Support NeoGAF

[Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew]

Bu-bu-but she's a survivour!

Disgusting.


Please point out the evidence where Nungesser did in fact rape her, because the only evidence that actually exists does not work in her favour.

Yeah I shouldn't have read that...

Holy shit, some folks are just batshit assholes.

 

[wildfire]

phew.

Just reading that part has given me second hand anxiety or something. Don't think I can read much more.

23. Emma also messaged Paul frequently throughout that summer with messages
including: "wuv youuuu, "- "i miss and love you btw" - "Paul i really miss you - "i really mis
you - "Paul I wuv you so much. Please stay w me foevah" - "paul I miss you so much" - "like
u know when you tell people you miss them and you don’t really mean it? - i actually mean it - i
miss you so much - ahhh" - "pookie - i miss you - "I LOVE YOU - SO MUCH" - "I MISS
YOU MORE THAN ANYTHING - "I love youuuu" - "and l would LOVE to have you here -
omg - we could snuggle" - "PAUL I MISS YOU PAUL I MISS YOU PAUL I MISS YOU
PAULLL" - "DUDE I MISS YOU SO MUCH" "I love you Paul!!!!!!." These messages
spanned from May 2012 through August of 2012, and similar messages continued until October
2012​

Unreal. So that's why the rape charges were dropped and they are right to do so. She made a big mistake posting this vid. She needs help.

 

[JJDinomite]

https://kcjohnson.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/nungesser-complaint.pdf

That was linked in the jezebel comments. Based on the messages alone (which I presume are verifiable) this girl is crazy.

Well, that about settles this.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

We'll see. I think the lack of publicizing his name protects her on libel/slander grounds, not sure about harassment—I think most harassment protections are workplace related... another place where Title IX takes the place of law. I think first amendment protections are liberal enough to protect her here. (If Paul had legal grounds to sue her, he probably would have by now.) Whether that's justified or moral is another, murkier, question.

She gave his name to the NY Post and the student newspaper in Dec 2013. The original leak of his identity came from her.

 

[bud]

she's so brave.

 

[Valhelm]

Please point out the evidence where Nungesser did in fact rape her, because the only evidence that actually exists does not work in her favour.

You're missing a word there. If neither the university or the District attorney had reasonable suspicion then you can hardly treat it as fact that he raped her.

I agree with Sho_Nuff, it seems like she wanted revenge because her feelings weren't reciprocated.

Hey! We're gonna be cool. I don't think Nungesser raped this person. There's not much evidence to suggest that he had any reason to believe that her consent was breached. But it's clear that sex occurred, and Sulkowicz seems to have felt that she was violated. I don't believe that Sulkowicz is lying. But the two of them experienced the situation very differently, due to a number of factors possibly including Sulkowicz' emotional instability.

It's very sad that Sulkowicz was traumatized by the sex that occurred, and it's very sad that Nungesser's reputation will permanently and irrevocably marred by this experience. I don't see what Sulkowicz stands to gain with this art-porn except possibly a higher profile as a performance artist, but because I didn't experience the alleged rape directly, I'm in no position to say what she should or shouldn't do.

 

[mre]

Ah, got it. Thank you.



Well, from the mattress project, there's not much evidence that it was. I guess that's where the line between private and public correspondence becomes blurry, because she told all of her friends about it, but strictly going off of the "art" that she got credit for from Columbia... I'm not sure? I honestly don't know, I just know that the first amendment makes defamation suits very difficult in the US. This particular art project definitely seems far more pointed in identifying Paul though.

Actually, I take it back. Since she filed the report, he probably stands a better chance.

The test would be "during the time she was carrying around her mattress, was it reasonably known around the Columbia campus that Emma Sulkowicz alleged that Paul Nungesser was her rapist." Sitting here, neither one of us can answer that question. My point was simply that choosing not to identify someone by name when you allegedly defame them is not a magic bullet solution if you later get sued for defamation.

Unreal. So that's why the rape charges were dropped and they are right to do so. She made a big mistake posting this vid. She needs help.

