LGBT Rapists

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Bwahahaha! No snowflake, that is not required. Kobe Bryant was charged with rape for ejaculating on a girl's face. No penetration at all.

Do you realize every time you post, you're wrong? Literally every time. It's bad enough that your so damn dumb, but the fact that you're too lazy to do even a basic Google search before opening your big mouth is inexcusable.

Penetration is required in Washington state for it to be rape. What Kobe Bryant did somewhere else is irrelevant to the case at hand.

Or are you simply unaware that criminal laws are set at the state level and can be unique for each individual state?

 

[whitehall]

Lefties condemned the Catholic Church for the sexual abuse of mostly young boys but failed to mention the inconvenient fact that homosexual priests were responsible for the abuse. The left went crazy and vowed to sue the venerable Boy Scouts (BSA) into bankruptcy when the BSA won the decision to discriminate against hiring overt homosexuals to supervise young boys. The sodomite lobby is a powerful influence among mostly democrat administrations.

 

[P@triot]

Kobe Bryant sexual assault case - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

When the officers told Bryant that she had taken an exam that yielded physical evidence, such as semen, Bryant admitted to having sexual intercourse with her, but stated that the sex was consensual.

Bwahahaha!! Dumb fuck, she too admitted the sexual intercourse was consensual. It was him ejaculating on her face (against her will) that was the cause of the allegations.

So like I said, why are you so damn dumb? Why? You comment on everything, but know nothing. Just stop commenting on shit you know nothing about. You don't know the law. Period.

 

[P@triot]

Penetration is required in Washington state for it to be rape. What Kobe Bryant did somewhere else is irrelevant to the case at hand.

Or are you simply unaware that criminal laws are set at the state level and can be unique for each individual state?

Hahaha! Way to skirt around the issue.

I'm 100% aware of laws varying state-to-state, snowflake. I'm also aware that if a man touches you when you don't want him touching you, a crime has been committed. You've been violated. Depending on how far it goes, it's anywhere from "sexual battery/assault" to "rape".

You can sit down now, clown. You're dismissed.

 

[P@triot]

I don't know what about this is sending you off of the rails, but from my perspective if you're going to take the stand to defend WHY you murdered someone, that would be a good time to tell the court and jury that you were raped by the person you murdered.

Interesting that you've jumped into a thread I've created (uninvited), are losing your shit about it, and have "off the rails" on your mind. Almost like your textbook projecting or something.

I'm not the least bit "off the rails". Nor am I claiming "justifiable homicide". I'm merely pointing out a fact. The sick LGBT community continues to rape and assault people, and people like you and g5000 try to defend it. It's indefensible. Which causes a rational person to ask, "what would make these two whack jobs try so hard to defend the indefensible". The logical conclusion is that you're either cross-dressing assaulters yourself or have someone very close to you that is.

 

[P@triot]

Wrong again, tard.

Kobe Bryant was charged with rape because he had intercourse with her.

After bending her over a chair and fucking her, he asked if he could cum on her face.

Full penetration, dipshit.

Except that she never claimed that the intercourse was forced, you low-IQ imbecile

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Hahaha! Way to skirt around the issue.

I'm 100% aware of laws varying state-to-state, snowflake. I'm also aware that if a man touches you when you don't want him touching you, a crime has been committed. You've been violated. Depending on how far it goes, it's anywhere from "sexual battery/assault" to "rape".

You can sit down now, clown. You're dismissed.

Your use of the term 'touch' so loosely to save face is noted. If you knew that the laws vary from state to state you certainly failed to display that knowledge in this thread. You also might try reading the ENTIRE statute instead of the parts that you erroneously believe support your argument.

I don't know if there currently exists a law that prohibits obtaining consensual sex using deceit, but a fraud statute probably would fit better than anything you've stated. Simple touch, even of a non-sexual nature that is unwanted can be a crime but your definition lacks two thirds of the legal definition in Washington state for rape - penetration and force.

These states do criminalize deceit/fraud as a means of obtaining consent:
State Penal Codes

Just because you made a mistake is no reason to be embarrassed but acting like a jackass to other people who didn't make the same mistake you did is just rude.

