Slashdot Mirror
Security Researcher Attacked While At Conference
New submitter fineous fingers writes "U.S. computer security researcher Georgia Weidman has revealed on her blog that a fellow speaker at the Confidence security conference in Krakow, Poland attempted to rape her. The attack occurred in her hotel room in the early morning hours of 28 May. Luckily, Georgia was able to fend her attacker off by clocking him in the head with a coffee mug. I was personally at this conference, but was staying at a different hotel and found out about it after the fact. It was Georgia herself that told me after she gave her fantastic talk on Leveraging Mobile Devices on Pentests. That she was able to give a flawless presentation later that day and had the courage to talk about the attack on her blog shows how awesome she really is."
If you were going to make a court case out of it, posting your evidence to a blog immediately might hurt your case more than help it. It's true that this is a very public accusation without much to substantiate it, but I don't think it's completely unreasonable to want to warn people without hurting your own chances for justice in your particular case. That public shaming requires both an unsubstantiated claim and people who take that as fact.
And how does that prove HE injured her?
She presented no evidence.
Say what? According to the account she wrote on her blog, she had a black eye. Something physical went down. Has the guy she's accused written up any rebuttal to her charges?
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Let none denigrate the usefulness of humble convention swag again.
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
He denies it. She presented no evidence. He presented none either, even though he is under no obligation to. No charges files. Her word against his.
Of course he denies it what is he going to say? "Yes I am a sexual predator"? There was plenty of evidence that something went down. There were bruises on both of their faces. Many of her items (that Gont took) were found in his room even after he denied having them. Polish Law Enforcement WAS contacted but decided not to take any action.
Look at his left eye: http://lh6.ggpht.com/-Vgd8jBxq8oo/Ua9HT0nPpuI/AAAAAAAAQ1k/oc6uKE5J9Bs/s800/_0272_confidence__M.jpg This was taken on the afternoon of the second day of the conference. The attack happened on the early morning of the first day. fingers
She did go to the police. Neither person involved was Polish so they were not interested. Fingers
"Innocent until proven guilty" applies only in court. Nobody is advocating throwing this guy in jail without a fair trial.
But she has the right to blog about being attacked, and I have the right to believe her based on my experience (that people with stories like that generally aren't making them up).
Luckily, Georgia was able to fend her attacker off by clocking him in the head with a coffee mug.
See? Java skill will always come in handy for the code warriors in every unexpected situation.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Of course he denies it what is he going to say? "Yes I am a sexual predator"? There was plenty of evidence that something went down. There were bruises on both of their faces. Many of her items (that Gont took) were found in his room even after he denied having them. Polish Law Enforcement WAS contacted but decided not to take any action.
Probably Polish LEOs decided that since she let him in her room in the wee hours of the morning, there is no way to determine what happened from there on.
Hence, the case devolves into a she said he said, and if she won't file official charges, and stay there long enough to see it through, they will decline to make an arrest. Its up to her to file formal charges.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
NO no no, there is no reason why you should feel ashamed for anything anyone else did.
It is as bad as people trying to make all white Americans feel bad because some shitty people kept slaves a couple hundred years ago, and pushed the natives off their land. If you personally did not do something bad, or through inaction allow something bad to happen, you have nothing to be ashamed of.
From victim of assault to stupid and ignorant. You claim to remove Bias, then subtly introducing yours.
How ignorant of empathy are you, Anon?
Okay, so at least now we have something to substantiate her claims. Shame this couldn't have been part of the summary.
I have no idea why I was modded down as a troll, all I did was point out that in the absence of evidence everyone is innocent until proven guilty and TFA contained no such evidence.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
As a male I feel ashamed that such a male exists among us.
That's muddle-headed thinking. Be proud or ashamed of your own actions, not those of strangers.
Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
I put that link in the summary. They took it out. Fingers
RTFA, dumbass. She did report it but the Polish police declined to file a report.
I come here to /. to read about computers, software, and technology in general.
Yet what do I actually encounter? Some article about a bunch of drama that allegedly took place at some obscure conference in eastern Europe a month ago.
