Discussion
  • Read More
    HaHaYouFoolAnna Merlan
    4/24/15 11:25am

    Okay. Let’s do a little pretending. Let’s say it’s totally true that Columbia honestly, justly, independently, and completely reviewed all three complaints of rape against Nungesser and found them to be entirely without merit. Not only that, but Columbia proved him to be innocent of all claims. Even if that were the case, still, FUCK THIS GUY and FUCK HIS LAWYER because there’s a bigger principle at stake here. He and whats-her-face from that stupid fucking affirmative action lawsuit in Texas ought to find each other. Peas in a goddamn worthless miserable pod.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      SpamBiddleHaHaYouFool
      4/24/15 11:28am

      You should just let people shit all over your reputation and lie about you because of some bigger principle? What is the bigger principle here exactly?

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      dan smithHaHaYouFool
      4/24/15 11:38am

      “ because there’s a bigger principle at stake here.”.....that is what is wrong with your entire argument. If it truly was a false accusation as your are positing then why should the wrongly accused suffer?

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    fighting polish is David Schwimmer as Rob Kardashian SrAnna Merlan
    4/24/15 11:20am

    very cool, mature move, mr lawyer, esquire

    As is evident from Emma’s Facebook messages to Paul during the summer prior to their sophomore year, Emma’s yearning for Paul had become very intense. Emma repeatedly messaged Paul throughout that summerthat she loved and missed him. She was quick to inquire whether he was in love with the woman he was seeing abroad.

    Thereafter, she continued purusing him, reiterating that she loved him. However, when Paul did not reciporcate these intense feelings, and instead showed interest in dating other women, Emma became viciously angry.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      BSTrainerfighting polish is David Schwimmer as Rob Kardashian Sr
      4/24/15 11:22am

      It’s bad that, even though the content is horrendous victim-blaming, I was more distracted by the typo (reciporcate vs. reciprocate). You can’t even spell-check that shit, horrible lawyer?! (admittedly I have been marking reports all week, so my brain is in “poorly proofread” spotting mode).

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      FrolickingGiantfighting polish is David Schwimmer as Rob Kardashian Sr
      4/24/15 11:25am

      “We already know that she cleverly crafted a story, and rode it to celebrity on the back of someone found not responsible.”

      Also this. Like, whaaaat?

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    yvanehtniojAnna Merlan
    4/24/15 11:29am

    It is about Columbia University as an institution, which was not only silent, but actively and knowingly supported attacks on Paul Nungesser, after having determined his innocence, legitimizing a fiction.

    Nope. Columbia’s review board doesn’t “determine innocence,” and the lawyer knows it. Hell, not even actual courts determine innocence, that’s why verdicts are “guilty” or “not guilty.” This is some Grade-C+ BS, right here.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      AndreaGarciaVargasyvanehtnioj
      4/24/15 11:53am

      They didn’t determine him as “innocent” at all! They determined him as “not responsible” which is way different. I’m not sure how many legs this lawsuit has to stand on.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Fuzzy Dunlopyvanehtnioj
      4/24/15 12:17pm

      Actually, the standard of proof in the Columbia investigations is “preponderance of the evidence,” a much less burdensome standard than the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard used in criminal cases. Under a preponderance of the evidence standard, basically if 50.0001% of the evidence favors you, you win. So if Nungesser prevailed under a preponderance of the evidence standard, it essentially means that the factfinders found it more likely than not that he was innocent.

      Does this mean they got it right? Of course not. But the lawyer is correct that they essentially found him innocent. This is quite different from a criminal trial, where a jury can believe someone to be guilty but find him not guilty because the proof was not “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    lexadexAnna Merlan
    4/24/15 11:23am

    Maybe I’m not understanding this correctly, but why doesn’t he just sue her for slander? I mean if he’s claims he’s innocent, of course

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      RosaleenBanlexadex
      4/24/15 11:27am

      Probably because even if a judge ruled in his favor, he wouldn’t get a lot of money out of a college student. Columbia, however, is another matter entirely.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      ihatepickingnameslexadex
      4/24/15 11:32am

      Well, you can defend against slander by proving the statement true. So, if he sues her for that she can basically put on a case to prove he did it (at a much lower burden of proof than a criminal trial).

