# Decapitated accused of kidnapping?



## HeavyMetal4Ever (Sep 10, 2017)

Just flicking through local news and saw this:
http://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...g/news-story/83a14460dfac8378ff857d56997b3011


----------



## chipchappy (Sep 10, 2017)

Yeah noticed this getting posted everywhere as well. At the moment all the articles I've read have been kinda vague about what "kidnapping" took place, but it will be interesting to see how it turns out. 

Funny enough... one of the focus ads on the first site i read that on was their next show date at a venue near me, doubtful that's still happening!


----------



## lewis (Sep 10, 2017)

im quite cynical these days because EVERYWHERE in the press, we see nobodies claiming things about celebrities just to get in the media and to have their 5 minutes of fame and some extra $$$.
So with that plus the Innocent until proven guilty stance, Im going to believe she is just one of those people.

I will await further details on this before writing the band off as douchebags.


----------



## BusinessMan (Sep 11, 2017)

I was really looking forward to seeing them play tonight. Oh well.


----------



## KailM (Sep 11, 2017)

lewis said:


> im quite cynical these days because EVERYWHERE in the press, we see nobodies claiming things about celebrities just to get in the media and to have their 5 minutes of fame and some extra $$$.
> So with that plus the Innocent until proven guilty stance, Im going to believe she is just one of those people.
> 
> I will await further details on this before writing the band off as douchebags.



This. I hope it's just a big misunderstanding or the chick is trying to get something out of them (probably the latter, most likely). I'd hate to see a great band go down for something stupid.


----------



## bostjan (Sep 11, 2017)

This is very confusing, indeed - several weird conflicting stories.


----------



## feraledge (Sep 12, 2017)

Are we really thinking Decapitated are celebrities??


----------



## jonsick (Sep 12, 2017)

There is an update.

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2017/sep/11/polish-metal-band-decapitated-accused-of-gang-rapi/

Either way, regardless of the truth of what happened, these guys are finished. That's a career ender right there.


----------



## BIG ND SWEATY (Sep 12, 2017)

If the charges are proven to be false I doubt this would be a career ender considering how big these guys are but they're absolutely finished if this is true, and rightfully so.


----------



## manu80 (Sep 12, 2017)

Weird stories...DNA will help if they can find a match...
another good advertising for metal music....sigh..


----------



## Lemonbaby (Sep 12, 2017)

KailM said:


> This. I hope it's just a big misunderstanding or the chick is trying to get something out of them (probably the latter, most likely).


Yeah right. When you're piling up millions like Elon Musk, Jay-Z or... ehrm... Decapitated, people just try to rip you off.


----------



## Ataraxia2320 (Sep 12, 2017)

manu80 said:


> Weird stories...DNA will help if they can find a match...
> another good advertising for metal music....sigh..



DNA will just prove they had sex, whether or not it was consensual is another story altogether. 

If the band did this then their careers are over, and rightly so. If this woman made a false accusation than shes a scumbag. 

Sad day for metal either way.


----------



## lewis (Sep 12, 2017)

god imagine if they all agreed to a consensual orgy.
DNA found will basically prove them guilty of something they havent done.
The only way they may be innocent (if orgies were had) and found innocent, is if someone filmed it all and it was obviously consensual.

Without that its her word vs theirs with probable DNA to back up her claims where true or not.

If they have all raped her, then 1) Im so so so shocked and surprised and 2) they all deserve to go down for a long, long time!
would be absolute scum.


going from touring the world to thousands of fans each night, to hit with Kidnap and rape charges?....

EDIT:
Just read the article and it seems a few of them refused DNA and 1 woman had bruising and wounds normally found with this type of thing.

WOW...not looking good at all..screams guilty to me. Not giving DNA?
they hiding?


----------



## prlgmnr (Sep 12, 2017)

lewis said:


> they all deserve to go down for a long, long time!



Eternity Too Short for them if you ask me.


----------



## JohnIce (Sep 12, 2017)

lewis said:


> im quite cynical these days because EVERYWHERE in the press, we see nobodies claiming things about celebrities just to get in the media and to have their 5 minutes of fame and some extra $$$.
> So with that plus the Innocent until proven guilty stance, Im going to believe she is just one of those people.
> 
> I will await further details on this before writing the band off as douchebags.



Do we really?  What I see everywhere is this type of statement whenever a girl reports being raped. I agree that people are innocent until proven guilty, but even more importantly a rape victim should be respected as a victim unless proven a liar. This band is hardly celebrities and I doubt they have more cash than this girl's local business owners, the idea that this is a cash grab is really far-fetched and unlikely.


----------



## Señor Voorhees (Sep 12, 2017)

Yup... Doesn't look good. I won't condemn them yet, what with the whole innocent until proven guilty, but I won't condemn her either. 

At first it was like wtf is the point of kidnapping someone for a few hours? Now that there are allegations of rape, it makes more sense. Scraped and bruised plus multiple dna samples does not look good though. 

Hopefully justice is done one way or the other, and hopefully the victim (whoever it turns out being) can move on in life. Shitty situation all around. I can't help but think they're having too much fun throwing the words "DEATH metal" around though. That's kind of annoying.