Actually, his complaint alleges that these messages had nothing to do with Columbia's decision to find in Paul's favor, as they specifically precluded him from introducing them into evidence during either their investigation or the hearing.

 

[jtb]

She gave his name to the NY Post and the student newspaper in Dec 2013. The original leak of his identity came from her.

Eh, the complaint barely has circumstantial proof of the first, and she spoke to the Blue and White anonymously and gave him a pseudonym. I think the "publication" of his name/identity officially begins with the Spectator/Police report.

The test would be "during the time she was carrying around her mattress, was it reasonably known around the Columbia campus that Emma Sulkowicz alleged that Paul Nungesser was her rapist." Sitting here, neither one of us can answer that question. My point was simply that choosing not to identify someone by name when you allegedly defame them is not a magic bullet solution if you later get sued for defamation.

Makes sense.

 

[Jenov]

Good catch. I wonder what the redacted title signifies?

I bet you Paul Nusemberger knows it. She's probably going to be sued over the video, her disclaimer won't prevent that,

 

[norm9]

Actually, his complaint alleges that these messages had nothing to do with Columbia's decision to find in Paul's favor, as they specifically precluded him from introducing them into evidence during either their investigation or the hearing.

The investigators probably were able to conclude that she is insane, even without the insane Fatal Attraction text messages.

 

[dr3upmushroom]

I don't understand why gaf always has trouble understanding any forms of contemporary art.

 

[dave is ok]

Interview with Emma about "Ceci N'est Pas Un Viol"

 

[Ri'Orius]

As a society, we should not and cannot be allowed to punish people without evidence. If there is zero evidence that a crime has been committed (not even a preponderance of evidence), how can you justifiably punish the accused?

Does her testimony not count as evidence? And my understanding is that the best estimates for the prevalence of false accusations of rape put the number at 2-8%. Which would imply her accusation alone would fit the "preponderance of evidence" standard of >50%..

 

[tfur]

Welp, I found it and watched it. Amazingly boring for pron or art pron or whatever.

The only thought it provoked, was one of "why did it just waste my time watching this nonsense."

 

[Moral Panic]

Does her testimony not count as evidence? And my understanding is that the best estimates for the prevalence of false accusations of rape put the number at 2-8%. Which would imply her accusation alone would fit the "preponderance of evidence" standard of >50%..

Are you trolling?

 

[Irminsul]

Does her testimony not count as evidence? And my understanding is that the best estimates for the prevalence of false accusations of rape put the number at 2-8%. Which would imply her accusation alone would fit the "preponderance of evidence" standard of >50%..

Following your logic, you would never need more than the testimony of the allegedly raped.

Also, isn't there some kind of in dubio pro reo within the American justice system?

 

[Corronchilejano]

Interview with Emma about "Ceci N'est Pas Un Viol"

Do you think that making yourself vulnerable is what it takes to change the world these days?
Yes.

Why is it "vulnerable"? Why that word specifically?

Also, the disconnect she attempts to do between her works and her refusal to speak about them speaks a lot to whoever gets the context of both pieces.

 

[davepoobond]

Huh. Can't watch it at work but is this actual sex or like softcore porn sex? Didnt see it immediately explained in the article.

 

[mre]

Following your logic, you would never need more than the testimony of the allegedly raped.

Also, isn't there some kind of in dubio pro reo within the American justice system?

Yes. Plus the criminal justice system uses the beyond a reasonable doubt standard.

 

[depths20XX]

Wow, first time learning about this girl. She seems like a terrible person. Many are saying she needs help. I think she just seems like a straight up scumbag of a person.

 

[kirblar]

Does her testimony not count as evidence? And my understanding is that the best estimates for the prevalence of false accusations of rape put the number at 2-8%. Which would imply her accusation alone would fit the "preponderance of evidence" standard of >50%..

Do you really not see the issue with using that logic?

 

[Valhelm]

Does her testimony not count as evidence? And my understanding is that the best estimates for the prevalence of false accusations of rape put the number at 2-8%. Which would imply her accusation alone would fit the "preponderance of evidence" standard of >50%..