      And then there’s the fact that she’s probably judgement-proof (it doesn’t matter how much you win if she doesn’t have any money to pay).

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    PyritePrincessAnna Merlan
    4/24/15 11:26am

    I hope he wins. Columbia has a lot to answer for. He was cleared by the university and the NYPD. She harassed him an absurd amount which Columbia did nothing to stop. She has hurt all women with her bullshit rape allegations. Regrettable sex is NOT rape.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      KaraThrace,LikeEverybody,LovesHypnoToadPyritePrincess
      4/24/15 7:25pm

      please have “Regrettable sex is NOT rape” printed on a t-shirt and wear it in public regularly, so you can be identified as the date-rapist you likely are.

      signed,

      all the women you may potentially meet in future

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      PyritePrincessKaraThrace,LikeEverybody,LovesHypnoToad
      4/24/15 11:45pm

      Thank you for proving my point. You are calling me a rapist. Interesting. Talk about crying wolf...

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    VodkaRocks&aPieceofToastAnna Merlan
    4/24/15 11:21am

    Can someone refresh my memory, did she publicly name him as her accuser? Or did it come out another way? Having a brain fart.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      thatbookishgirlVodkaRocks&aPieceofToast
      4/24/15 11:29am

      I am nearly 100% positive she never named him in any of her demonstrations or her art piece. I think I remember his name coming out when someone leaked all the paperwork from their university “legal” proceedings regarding the assault. That or he was dumb enough to point the fingers at himself.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      BlessedAreTheHedas. Our fight is not over.VodkaRocks&aPieceofToast
      4/24/15 11:59am

      She never named him. She gave the police his name when she filed a report. Then it became public record. But, from what I read in that Daily Beast article, by his own admission, no one on campus recognized him, most had no idea who he was. Yes, people called for his expulsion, but it was never going to happen. He thrust himself into the spotlight with that article and now with this.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Falcon Depth BrunchAnna Merlan
    4/24/15 11:22am

    They should add a extra couple thousand to his student loans for being a douchecanoe.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      SeaMeatFalcon Depth Brunch
      4/24/15 11:27am

      did you read the facebook messages in the complaint?

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Falcon Depth BrunchSeaMeat
      4/24/15 12:27pm

      So that revokes consent? Ok good.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Cassie STAnna Merlan
    4/24/15 12:06pm

    Every time Gawker fails to warn me that a link leads to Jezebel, I end up wondering what fucking insane universe I've fallen into in the comments. And then I look at the link and see "Jezebel.com" and realize what happened.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      harmonguyCassie ST
      4/24/15 2:39pm

      I wish they would create a seperate comment section or choose to ungrey people who are followed on gawker on cross posted articles. If something is posted on a site, the members of that site should be able to freely comment on it.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      SocialJusticeWarriorPrincessCassie ST
      4/24/15 4:43pm

      Every time I see this type of comment from an idiot who obviously has an issue with feminists and articles/comments from a women’s perspective, I end up wondering if you have a mother/wife/daughter and what they did to deserve such a hateful son/husband/father. Jezebel at best is feminism-light, the fact that you describe it as a “fucking insane universe” shows your unwillingness to listen and value any female voices. Go back to whatever MRA hole you crawled out of and don’t let the door hit you on your way out.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    mekkiAnna Merlan
    4/24/15 11:37am

    Is it possible that he could have done what he was accused of with the three other cases but in the case of Sulkowicz, be innocent? And this is a case of a psychopath being harassed by another psychopath?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      labeled: crazy aunt kanyemekki
      4/24/15 11:51am

      Why the fuck would you even say that? Seriously. Why?

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    LibrarianofthegrayAnna Merlan
    4/24/15 12:16pm

    Ugh, statement regarding the emails - It sucks that he is actually attempting to prove that, well if she was yearning for the man she must've wanted his dick. Even if the facebook messages have been taken out of context or falsified, which Sulkowiz has said were incorrect, using them to defame her is just gross.

    Sure, I totes believe that this is all about the university when the bulk of your complaint is not about Columbia's handling of dudebro's case its about his interactions with his alleged victim.

    Reply
    <