But what's worse is reading through comments and encountering one like this one from "decora". Why is a comment talking about violently killing somebody, then butchering the victim's genitals, and finally mailing them to the victim's mother modded up to "5, Insightful"?
Come on. That's the kind of crap I expect to see modded up at a place like reddit. And that's exactly why I don't visit reddit, but come here instead. We shouldn't have to encounter nonsense submissions like this one, nor utterly stupid (if not outright disgusting) comments modded up so highly.
Can /. please go back to focusing on technology, rather than junk like this?
No one really knows how they'd handle such a situation until they are in it. Past thoughts and declarations might predispose an untrained person to a certain action, but when a harsh reality comes suddenly and unexpectedly it's all about instinct and fight or flight responses.
I've been enough dangerous situations to know that I'm neither a courageous man nor a coward, but simply a man. I saved a roofied woman from being raped by a group of strangers and have a heavily scared face to remind me of my moment of courage. On the other hand, I ran like hell when skinheads raided my friend's party with baseball bats and knives. I have the memory of standing over my friend's hospital bed as he was nursed back to health to remind me of my moment of cowardice.
The lady from the article is alive and was able to free herself from her attacker. That is what matters.
Why did he steal her property on the way out though? That doesn't fit.
I'm leaning very much towards her end of things at this stage. Rape is about power, taking her phone and passport as he left very much fits the profile.
I find every time they go running to the Internet instead of the cops to be suspect frankly, as I can accuse anybody of anything and so can you. .... if he did what she said she should have been on the phone to the cops not 10 minutes later, why wasn't she?
I don't know if you're illiterate, lazy, or just an ass -- but had you read the linked post, you would know that the very first thing she tried to do was contact the police, and she stuck at it for hours until she was able to get them to show up. Turns out, this can be difficult to accomplish late at night, in a foreign country where you don't speak the language, in a former Eastern Bloc country.
She was unable to get an outside line from her hotel room phone. The hotel desk clerk claimed not to understand English well enough to place the call when asked. Her own cell phone had been damaged in the attack; she eventually was able to have a friend contact the U.S. embassy, who were able to - finally - reach the Polish police.
~Idarubicin
You took the time to write that whole thing, but didn't even RTFA? She reported it to the police, and they weren't interested because neither were locals.
So, basically, your entire post is irrelevant.
Help I am stuck in a signature factory!
attempeted murder is attempetd murder, and self defense is self defense. why would i post someting so strong?
its called a "pre-emptive strike" against all the rape apologists on slashdot and in the tech "community" in general. hit them fast, hit them hard, hit them first. you either believe people have a right to defend themselves against a violent assault, or they dont. its not drama, its not a disagreement. its a fucking attempted murder at a security con.
if you dont want to talk about attempted murder in the "tech community" then go fucking read ars technica. you can find a great new review of the hottest new video game.
It's interesting that you said 'her word against his' instead of 'his word against hers'
Does this express a bias in favor of his point of view; his word against hers, that there was no attempted assault, burglary, or rape?
You read too much into it.
Her words came first (she called police) his reply came second (the police questioned him). Everything was chronological.
Yet you want to find some political motive there? Would you not also find reasons to complain if the chronological sequence was reversed?
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
From her blog (her post is long and detailed):
From his blog (he wrote very little):
What disturbs me here is the knee-jerk suggestion that she invented the story for some unspecified reason. Statistically, only a very small number of rape accusations turn out to be fabricated. Of course I don't know for sure what happened. I've never even heard of these people before. But based on the little evidence I have seen, I know who I believe.
Far be it from me to expect you to have read the article, but she did go to the police, they weren't interested, her next resort was the conference organisers they decided because security footage showed her letting him into her room that meant nothing could have happened, So after this she resorts to her blog, They both have injuries from the struggle, he stole her possessions, lied about it and then they were subsequently found in his room, all of which you'd know if you'd I don't know read about it, but you instant leap to disbelieve her is admirable, it will serve you well in the future, good luck with that.
A reasonable person would draw the conclusion that he must have injured her; if she was observed /not injured/, and he was observed not injured, prior to him entering her room.
And she and he were observed injured shortly afterwards.