That's something to consider in most rape cases, but Sulkowicz' behavior after the incident and the fact that the sex seems to have begun consensually means that this is not most rape cases.

I'm really not too fond of the whole "always believe survivors" idea. While the way our society handles rape and rape victims can be disgusting, treating victims as infallible and objective parties is a poor idea. I'm really not willing to let innocent people be convicted of rape because sex that they thought was consensual was perceived differently by the other person.

 

[Wiktor]

Does her testimony not count as evidence? And my understanding is that the best estimates for the prevalence of false accusations of rape put the number at 2-8%. Which would imply her accusation alone would fit the "preponderance of evidence" standard of >50%..

Both of their testimonies should have equal weight. And apparently Columbia also interviewed a lot of their friends and families and they didn't collaborate her story. Not that it's conclusive proof one way or another, but it's easy to see why they cleared him. What's much harder to understand is why they then proceeded to screw him over, as it was obvious it would lead to civil suit. I guess they calculated it would still be less costly than PR damage.

 

[jtb]

No one's being "punished" without evidence. If Paul was punished for raping Emma—regardless of whether or not he actually did it—that would involve him either getting kicked out of school or getting some kind of legal sentence. Under either punitive system delegated to deal with this alleged crime—the law or the University—Paul was not punished.

After that point, it becomes a free expression issue—which is why I think the question of defamation is interesting (and important)... and I think Paul would have an uphill battle winning any kind of defamation suit.

 

[Wiktor]

No one's being "punished" without evidence. If Paul was punished for raping Emma—regardless of whether or not he actually did it—that would involve him either getting kicked out of school or getting some kind of legal sentence. Under either punitive system delegated to deal with this alleged crime—the law or the University—Paul was not punished.

After that point, it becomes a free expression issue—which is why I think the question of defamation is interesting (and important)... and I think Paul would have an uphill battle winning any kind of defamation suit.

Which is likely why he is suing the school. Plus they have the money to pay out.

 

[kirblar]

Both of their testimonies should have equal weight. And apparently Columbia also interviewed a lot of their friends and families and they didn't collaborate her story. Not that it's conclusive proof one way or another, but it's easy to see why they cleared him. What's much harder to understand is why they then proceeded to screw him over, as it was obvious it would lead to civil suit. I guess they calculated it would still be less costly than PR damage.

Given the way she's describing the video, I wonder if she described the mattress project in similar terms to her art instructor ("It's not about anything specific") prior to getting approval for it, at a time when the whole thing hadn't blown up.

 

[tfur]

Huh. Can't watch it at work but is this actual sex or like softcore porn sex? Didnt see it immediately explained in the article.

It's poor quality, "security camera" positioned cameras. There a 4 of them for different angles, at a bit of distance.

 

[ThreePiMatt]

Huh. Can't watch it at work but is this actual sex or like softcore porn sex? Didnt see it immediately explained in the article.

It is straight up porn. Oral sex, visible penetration, etc. Nothing implied.

Which is likely why he is suing the school. Plus they have the money to pay out.

From the looks of it, she comes from a somewhat affluent background. Obviously not the kind of money an Ivy League school could pay out, but they sound like they're pretty firmly upper-middle class.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

Does her testimony not count as evidence? And my understanding is that the best estimates for the prevalence of false accusations of rape put the number at 2-8%. Which would imply her accusation alone would fit the "preponderance of evidence" standard of >50%..

Think this through carefully, and how easily abused such a system would be if a student could face expulsion (but not jail time, of course) under the mere suggestion of impropriety.

Any student, male or female, who spent more than 10 minutes alone with another could be instantly thrown out on a whim.

 

[DrGonzo615]

Does her testimony not count as evidence? And my understanding is that the best estimates for the prevalence of false accusations of rape put the number at 2-8%. Which would imply her accusation alone would fit the "preponderance of evidence" standard of >50%..

One persons testimony is just that, testimony. The authorities investigated and found nothing to substantiate her claims. She claimed that he violently raper her including hitting her in the face and choking her and there were no signs of injuries, there were no reports from people close to her that there was any change in her behavior or visible physical injuries.

