hand into a car and to her hotel room played a substantial role.
Judge Pastor went on to say:
Eight months later, USC’s Office of Equity & Diversity (OED) found Premjee guilty anyway and expelled him. He had six credits left before graduation. In addition to disregarding the video evidence, USC did not allow his attorney and advisor Harland Braun to speak during administrative hearings. When Braun attempted to anyway USC showed him the door and, per a USC statement, told him to instead “send another lawyer from his firm or another individual of his client’s choosing” if Premjee wished to continue having an advisor.
This is the same USC where Title IX Coordinator Gretchen Means remarked to a colleague “Does that college motherfucker know who I am?” when another student she expelled initiated an appeal. Means’ bias was also a substantial factor in yet another case in which USC was ordered to pay $112,000 in attorney’s fees.
Now, following a hearing on December 18th, USC has reinstated Premjee. Remarkably, this reinstatement was in fact initiated by USC. The Daily Trojan explains:
Those “recent California court rulings” referred to are almost certainly the Court of Appeals ruling against USC in another case a mere seven days prior in which the Court reversed the Superior Court’s decision, granted John Doe’s writ of administrative mandate and – as in the other Doe v. USC case – awarded attorney’s costs.
Can USC be taught to play fair? Or will they, à la their neighbor California State University, soon post litigation reports in their online Board of Trustees meeting records highlighting the excessive spike in the costs of defending litigation by students wrongly disciplined for sexual misconduct?
This case is in our Legal Database.
I agree. Don’t go home with drunk bitches you met at the bar. No matter how tempting it is.
Ok, here's what pisses me off about these exchanges after someone has been exonerated. Why in the fuck are they still protecting that dirty ho's identity? That slut needs to be dragged. Dude's shit is all over front street and he's been proven innocent. Why can't we know who this ho is?!?
Apparently he didn't use enough of this.
Former Baylor fraternity president gets no prison time in plea deal on rape charges
That means if the 24-year-old successfully completes three years of deferred probation and pays a $400 fine, his criminal record will be wiped clean of the charge, CNN affiliate KWKT said.
https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-baylor-frat-rape-accusation-20181211-story.html
In the Texas case, Jacob Walter Anderson, 23, had been charged with
sexually assaulting a 19-year-old fellow Baylor student
outside a 2016 fraternity party. The woman told police she was given punch
and became disoriented. She said Anderson led her behind a tent and raped her while choking her.
Former Baylor fraternity president gets no prison time in plea deal on rape charges
That means if the 24-year-old successfully completes three years of deferred probation and pays a $400 fine, his criminal record will be wiped clean of the charge, CNN affiliate KWKT said.
https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-baylor-frat-rape-accusation-20181211-story.html
In the Texas case, Jacob Walter Anderson, 23, had been charged with
sexually assaulting a 19-year-old fellow Baylor student
outside a 2016 fraternity party. The woman told police she was given punch
and became disoriented. She said Anderson led her behind a tent and raped her while choking her.
Last edited:
these niggaahs love cac hoes
Not everyone
Amen. Fuck believe her. I know better.
Because it wouldn't help resolve the situation nor would it result in any real measurable levels of "justice" for the formerly accused man.
Think about it. All it would end up with is MORE divisive issues and rhetoric from men and women on both sides of this issue.
On one side, people like yourself:
- Calls for "dragging" this woman.
- Publically shaming/harassing her.
- Calls for her to be "cancelled" by society in general.
- Put pressure on her employers to fire her. (If she works)
- Calls for her to "pay" for her crime for the sake of public outrage and not true justice.
And on the opposite side:
- Demands for women to be protected from harassment and shaming from men.
- Louder demands for women to be believed when they accuse men of sexual violence.
- Accusations that the law doesn't protect women who have been the victims of sexual assault or harassment equally and fairly.
- Providing feminists with more evidence that men are hateful, violent and vengeful predators who want to harass and hurt women.
- Making it more difficult for men to receive fair trials when they are charged with sexual assault charges.
Bottom line:
Dude, you're a smart guy. And while you yourself would never do it, you know that there are plenty of unstable individuals out there who are fully capable of harming, hurting or even killing women with little to no provocation. Making this woman's identity public might be just the opportunity for them to act on their impulses. Which (in the end) would result with a man STILL going to jail for harming a woman....
Because it wouldn't help resolve the situation nor would it result in any real measurable levels of "justice" for the formerly accused man.
Think about it. All it would end up with is MORE divisive issues and rhetoric from men and women on both sides of this issue.
On one side, people like yourself:
- Calls for "dragging" this woman.
- Publically shaming/harassing her.
- Calls for her to be "cancelled" by society in general.
- Put pressure on her employers to fire her. (If she works)
- Calls for her to "pay" for her crime for the sake of public outrage and not true justice.