----------



## lewis (Sep 12, 2017)

JohnIce said:


> Do we really?  What I see everywhere is this type of statement whenever a girl reports being raped. I agree that people are innocent until proven guilty, but even more importantly a rape victim should be respected as a victim unless proven a liar. This band is hardly celebrities and I doubt they have more cash than this girl's local business owners, the idea that this is a cash grab is really far-fetched and unlikely.


read one of my later posts.

I admit its looking likely they did it now and backtracked.


----------



## JohnIce (Sep 12, 2017)

lewis said:


> read one of my later posts.
> 
> I admit its looking likely they did it now and backtracked.



I already had read it, and now you see my point  While saying "innocent until proven guilty" in your first point you were saying the rape victim was a lying gold digger unless proven a rape victim. Try giving the girl the same benefit of the doubt that you gave the band next time.


----------



## lewis (Sep 12, 2017)

JohnIce said:


> I already had read it, and now you see my point  While saying "innocent until proven guilty" in your first point you were saying the rape victim was a lying gold digger unless proven a rape victim. Try giving the girl the same benefit of the doubt that you gave the band next time.


i wasnt saying she WAS, I was saying she might be.
But yeah exactly.
Lets see what happens.


----------



## KailM (Sep 12, 2017)

Not looking good for these guys. If they did it, they are unbelievably stupid and deserve whatever they get. Either way, they're probably ruined. Hopefully the truth is uncovered and justice is served. The sad thing is that even if they're exonerated, they'll likely be known as "that band that kidnapped and gangraped a girl" from here on out, whether it's true or not.


----------



## vilk (Sep 12, 2017)

One time this lady accused the singer of Gaza of raping her and then later admitted that she made it up for attention, but the band was already ruined by the scandal and had to go on without the singer (now as Cult Leader). I don't actually know the real reason why the singer left, but I have to assume the whole being accused of rape thing made him feel like being a professional entertainer was no longer worth it.

What ever happened to the witnesses who said that the woman came and left freely and on good terms?


----------



## oracles (Sep 12, 2017)

I don't want to call the girl a liar, I wasn't there and absolutely don't know the circumstances, however I can dispute one piece of that article. Decapitated isn't on a bus for this tour, they have a van and trailer, and so do all the other bands on this tour. I saw them recently in Vancouver and hung out with Vogg for a little after their set at their van.

Again, I don't want to call the girl a lair, I truly hope she wasn't raped and I really want to believe the band didn't do something like that, but to say it happened on a bus bathroom when they aren't touring on one doesn't add up.


----------



## wankerness (Sep 12, 2017)

You think she made up a BUS? That would have been THE FIRST THING that would have been used to dismiss it.

If you'll notice, the band refuses DNA testing, there were statements released BY THEIR LAWYER that "she got on the bus and left out of her own free will on good terms with the band," so...yeah. There's absolutely no dispute that she interacted with them where she said, and it looks like no dispute that they had sex with her.

And to suggest that she made it up to suck them dry and/or get fame is flat-out nuts. I'm glad to see most everyone in this thread is moving away from that idea now, though I dread to think what they're saying on metal forums. They're a frickin death metal band, they have basically no money or fame!


----------



## vilk (Sep 12, 2017)

wankerness said:


> You think she made up a BUS? That would have been THE FIRST THING that would have been used to dismiss it.
> 
> If you'll notice, the band refuses DNA testing, there were statements released BY THEIR LAWYER that "she got on the bus and left out of her own free will on good terms with the band," so...yeah. There's absolutely no dispute that she interacted with them where she said, and it looks like no dispute that they had sex with her.
> 
> And to suggest that she made it up to suck them dry and/or get fame is flat-out nuts. I'm glad to see most everyone in this thread is moving away from that idea now, though I dread to think what they're saying on metal forums. They're a frickin death metal band, they have basically no money or fame!



Actually what he said was


Decap's defense lawyer said:


> We have witnesses that can testify to the fact that the accuser came to visit (the) band of her own free will and left on good terms.”



In the American court system, witnesses are considered a form of evidence I think... If these witnesses truly exist...


----------



## Señor Voorhees (Sep 12, 2017)

Yeah, if there was no bus, I'd imagine this would be a shut case already. I can't remember the article (and am on the tail end of break at work so no time to read again,) but did it say witnesses that can say she left happily and of her own free will? I know they said she went with them willingly, which is easy to believe. I'm sure there are plenty of witnesses to her getting on the bus willingly. It's the leaving part that I question. 

It's a strange target for "gold digging" if that's true. Can't imagine they're that well off and they're certainly not super well known. I really want to know what all the evidence for and against them is... Everyone has a bias, and I'm certainly guilty of that too. I'll certainly keep my eyes on this case though, as it is an incomplete picture without all the details.


----------



## vilk (Sep 12, 2017)

I don't think it's accurate to assume the only reason that a woman would accuse a man or a group of men of rape is for deep pocket court winnings. I speculate that it often has to do with guilt, regret, women voluntarily doing something that they deep down don't truly want to do, women consenting to or initiating sex but changing their mind and then not expressing that, etc.