So no, there was no actual hard evidence or any circumstantial evidence for the police to go on. Police cant go on statistics to determine whether or not to pursue prosecution.

 

[jtb]

Given the way she's describing the video, I wonder if she described the mattress project in similar terms to her art instructor ("It's not about anything specific") prior to getting approval for it, at a time when the whole thing hadn't blown up.

It's possible, but I highly doubt it. It was a big deal from the get go. She got that huge profile on the cover of New York in September, presumably right as the school year was beginning.

 

[Derekloffin]

Does her testimony not count as evidence? And my understanding is that the best estimates for the prevalence of false accusations of rape put the number at 2-8%. Which would imply her accusation alone would fit the "preponderance of evidence" standard of >50%..

There is no 'best estimates' of false accusations. There is some evidence of CONFIRMED false accusations (which is where the 2-8 comes from), but that's the extreme. We have a massive grey area in the stats that we'll probably never be able to fill. Just as we have lots of rapist who will likely never get punished, we may well have lots of false accusations going around too and we can't really know those numbers and we shouldn't act like we do. Never mind the whole acting like a mere accusation is good enough is VERY scary thinking.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

No one's being "punished" without evidence. If Paul was punished for raping Emma—regardless of whether or not he actually did it—that would involve him either getting kicked out of school or getting some kind of legal sentence. Under either punitive system delegated to deal with this alleged crime—the law or the University—Paul was not punished.

After that point, it becomes a free expression issue—which is why I think the question of defamation is interesting (and important)... and I think Paul would have an uphill battle winning any kind of defamation suit.

She tried to get him thrown out of school without evidence. She tried to have him arrested without evidence. That's what I was referring to.

 

[NimbusD]

They certainly don't paint Paul as a serial rapist

Very specifically said they don't do that either. My main point is how disgusted I am with people who look at that and start to demonize her based on that alone.

I agree that in many cases it's a messed up situation but I just don't see how people are expected to act or think when it comes to criminal proceedings or investigations when all or most of the evidence provided is the word of the accuser. At that point there is little of a defense to be mounted except for using the accuser's own words or deeds against them. I really don't see how else it can work.

No matter how you slice it Emma's credibility is going to take a hit from this art piece among anybody who hasn't firmly made their mind already.

Yeah, I get it. It's a rough situation as an outsider because you can't take any action without solid evidence really. But that's unfortunately the situation with a lot of rape that doesn't involve a lot of physical trauma. I'd never say that the guy should be thrown in jail or anything, no one can prove anything. However I definitely understand that if someone is in that situation, they don't want to feel like they're being silenced in addition to going through what happened to them...

At least the whole situation has helped to shed light on the legal process and cultural aspects that rape victims are subject to and what options they have available to them. Or at least it should have. But it seems that the most important pieces of these arguments fall to the wayside so people can gawk at those involved and lay judgement based on personal beliefs.

 

[Ri'Orius]

Are you trolling?

Do you really not see the issue with using that logic?

I certainly see the issue with the outcome of the logic. I do not see any issue with the premises or the chain of logic itself.

Basically, I think that the "preponderance of evidence" standard, as I've heard it described, sounds ludicrous.

Both of their testimonies should have equal weight. And apparently Columbia also interviewed a lot of their friends and families and they didn't collaborate her story. Not that it's conclusive proof one way or another, but it's easy to see why they cleared him. What's much harder to understand is why they then proceeded to screw him over, as it was obvious it would lead to civil suit. I guess they calculated it would still be less costly than PR damage.

Logically, no, both their testimonies alone should not have equal weight. Statistically the accused is more likely to be the liar than the accuser. Not "shadow of a doubt" more likely, but definitely ">50%".

Of course the investigation could certainly knock down the accuser's credibility.

 

[jtb]

She tried to get him thrown out of school without evidence. She tried to have him arrested without evidence. That's what I was referring to.

Huh? People get acquitted of crimes every single day. She tried, she failed. For Paul, the system worked. He won, twice.