Only unreasonable doubts could show otherwise.
in the absence of evidence everyone is innocent until proven guilty
You're a court? Unless you're a court, I don't see why you should bother with that. In objective reality, you're innocent if you do nothing wrong. This isn't quantum ethics where everything is okay until you get observed. I'm afraid that the scenario described is all too plausible. It's a pity, though - being as paranoid as I am, I'd probably keep a camera in the room, just to be sure. They build these babies really small nowadays. You never know when you might need evidence for something.
Ezekiel 23:20
It became assault when he did not stop when ordered to.
Two people go into a hotel room, apparently uninjured.
They subsequently leave the hotel room with documented physical injuries.
The physically weaker person provides a detailed account of their version of events, claiming that the physically stronger person attacked them, they were luckily able to fight off the stronger person and escape, but that the local (foreign) police did not pursue this case due to a lack of conclusive evidence.
The physically stronger person responds to these allegations with a blog post titled Lies, nuts, and the quest for attention, which focuses on ad hominem attacks and how very, very butthurt he is that people are even considering these allegations. The blog post does not provide any alternate explanation for the events that resulted in injuries to both parties, or any new information at all.
I'm having difficulty coming up with a rational explanation that doesn't include the stronger person being a predator who engineered a situation where they expected to face no consequences for their actions due to the victim being in an unfamiliar environment with limited support, the disinclination of local law enforcement to become involved in a dispute between foreign nationals, and engineered absence of conclusive evidence.
My opinion? I have no doubt that her story is substantively true. The argument that 'the polish police did not arrest me, so I must not have done it' is about as convincing as tissue paper to anyone who has seen the inconsistent results of even well-trained and well-equipped police forces-- if what we've seen so far is all he has to offer then he should be rightly shunned by the tech community and then some.
Given the alleged crime and narcissistic tone of the blog post, there are likely similar victims out there. Hopefully they will come forward as well.
"We have to go forth and crush every world view that doesn't believe in tolerance and free speech." - David Brin
Her word against his.
I've read her words and his blog and right now my money is on her story being true. She wasn't offended by him coming on to her, admits she was drinking, thought he was good looking and that she let him into her room. All things a liar would know undermines their story and would try to conceal or modulate.
If there was no attack then she put herself in jeopardy even reporting the incident. Something happened in that room that shook her up very badly and her actions and reactions were consistent with that mental state. Her telling of the story is a bit verbose but not grandiose.
In his blog he actually doesn't actually deny he attacked her. He implies she's a liar and mentally unbalanced, none of which comes across in her account of the incident. He also says he'll sue anyone who accuses him without proof, which seems a little defensive.
If her story is a blatant lie, how did she get the black eye? There were only two people in that room, the security tapes verify it was him, and he doesn't even admit he hit her. She admits she hit him with a coffee cup. And how did her stuff end up in his room?
So we have one party admitting to the facts in evidence and one suggesting the other is crazy and a liar. That's not exactly a tough case to crack.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
He never actually denies anything on the blog post.
He says "some mentally-disordered person came up with a blatant lie" but that's as close to a denial as he gets.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Rape is about power. Sex is secondary. He was assuring his power over her. Well, trying. He lost.
If he just wanted sex, he could have gotten a prostitute. Her pimp would have killed him for damaging his employee if he tried to do the same thing.
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
What kind of rapist steals a bunch of stuff? And after he had his face smashed in? Or was this from the previous night he was in her room?
What a dumb argument. Read the newspapers, and you will hear many accounts of people being both raped and robbed. And is it really so unlikely that somebody painfully foiled in an attempted rape would grab some of her stuff on the way out in a childish fit of pique to get back at her?
On the other hand, it is pretty hard to construct a remotely plausible scenario in which the weaker female initiated unprovoked violence against a stronger male and he ends up with her stuff. And why would she then accuse him of rape? An accusation of theft is supported by evidence, and is easier to make stick than an attempted rape accusation.
She claims attempted rape.
He claims "she's a poco loco, bitch gone crazy for my dick and now thinks she's gonna get famous by talking shit about an obscure researcher from south america LOL crazy bitch, I didn't do nothing!"
Yet she was clearly injured. And he was clearly injured. And stuff that was taken from her room magically appeared in his room, where it was recovered by conference staff.