And on the opposite side:
- Demands for women to be protected from harassment and shaming from men.
- Louder demands for women to be believed when they accuse men of sexual violence.
- Accusations that the law doesn't protect women who have been the victims of sexual assault or harassment equally and fairly.
- Providing feminists with more evidence that men are hateful, violent and vengeful predators who want to harass and hurt women.
- Making it more difficult for men to receive fair trials when they are charged with sexual assault charges.
Bottom line:
Dude, you're a smart guy. And while you yourself would never do it, you know that there are plenty of unstable individuals out there who are fully capable of harming, hurting or even killing women with little to no provocation. Making this woman's identity public might be just the opportunity for them to act on their impulses. Which (in the end) would result with a man STILL going to jail for harming a woman....
Interesting response but I find it hard to believe you actually put stock in that theory. This is nothing but an elementary exercise in balance. (the very symbol of justice). Everything you said beneath the words "And on the opposite side:" apply to the INNOCENT. There are two parties in this dispute: The innocent and the guilty. The guilty forfeits the protections of society and the opinions of high minded opinion makers and academics. The INNOCENT are inversely afforded the benefit of the doubt, they're entitled to have have their lives and reputations repaired. That man is innocent and the woman is guilty. A price needs to be paid. The man has already started paying it but its not paid in full. Who do you think needs to finish paying the bill? Even if in the eyes of the law her crime is minimal, making an example of every woman that lodges a false accusation can serve as a deterrent for the next woman that tries it. It may very well save an innocent guy that isn't lucky enough to have a surveillance tape to exonerate him. I don't see how you oppose that.
Further, I would suggest keeping both parties out of the press. So that if the justice system found the accused guilty or innocent, the accused can at least say they had du-process. Sometimes even when these cats are found innocent their lives are ruined because the negative sensationalism of the headlines are not as fervent for their innocence as for when they are accused, this way if there is truly a rape, the victim can be allowed to correct a mistake and save face for everyone until the truly guilty is convicted, the accuser can be protected even more. But all District Attorneys operate off of sensationalism and the Court of Public Opinion, so it's not likely this change would be made across the board.
I see what you're saying.
And while I can agree with most of it, I simply don't agree with HOW you're calling for the punishment of the guilty.
In the eyes of the law, this woman's crime is not minimal. The laws in every State of the Union take falsifying a criminal complain VERY seriously.
Ultimately, this woman's crimes and punishment will be handled privately. Also, in addition to possibly serving jail time, she will probably be ordered to make financial restitution to this man and to the state as well.
Have faith, my friend...
i dont think the chick was white.
her name suggests she is indian or pakistani etc.
dude knew she was drunk, his frat bros. wouldnt let him fuck her at their house, he but CHANCED it anyway.
the chick was high AND drunk, AND embarrassed. she was SO drunk she damn near died.
he DID NOT drug her.
unfortunately a drunk woman is considered unable to consent to sex, EVEN IF SHE RAPES A DUDE.
im glad it worked out, but dude did this to himself.
never fuck around with jail bait.
her name suggests she is indian or pakistani etc.
dude knew she was drunk, his frat bros. wouldnt let him fuck her at their house, he but CHANCED it anyway.
the chick was high AND drunk, AND embarrassed. she was SO drunk she damn near died.
he DID NOT drug her.
unfortunately a drunk woman is considered unable to consent to sex, EVEN IF SHE RAPES A DUDE.
im glad it worked out, but dude did this to himself.
never fuck around with jail bait.
The woman was Indian....
‘I Did Not Rape Arshia,’ States USC Student Accused of Sexually Assaulting Intoxicated Woman – Charges Dropped by Judge
www.indiawest.com
‘I Did Not Rape Arshia,’ States USC Student Accused of Sexually Assaulting Intoxicated Woman – Charges Dropped by Judge
‘I Did Not Rape Arshia,’ States USC Student Accused of Sexually Assaulting Intoxicated Woman – Charges Dropped by Judge
Indian American University of Southern California student Armaan Premjee, who has been accused of sexually assaulting an intoxicated young woman, categorically stated he did not rape her.
I agree with this completely.
I hope you're right. But I wouldn't bet on it. All the world will remember is a nasty, oversexed coolie that came to America to get some easy, vulnerable Cali ass and an anonymous girl that was just young and immature. End of story.I see what you're saying.
And while I can agree with most of it, I simply don't agree with HOW you're calling for the punishment of the guilty.
In the eyes of the law, this woman's crime is not minimal. The laws in every State of the Union take falsifying a criminal complain VERY seriously.
Ultimately, this woman's crimes and punishment will be handled privately. Also, in addition to possibly serving jail time, she will probably be ordered to make financial restitution to this man and to the state as well.
Have faith, my friend...
Similar threads
