
Jacob Appelbaum Accused of Rape - sethbannon
https://medium.com/@chelsea.komlo/behind-every-serial-abuser-there-are-many-enablers-491bf2303f82
======
mpweiher
Hmmm...I see an allegation of rape, which is a serious criminal allegation.
This is not for a ‘community’ or conference organizers to adjudicate, we have
the criminal justice system for this: the police, the courts etc.

Conversely, a false accusation is also a serious crime. This is simply not a
matter to be resolved in public by defamation. Leave it to the courts.

~~~
xref
Chelsea addressed this in her post if you had read it.

"I have worked with legal counsel throughout this entire process. I have
strongly considered the idea of seeking criminal charges in Germany against
Jacob, but initiating lengthy legal proceedings in another country which I am
neither a citizen nor a resident is a significant barrier for me. That said, I
would gladly discuss this with any interested German authority and would be
willing to testify in any court of law about this crime without hesitation."

~~~
mpweiher
That’s not addressing it. At all.

Rape is serious crime. It is therefore an ‘Offizialdelikt’, which means that
it must be prosecuted if the Staatsanwaltschaft knows about it, and once they
know about it, it becomes their case.

Not pursuing this through the criminal justice system because you can’t be
bothered, but instead resorting to public defamation instead is at best fishy,
because in the context of an Offizialdelikt, the distinction she draws doesn’t
make sense.

~~~
belorn
To clarify (if necessary), its the distinction between criminal vs civil case.
Rape is prosecuted by the state on the initiate of the state. The victim do
not "initiating lengthy legal proceedings", they only report the crime to the
police and the dedicated prosecutor for sexual violence crime is responsible
to take it from there.

A victim of such crimes have a right to be heard, right to get support, and
the right to receive compensation from the accused if they are found guilty.
The victim is not required to testify and the accused can still be found
guilty.

In some cases it happen that the victim rescinds their version and the
prosecutor still continue to go forward with the case. That can't happen in
civil cases but it can in criminal.

------
praulv
"I thought Jacob was a friend and engaged in consensual sexual relations with
him during those three days. It took me five months to process and understand
that Jacob had violated my trust and my body. It is common for victims of rape
to take months, if not years, to come to terms with this, particularly if the
abuser is one in a position of trust to them."

What the actual fuck? This is insanity. I don't care for a throwaway account,
I'm happy to put my name to this comment.

~~~
justifier
The real insanity is that the majority of comments are clinging to this out of
context sentence as discrediting the author especially when it comes well
after this earlier statement

> Less than a week later, Jacob raped me in his apartment. Two of Jacob’s
> friends witnessed the assault, one other participated.

> In June 2016, I published a description of my assault under the pseudonym
> “River” on jacobappelbaum.net alongside others’ accounts of harassment and
> assault.

------
siproprio
> I thought Jacob was a friend and engaged in consensual sexual relations with
> him during those three days.

Anything else to the story?

~~~
mpweiher
Well, no.

Or, maybe yes. She seems to be saying that she is not capable of giving
consent, meaning that she is the legal equivalent of a child. Odd, but that is
apparently where modern day so-called feminism is going. Seems more like anti-
feminism to me, quite frankly. Odd.

~~~
justifier
> She seems to be saying that she is not capable of giving consent, meaning
> that she is the legal equivalent of a child.

What in this post could lead anyone to that conclusion?

The author established sexual boundaries

> When I became romantically involved with Jacob, I clearly told him that I
> wasn't interested in group sex, or having sex in front of other people. I
> told him this more than once, and clearly stated that if we were going to be
> intimate, I wanted it to be with him in a private setting.