Given that her allegations present a clear story explaining how these things happened, and his version of the story seems to contradict the actual facts and photographic evidence available - I'd say it's a good bet that he DID attempt to rape her.
But given that this is Slashdot, I understand that you're retardedly skeptical of her story.
Why weren't charges filed if this is true?
She tried.
What about her leaving things at his apartment?
The security footage indicates he visited her, not the other way around. She was not in his room to leave things there. Why are you ignoring all the evidence to support rapists? Are you one of the nutjobs that thinks the world is out to keep the innocent white man down?
Learn to love Alaska
Either your reading comprehension or reasoning skills are poor -- or both. If you read her story carefully, you should be able to count 9 distinct pieces of evidence that are mentioned, most of which have already been confirmed by independent third parties. You should also be able to intuit the existence of additional pieces of as-yet-uncollected evidence -- most of which, unfortunately, are probably never going to be collected due to the incompetence and laziness of the responding police department. AND, once you're done doing all that, you should be able to apply Occam's Razor to this story and rather quickly conclude that there is absolutely no reason whatsoever for her to falsify any portion of it BECAUSE SHE HAS NOTHING TO GAIN FROM IT AND EVERYTHING TO LOSE.
By contrast, there is no evidence which exculpates the attacker. And, once again applying Occam's Razor, the attacker has every reason in the world to lie and no reason whatsoever to tell the truth.
This is NOT "her word against his". It's "her word and a substantial pile of evidence" against "his word and no evidence".
Convincing? Of what? He didn't even deny anything. The closest he came to that was to condemn the method of propagation of the accusation, and didn't condemn the accusation or deny it at all, at least in the "rebuttal" I read.
Learn to love Alaska
Rape isn't about sex. It's about power and humiliation.
Write boring code, not shiny code!
Because there is no proof and there will never be? Sometimes, that's just the way it is. Maybe she prefers going public to shame him, since it is the only way she can actually get to him. Makes sense to me. Shows a lot of courage on her part, seeing how rape victims are treated by the public opinion.
Write boring code, not shiny code!
Unless you are in an area where tourism is important, yes, they do. They can't successfully prosecute if there are no witnesses, and if all the witnesses will be gone at the time of the trial, taking a complaint is a waste of time. So yes, many places will refuse to prosecute if they assume you won't be in town or reachable during a trial.
And not everywhere shares your views on attempted rape. She wasn't actually raped or killed, and rape isn't as serious everywhere as you imply. There was a recent case in Nigera where a mob attacked and stripped a woman for not wearing a long enough skirt, leaving her naked and abused in the street. From what I've heard, the public outcry there was in support of the mob, but I'm not in Nigera.
Learn to love Alaska
Love the misogyny -- it's very modern. Phil Mason and Richard Dawkins would be proud of your contributions.
Some criticism, to improve your future pro-rape posts:
1) You did a great job calling the victim a "cunt", but instead of "I hope she gets sued" you should have written "I hope she gets raped" or better yet "if I saw her I'd rape her". Bonus points if you address your comments directly at the victim.
2) The victim did contact the police, a fact which has been pointed out numerous times in this discussion. When you distort the truth, make sure that no one can contradict your assertions!
Required reading for internet skeptics
She contacted the police immediately. The police indicated a lack of will to pursue the matter. She then moved on to the conference organizers and her blog.
Learn to love Alaska
See, this is what happens when you really get raped. The police don't give a damn. Perhaps the most perverse piece of evidence that the push to get Assange for rape is such a sham.
You're going to have a lot of people try to tell you that rape is about power. That's not strictly true, but in this case it seems to have been a motivator, because the criminal in question wasn't merely out to sexually assault the victim.
However, don't be mislead into thinking that rape is actually always about power, because it's not. It's not even always about dominance, either. Even Georgia Weidman seems to understand that. I don't expect Slashdotters to understand that, however.
Gont's on camera going into her room. They both have injuries. Cops verified hers shortly after Gont left the scene. So you have a situation in which a guy goes into a woman's room, then gets into a brawl with her. I can't think of many ways that goes down without sexual assault being involved. Let's say he's totally in the clear and she attacked him for some unknown reason. Maybe she wanted sex and he didn't so she clocked him with a coffee mug. Okay. If a woman did that to me, I would probably not respond by punching her in the face. I'd just leave. Given Gont's and Weidman's relative builds, it's not like she could have stopped him.