 

[norm9]

Huh? People get acquitted of crimes every single day. She tried, she failed. For Paul, the system worked. He won, twice.

I'm not so sure Paul the rapist feels like a winner lately.

 

[Brakke]

Yeah, I mean, when people call me "Mattress Girl" I find that really infuriating. It's like, okay great, so you think that I'll never progress beyond that point. That I'll be a "Mattress Girl" rather than a living, breathing person who has the ability to change.

.

 

[Loakum]

This thread is destined to be locked.

 

[antonz]

Huh? People get acquitted of crimes every single day. She tried, she failed. For Paul, the system worked. He won, twice.

Considering people in this very thread still view him as a disgusting rapist means he lost. There are going to be tons of other bias people all around him that will always look at him as a rapist and it will impact his life.

 

[Irminsul]

.

Good news: She's now the "mattress and sex tape (maybe, but probably not on the same mattress) girl." That's progress, I'd say.

 

[perfectchaos007]

.

Assuming the acquittal was correct, I'm prone to believe she initially she had an ambition to be the leading public figure and face for rape victims, and the mattress was her gimmick to get her more exposure. Of course it's all speculation at this point because it's really tough to figure out any motives here. This entire situation is ambiguous as all get out. With this porn "art" video that doesn't depict her non-rape (legally speaking), she's really doubling down. I just think she's digging herself a deeper hole at this point.

 

[jtb]

Considering people in this very thread still view him as a disgusting rapist means he lost. There are going to be tons of other bias people all around him that will always look at him as a rapist and it will impact his life.

I'm not so sure Paul the rapist feels like a winner lately.

He was found not guilty and will not be punished under any justice system. The first amendment doesn't protect your feelings, it protects free expression. That's just the price of living in a free society.

 

[Moral Panic]

I certainly see the issue with the outcome of the logic. I do not see any issue with the premises or the chain of logic itself.

Basically, I think that the "preponderance of evidence" standard, as I've heard it described, sounds ludicrous.

Even if the number of false reports was 0.001% that is a cumulative average. It has nothing to do with the actual merits of an individual case which the "preponderance of evidence" standard measures against.

He was found not guilty and will not be punished under any justice system. The first amendment doesn't protect your feelings, it protects free expression. That's just the price of living in a free society.

Free expression doesn't mean you can slander and defame though.

 

[Calamari41]

Imagine having someone like this hounding you for the rest of your life.

 

[Rafterman]

Logically, no, both their testimonies alone should not have equal weight. Statistically the accused is more likely to be the liar than the accuser. Not "shadow of a doubt" more likely, but definitely ">50%".

Of course the investigation could certainly knock down the accuser's credibility.

That's absurd. Statistics mean nothing in individual cases. Even if the accused were lying 99% of the time it wouldn't matter. Every case is separate and you can't weigh testimony based on previous ones.

 

[Wiktor]

Logically, no, both their testimonies alone should not have equal weight. Statistically the accused is more likely to be the liar than the accuser. Not "shadow of a doubt" more likely, but definitely ">50%".
.

That's a very dangerous road you're taking. Statistically african-american males are more likely to commit violent crimes than white males. You really want that statistic to be taken into consideration when it comes to how courts and law enforcements deal with this types of situations? Of course not.

Statistics have no place in any court or tribunal

 

[Wiktor]

He was found not guilty and will not be punished under any justice system. The first amendment doesn't protect your feelings, it protects free expression. That's just the price of living in a free society.

No free society on a planet right now has full freedom of expression.

 

[_Ryo_]

Is this video supposed to work in a quantum manner?

It's not a recreation to demonstrate sexual assault and rape unless the viewer personally comes to the opinion that it is? Or it's a completely consensual reenactment of consensual sex unless the viewer believes that it's not?

Is it like Schrödinger's cat where it is both consensual and nonconsensual depending on the context it's viewed in?

Is society the box
and the video the cat?

If one were to come by this video without knowing the context of it would it be wrong to watch it guilt free?

 

[The Llama]

Statistics have no place in any court or tribunal

Completely disagree with this. They're very useful in some cases, like employment discrimination.