And had those boundaries violated while intoxicated

~~~
belorn
From a legal perspective, the level of intoxication needed is very high before
a person is considered to no longer be able to give new consent. If you are
legally drunk, consent for sex is still consent. We (people, citizens, HN
community) might find that abhorrent, but it is not rape in the eyes of the
legal system.

We could change that and make the ability to give consent go away at the first
drink, or at a specific percentage (like drunk driving). The benefits and
drawbacks for doing so can be aired under constructive political debate. In
this case however, prior established boundaries do not establish if consent
can changed once intoxicated but still within the legal range where new
consent can be given.

The only avenue for prosecution would be to claim that Jacob intended to make
her drunk in order to trick her into sex which she don't consent to. The
qualifiers for that is very hard to prove.

------
stmfreak
Public shaming where criminal charges are not forthcoming typically reinforces
the defense of the accused. Was it rape or was it regrettable?

------
throwawaymonkey
This public shaming without any police report is really troubling. A woman can
totally derange a mans life with zero evidence. Either you feel you have been
violated, and then you go to the police, or you keep it to yourself.

This "trial by twitter" that's going on at the moment is disgusting. A person
is supposed to be presumed innocent, and then the alleged victim has his or
her day in court. With this, the alleged perpetrator is assumed guilty, and he
doesn't get a day in court.

She writes: "I thought Jacob was a friend and engaged in consensual sexual
relations with him during those three days. It took me five months to process
and understand that Jacob had violated my trust and my body."

I'm sorry, that's not rape. If you give consent, you can't take it back months
after the fact. How is a guy supposed to know what will happen months into the
future? By this standard, any male can without knowing he has violated a girl
suddenly be accused of rape on fucking twitter or medium? WTF?

Hopefully, there's more to her story than that text. What I can read, is that
she didn't do a police report, but instead tries to destroy the guys life
without any trial, she just decided that he is guilty. From that, it seems
like she has put pressure on conferences, his PhD advisors and organizations
to destroy him.

She assumes no personal responsibility, it's always the guys fault. She writes
that he "pushed his sexual agenda" multiple times. Why the fuck did she not
just walk away? That's not victim shaming, since I'm not saying she deserved
to be "raped", I'm just saying she put herself in a stupid situation, and
taking zero responsibility. Swap the genders of that text, and no-one would
bat an eye.

Seriously, at this point, why would any man have anything to do with women,
workplace or otherwise? Look at this story, she calls men that are interested
in women for "sexual predators"? How is a future husband and wife supposed to
meet?

~~~
justifier
The 'consensual sexual relations with him during those three days' is out of
context

The author also states:

> Less than a week later, Jacob raped me in his apartment. Two of Jacob’s
> friends witnessed the assault, one other participated.

> In June 2016, I published a description of my assault under the pseudonym
> “River” on jacobappelbaum.net alongside others’ accounts of harassment and
> assault.

Why ignore some parts of a discussion and only discuss elements that satisfy
your predetermined opinion?

You also place the word rape condescendingly in quotes which I interpret as
you insisting the definition of the word is important

In that case what is your definition of rape?

In 2012 the doj updated it's, unchanged since 1927, definition of rape: “the
penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or
object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the
consent of the victim.” [https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/blog/updated-
definition...](https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/blog/updated-definition-
rape)

>I'm just saying she put herself in a stupid situation

Can you elaborate? What was the stupid situation? Are you asserting attendance
absolves the attacker?

> How is a future husband and wife supposed to meet?

the Geraldo defense:
[https://youtu.be/-neJp7xRIPk](https://youtu.be/-neJp7xRIPk)

An aside.. I apologise for bringing the levity of Colbert's comedy into this
conversation but I feel sometimes comedy can be a tool to reach out to the
people who enter a discussion with their minds obstinately predetermined

~~~
throwawaymonkie
Why was my comment flagged?

~~~
throwawaymonkie
Alright, I've tried writing my comment again. I've seen way more uncivil
comments on Hacker News not being flagged, but then again, they were probably
leftist, like calling Trump a retarded monkey or something.

The flagging I got was pretty much just a hate-click by someone that disagreed
with me.

~~~
throwawaymonkie
Wow! flagged again! Of course I will never get a reason why. There was no
name-calling or anything.