While we don't have irrefutable proof that sexual assault occurred, it certainly fits the circumstances, and I'm at a loss to come up with an explanation in which Gont comes out clean.
There should be two or even three standards here. There is a standard for criminal charges and there is a standard for personal judgment about the situation; who can be trusted, who you do or do not want to associate with etc.
I know Georgia, I have never met this Fernando Gont character. Four things I'd say about Georgia are she is not the type to make up facts, she is very very smart, and very career minded, a normally very easy going as far as interpersonal matters. I don't think going public with this will help her career. Sure it games her name out there but It does so as someone you might need to watch yourself around or something, if you don't already know better. If anything these accusations will hurt her unless definitively proven. So I don't see any motive to for her lie. I'd trust her even if she did have motive; because I know her to be trust worthy anyway, but even if that were not the case I can't see any incentive to lie.
As far as how I'll handle myself in the community, and what personal opinions I hold: Georgia says it happened. That is good enough for me. Maybe people how know Fernando will reach the same conclusion maybe the opposite, or maybe something in between but that is for them to decide.
If this was criminal legal matter that would be a different standard. I would just that standard if I was on a jury ( and did not know her, otherwise I'd never get on the jury), than if we take as a given all the physical evidence mentioned in their respective blog posts exits; I don't think there would be enough for me to reach any conclusions that meet the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard. If it were a civil trial that would be a lower standard but would still need to be based on evidence, not sure how I'd go on that. I would have to see this security footage, and photo, the coffee mug etc.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
I'd say it's about both. Some people get off on exerting power over and/or humiliating others.
And how did her stuff end up in his room?
Under her version of the story, how did her stuff end up in his room? Theft wouldn't exactly be at the top of someone's mind after being beaten back from attempting rape.
(I say this without making any commentary about the veracity of her story. We armchair detectives don't have the tools to make a judgment, and it would be hubris to do so.)
I have no doubt that her story is substantively true.
I can think of at least three rational alternative that while unlikely prevent any claim of "no doubt".
None of these are particularly likely given what we currently know, but it is absurd to have "no doubt".
She is entitled to tell the truth. Period. If he tried to rape her, then she has a perfect right to tell the world about it. She knows the truth, no matter what the evidence is. It's up to us to weigh the evidence and determine whether we believe her. Whether she wanted to press charges is totally irrelevant -- people decide not to pursue these cases for all sort of reasons (particularly when it happened far from home, for God's sake).
Of course, if she's lying, that is another matter entirely. But everything I've seen and heard, about both this situation and this world, makes me believe her.
caritj.org
His take is on his blog: http://blog.gont.com.ar/2013/06/lies-nuts-and-quest-for-attention.html. Offering no insights on what happened (he's entitled to that stance).
My take: He did go to her room. There was some sort of skirmish and both got wounded. The rest is unclear. BUT, if I were invited to someones room, and things started to get out of hand, with fighting and violence and whatnot in the air, I'd GET THE F OUT! Even if there's no attempted rape involved, you don't fight with a woman in her hotel room, even if it's just to avoid accusations. Okay, so that doesn't prove anything, I know, but you know, it is a little weird.
That doesn't "substantiate her claims." That substantiates that one person was injured, and so was another. Could have been a fistfight, could have been anything. Still her word versus his as to the cause of the fight, unless there is visual/audio evidence or other witnesses.
Actually, you're confusing "substantiate" with "prove." It does substantiate her claims, because, to use the root of the word, it adds "substance" to her claims.
If a person claimed that she had just been assaulted by someone and nearly raped, but she didn't have a mark on her, that would be rather suspicious. If she was clearly marked/bruised, but her alleged assailant was not, that would be slightly less suspicious, but still pretty hinky. But when both accuser and accused have injuries consistent with the allegations...well, now it looks like 1, the accuser isn't making up an attack, and 2, she isn't mistaken about the identity of her attacker. I certainly haven't seen a lot of people at professional conferences walking around with fresh injuries of the sort consistent with blunt force trauma..or any other sort, now that I think of it.