 

[g5000]

Except that she never claimed that the intercourse was forced, you low-IQ imbecile

Boy, you really like to double down on your idiocy when you are wrong, don't you.

The woman DID claim the sex was forced.

From the link I provided earlier:

The evidence recovered by police included the T-shirt that Bryant wore the night of the incident, which had three small stains of the accuser's blood on it. The smudge was verified to be the accuser's blood by DNA testing and probably was not menstrual blood because the accuser said she had her period two weeks earlier. It was revealed that Bryant leaned the woman over a chair to have sex with her, which allegedly caused the bleeding. This was the sex act in question, as the accuser claims she told Bryant to stop, but he would not, and Bryant claims he stopped after asking if he could ejaculate on her face.


Now, do you want to TRIPLE down, tard?


.

 

[g5000]

Interesting that you've jumped into a thread I've created (uninvited), are losing your shit about it, and have "off the rails" on your mind. Almost like your textbook projecting or something.

I'm not the least bit "off the rails". Nor am I claiming "justifiable homicide". I'm merely pointing out a fact. The sick LGBT community continues to rape and assault people, and people like you and g5000 try to defend it. It's indefensible. Which causes a rational person to ask, "what would make these two whack jobs try so hard to defend the indefensible". The logical conclusion is that you're either cross-dressing assaulters yourself or have someone very close to you that is.

Fuck you, tard. I'm not defending rape by anyone.

Have you EVER made a truthful post?

The murderer in the OP was not raped. That's a fact.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Interesting that you've jumped into a thread I've created (uninvited), are losing your shit about it, and have "off the rails" on your mind. Almost like your textbook projecting or something.

I found your thread interesting because not even 30 minutes prior I had just watched a 48 Hours episode featuring the story that is the topic of your thread. As far as I know, an invitation is not needed to comment on a thread although there are some people here who have been asked NOT to comment because they are unable to be civil.

And if anyone is projecting, that would be you. I am at least familiar with our legal system here in Washington state and work in a field that requires me to have a certain depth of understanding of our laws (RCW/WAC) in order to do the work that I do.

I'm not the least bit "off the rails". Nor am I claiming "justifiable homicide". I'm merely pointing out a fact. The sick LGBT community [snipped]

You're espousing an opinion, not fact.

The sick LGBT community continues to rape and assault people, and people like you and g5000 try to defend it. It's indefensible. Which causes a rational person to ask, "what would make these two whack jobs try so hard to defend the indefensible". The logical conclusion is that you're either cross-dressing assaulters yourself or have someone very close to you that is.

Sexual assault and rape are indefensible, on that we agree. But it seems you took exception to me pointing out that in the 48 Hours news show and during the defendant's testimony, he never claimed that he was raped, that's something that you came up with according to your interpretation of the alleged definition of 'rape'.

Being outraged and angry after having been deceived or tricked into doing something that one would never do or that one may find to be reprehensible or vile is understandable however the way you presented your argument was as if this is somehow pertinent to the defendant murdering the victim. You say not, but what was the point of you claiming something to be true that no evidence had been presented to support?

I do not support in any shape or form, people using deceit or fraud to coerce others into doing things they otherwise would not do, including engaging in sexual activities. The difference between you and me though is that you have some type of compulsion to ascribe this type of behavior to only (or rather all to hear you tell it) members of the LGBTQ community. People use deceit to trick others into having sex with them all of the time - married individuals pretending to be single knowing that the other person wouldn't be involved with them if they knew they were married, under aged girls pretending to be old enough to give consent when they're not and their partner could land in jail for engaging in "statutory" rape, etc.

People tell me all kind of things and one thing I learned a long time ago is that a lot of the angst that occurs when guys find themselves in a situation of that nature is not due to revulsion, it's more due to them being unable to mentally reconcile having enjoying it.

 

[g5000]

Bwahahaha! No snowflake, that is not required. Kobe Bryant was charged with rape for ejaculating on a girl's face. No penetration at all.

You can't even admit there was penetration after proven you are wrong, can you, tard.