For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
She didn't post any "evidence." She posted her account, which could be anything from 100% false to 100% true. If she smashed the guy in the temple with a coffee mug and caused profuse bleeding, there should've been ample evidence of at least her hitting him, there'd be blood in the hotel room, etc. The police don't just yawn and walk away from a rape report where there's evidence. And why did the conference organizers suddenly give her the cold shoulder? Oh, wait, right, Teh Patriarchy, I forgot...
Please help metamoderate.
Wouldn't your statistics for "rate of sexual assault" be lower if you didn't act on rape accusations very often, as we see in this case?
If you're going to accuse somebody of a criminal act, it's always a good idea to get their side of the story. http://blog.gont.com.ar/
When she was contacted by the Consulate, I'm sure they informed her of this:
If you decide to pursue your case through the Polish judicial system, the initial step is
filing a police report. It is best to do this at the police station (komisariat policji) closest
to where the incident occurred, although a police report can be filed at any police station.
and
In Poland, police stations are required to take your report regardless of your nationality or
resident status. Police stations are also required to provide translators, although this can
take some time to arrange; the U.S. Embassy does not provide translators. If, for any
reason, you have difficulties filing your police report with a Polish official, please let us
know immediately.
Her blog states:
The US Consulate was great though. It was a night and day difference between dealing with them and the Polish police. I’d recommend getting in touch with them to anyone who has an incident in a foreign country. While ultimately they aren’t able to force charges against him, having someone on my side was nice.
So, was a police report filed? This seems pretty straight forward and that the Polish Police have to take a report. According to the blog they were "blah blah" So, according to the blog, no. If she had any discussion with a member of the US Consulate they would have had this discussion. If she felt so violated then why didn't she file a report? It's her right and the consulate would stand behind her. why? Also her comments "Blah blah" regarding the police and not being interested are contrary of the US government's position and own documents. Sorry, this looks like a he said/she said unless there's anything else that wants to put out there.
Speaking of putting this out there, without anybody else coming forward with something, a picture a copy of a police report a criminal court proceeding, maybe Fernando her getting hauled away in cuffs perhaps? No? Why not? There's camera phones, there's other people involved who are still not being named, maybe they don't exist? I'd love to see the video, where is the video that everybody supposedly has seen? Wait, only her word?
I'm sorry she got hurt, bruised... It sounds like she gave as good as she received though (bad choice of words?)
Again, don't put this guy on trial without evidence and statements from witnesses. Also, who here thought DSK was guilty of assault on that maid in NYC from just the press reports? Was he ever on trail for it? No. He was acquitted.
I'm going to now go get some popcorn and watch the twitterscape on this one. IMO, she's an intelligent person, well respected in her field and in terms of handling this episode, as traumatic as it sounds, she really didn't handle the situation well and now she's using the web to try her case. I haven't looked anywhere else but does anybody have something more than a twitter posting about this from somebody else that was there? How about some pictures.. I'm putting on my Don Henley music now.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Not really. Her story is that he was continuing to undress her and/or trying to penetrate her after she told him in no uncertain terms to stop. Ergo he was in the process of committing a violent act (sexual assault) when she hit him. Again, if the story is accurate, her hitting him would be considered self-defense.
They both go up to her room. They talk for a while, they start making out on the bed. He starts getting handsy, she starts refuting him.
Now, I'll make a brief consideration here. We don't know what was actually said in the room, if anything. Her blog says:
Perhaps I was not making myself clear, “No!” “Stop!” “I don’t want to do this!”
But since we're being constrained by the evidence here, let's just be fair and admit that we just don't know.
So, he starts getting handsy, she starts refuting him. He then does or says that she dislikes (moves his hands down her pants, says something offensive in her ear), and then, pay attention, she physically assaults him. Maybe she bites him, maybe she punches him, knees him on groin, whatever. And then he loses his temper, and hits her. Maybe the violence continues in some way, maybe not, he eventually leaves.
So he hit a woman, and that's assault, sure. But rape? No.
But there's yet another distinction to be drawn. Maybe she really does believe she was going to be raped. I'm not ruling that out. And maybe you'll say "Well, if she was refuting him, it must have been rape". But let me make another consideration: Rape has to do with the state of mind of the violated party, at the time the events were happening, but it also has to do with the actions and perceptions of the perpetrator. Like I said, we don't know what happened or what was said, and that's the crux of the matter. I find it perfectly possible that she may have said or done something that he didn't think was really supposed to make him stop, and in a perfectly understandable way. This is where the "no means no" thing comes into play, and where rape gets into the grey zone: If a man walks up to a complete stranger and tries to have sex with her, the most reasonable assumption is that any form of "no" means "no". If you're talking about a boyfriend and girlfriend having sex, I'll find it completely understandable if she's saying "stop" but really means "keep going". In a lot of scenarios in between, the line gets blurry. If you've had drinks with a guy and invited him up to your hotel room at the end of the night, I'm afraid it doesn't get blurry in your favor. Or yet, maybe she didn't say or do anything at all to make him stop, until she had an unreasonable reaction of assaulting him. Again, there's no evidence of what happened in the room.
By the way, what is this "engineered a situation" that you speak of? He engineered getting invited back into her room? He engineered the conference being a place that was familiar to neither of them? And, by god, how does one engineer the absence of evidence? To me, that can only mean that it would be reasonable to expect to find certain pieces of evidence which were, against such reasonable expectation, not there - and I can't think of anything in this story that fits that.
Other thoughts I have about her story in general:
- Her post is rather "verbose", as someone else here described it, yet there are only three paragraphs dedicated to what would have actually constituted the attack.
- I agree with another poster who said that, on the photo posted elsewhere here, he's missing the cut on his temple he is supposed to have from her account.
- Who the heck tries to rape someone, fails, and then thinks "Well I may as well leave with her passport, iPad, a cellphone, and whatever?" And is even dumb enough to keep that shit in his own room later. And is dumber yet to personally return that stuff later.
Her account is detailed, and there are images that show the respective injuries. What, you think she attacked him and he simply defended himself by punching her in the face? His account is what I would expect coming from an asshole who does things like this and expects to get away with it. Items missing from her room just happened to "magically appear" in his room after he denied taking them? Yeah.
The Polish police do have a report, but they aren't doing anything about it. And given that they are both foreigners from different countries, it is unlikely they ever will do anything about it. Pretty typical actually if you have ever dealt with foreign authorities, even in first world countries.
Her story is far more credible than his. His story sounds more like a sociopath. The circumstantial evidence appears to be in her favor.
At the very least, hopefully other female tech experts attending conferences with this guy will be on their guard.
~X~
Are you sure? Perhaps the police didn't give a damn because since she stopped the rape before it happened they knew there wouldn't be enough evidence to get a conviction. It IS a he-said, she-said situation with no conclusive evidence beyond "Both people got injured", which isn't (and shouldn't be) nearly enough for a rape conviction.
A friend of Georgia's connected her to the US embassy; she ended up using my girlfriend's cell phone to call the police by dialling 112. (random question: how many Americans know that that's the international GSM emergency number? My guess, not many.) Still, there was a whole bunch of "not my problem" going on on the part of the hotel staff; they spoke English just fine until we asked for them to call the police; after that, the only words they said were "No speak English".
Hell, you can see most of it here in this very thread. The troll "contributions" run the gamut from "her fault for inviting him in" to "she's ugly".
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
Try that in NYC. Take a white man in a suit who walks up to a cop and complains that someone hit him and took his wallet (and he hit back). They find a black guy with his wallet and a head-wound. That'll be a conviction 99.44% of the time. Even if the guy with the wallet claims he was hit by the guy in the suit first, and when defending himself, the wallet fell out, so he grabbed it to help identify the assailant later. There's no "proof" either way, but just like if a cop pulls you over for speeding and gives you a ticket for 75 in a 55 when you were going 55, you will be convicted most of the time. But the request in this case is to assume that it's likely that the altercation was started by the women, despite the fact nobody involved has asserted that, and there's no evidence to support it.
I honestly don't understand all the rapist defenders here.
Learn to love Alaska
Reasonable people? Game theory begs to differ