 

[g5000]

This whole Kobe Bryant red herring sure blew up in P@triot's face.

As has been shown, penetration is necessary for a rape charge. The man in the OP was not raped. He was not penetrated by the transgender victim he kiled.

Kobe Bryant DID penetrate the woman who accused him of rape.

HUGE difference. Apples and oranges.

 

[P@triot]

I'm not defending rape by anyone.

The fuck you're not. That's all you're doing. And it's pretty evident why.

The murderer in the OP was not raped. That's a fact.

I rest my case. The murderer did not want a man touching him. The murderer did not invite a man to touch him. And yet, that's exactly what a man did.

Me thinks G-string does a considerable amount of cross-dressing and raping in his spare time

 

[P@triot]

Sexual assault and rape are indefensible, on that we agree. But it seems you took exception to me pointing out that in the 48 Hours news show and during the defendant's testimony, he never claimed that he was raped, that's something that you came up with according to your interpretation of the alleged definition of 'rape'.

And I didn't "take offense" to that in the least. As a matter of fact, I'm not even arguing that. Although it may have been, I'm unaware of it being brought up in the trial.

That doesn't mean it's not a fact. If it wasn't brought up, it just means it wasn't part of the defense's strategy. Likely because the victim found it completely humiliating and wanted to avoid it.

 

[P@triot]

Being outraged and angry after having been deceived or tricked into doing something that one would never do or that one may find to be reprehensible or vile is understandable however the way you presented your argument was as if this is somehow pertinent to the defendant murdering the victim.

Not in the least. You read what you wanted to read, rather that what was actually written. If I believed it was justifiable homicide, I would have stated that. I'm not one for tap-dancing. I state exactly what I think emphatically.

My point was clear: I'm tired of these LGBT sickos raping people and it is time they start getting prosecuted for this shit.

 

[P@triot]

Bryant leaned the woman over a chair to have sex with her, which allegedly caused the bleeding. This was the sex act in question, as the accuser claims she told Bryant to stop, but he would not, and Bryant claims he stopped after asking if he could ejaculate on her face.

Bwahahaha! You literally just proved that the intercourse was consensual. She told him to stop - she didn't say "no" to start. Bryant did in fact stop at that point. But came on her face without her consent.

And speaking of which, I just came on your face for like the third time in this thread alone. Better wipe that shit off, G-string.

 

[P@triot]

People tell me all kind of things and one thing I learned a long time ago is that a lot of the angst that occurs when guys find themselves in a situation of that nature is not due to revulsion, it's more due to them being unable to mentally reconcile having enjoying it.

That's the left's favorite line. "Bitch wanted to get raped...she was enjoying it". "Dude wanted to be grabbed by that other dude, he's just feeling ashamed for having enjoyed it".

All rapists (and sexual deviants) want society to believe that they were in the right, and the victim was getting off. They were doing the victim a favor. And it also gets them off knowing the allegation is gross as fuck (which deviants get off on).

You can tell yourself that dude was enjoying it all you want, his actions speak much louder than your lies. He became a homicidal maniac at that moment (despite a life of never having killed) because he was so disturbed/distraught over being raped.

 

[P@triot]

People tell me all kind of things and one thing I learned a long time ago is that a lot of the angst that occurs when guys find themselves in a situation of that nature is not due to revulsion, it's more due to them being unable to mentally reconcile having enjoying it.

Seriously folks, imagine thinking you "learned" that victims of rape actually enjoyed being raped. That one sentence right there tells you everything you need to know about the left and their disturbing minds. Everything.

 

[The Original Tree]

Why is Kobe Bryant even being discussed in this thread when the topic is the sexual deviancy of homosexuals-pedophiles?

 

[g5000]

The fuck you're not. That's all you're doing. And it's pretty evident why.

I rest my case. The murderer did not want a man touching him. The murderer did not invite a man to touch him. And yet, that's exactly what a man did.

Me thinks G-string does a considerable amount of cross-dressing and raping in his spare time

There was no rape, dumbass.

You seem to be obsessed with transgender people. You took a murder victim and turned him into an imaginary rapist. You need to take this psychosexual obsession of yours to a doctor.