----------



## Señor Voorhees (Sep 12, 2017)

That is a fair point. Hadn't considered it. Certainly more plausible than gold digging, imo.

In that case, if she had regrets and didn't voice them then that extra sucks for everyone involved.


----------



## bostjan (Sep 12, 2017)

I don't know anyone involved in this personally, so none of this is directed at any one particular person's character, but I know for a fact that some women are capable of making this sort of story up out of the blue for seemingly no reason. I also know that bands are capable of doing some horrible things on tour. When accusations like this are what you have to deal with, you have to treat every possibility as equally likely until you have gathered some evidence. I really hope that the police get to the truth of the matter as accurately as possible.

If the band has a touring vehicle without a bathroom, then, in my mind, the accuser has lost all credibility. On the other hand, if it does, and the stories of the various band members do not fit together, then the band itself loses its credibility as a witness.

In general, witnesses are not that credible a source of evidence, but if that's all there is to go on...


----------



## Ataraxia2320 (Sep 12, 2017)

wankerness said:


> If you'll notice, the band refuses DNA testing



Actually, Vogg hasn't. He willingly gave a DNA sample.


----------



## CreptorStatus (Sep 12, 2017)

oracles said:


> I don't want to call the girl a liar, I wasn't there and absolutely don't know the circumstances, however I can dispute one piece of that article. Decapitated isn't on a bus for this tour, they have a van and trailer, and so do all the other bands on this tour.



Hmm, that was probably just for the Canadian date(s). My band played their Seattle show (which was the night before the Spokane show in question) and while they didnt have giant luxury tour buses, they did have two "BandWagon" RV type buses which are basically a smaller more affordable version.


----------



## ArtDecade (Sep 12, 2017)

If she is telling the truth, this band might consider a reunion show in about 30 years - when they get out of prison.


----------



## gunch (Sep 12, 2017)

This all really sucks if true because Vogg is one of my heroes, just like John Parkin was


----------



## feraledge (Sep 12, 2017)

Clearly on a bus.
If they weren't on a bus, none of their stories make sense. But none of this sounds like there's a single reason to give the band more reasonable doubt than the likely victim. Her friend was pulled over and apparently shaken before she was being brought in and checked out for sexual assault. If she was the plotting person anyone seems to imply, her friend getting pulled over by the cops is a weak link for a plan. Sounds more like what happens when someone witnesses their friend being raped.
Unless there's video of her leaving happily, it sounds to me like there's no denial of the fact that she willingly got on the bus and multiple dudes had sex with her, but saying she willingly got on the bus as though that's evidence of consent is the kind of thinking a bunch of gang raping dudes would have.


----------



## bostjan (Sep 12, 2017)

Except that one of the band members is quoted saying he doesn't recall ever seeing her. Vogg is quoted saying that two of the guys did engage in sex with her, but not himself, and submitted to a DNA test to support that. The two members named as being involved in the carnal act refused DNA testing, which, if there is no denial of sex, why would they need to give DNA?

Also an issue that may or may not affect credibility is the part of the story where the girl dropped the rape allegations on the police while her friend was being processed for DUI.

At any rate, though, best case scenario for the band is that two of them had sex with the girl who claims to have been raped. When they say it was consensual, through an interpreter (whether to make sure they don't misspeak or whatever), the credibility of consent is going to be called into question. I'd say the rest of their tour is cancelled for sure at this point, and they'll be lucky to come out of this with any possibility of continuing their careers.


----------



## wankerness (Sep 12, 2017)

Deniers here - what do you think this girl would make this story up for? It's not like rape accusers ever get anything positive out of doing it, unless they do it to someone like Michael Jackson. Most likely they'll barely see a dime and instead just be harassed by diehard fans of the band for the next year or two and probably receive tons of death threats.

I'm glad that the one guy is cleared. Still, if there was in fact a gang rape, the possibility he didn't do anything to stop it (IF he was there, and IF he knew what was going on - two big ifs) wouldn't exactly reflect well on him.


----------



## lewis (Sep 12, 2017)

wankerness said:


> Deniers here - what do you think this girl would make this story up for? It's not like rape accusers ever get anything positive out of doing it, unless they do it to someone like Michael Jackson. Most likely they'll barely see a dime and instead just be harassed by diehard fans of the band for the next year or two and probably receive tons of death threats.
> 
> I'm glad that the one guy is cleared. Still, if there was in fact a gang rape, the possibility he didn't do anything to stop it (IF he was there, and IF he knew what was going on - two big ifs) wouldn't exactly reflect well on him.


are you female?

because if so that would explain your mindset. (Im not saying you are wrong/right vs anyone else - was more an observation)


----------



## Señor Voorhees (Sep 12, 2017)

I think it's interesting to see people's biases showing. lol

Like I said, I won't condemn them until it's proven, but I am biased to believe the accuser. (And, again, I won't berate the band until it's proven.) Just because, and I know from a personal friend's experience, that there is usually very little to gain from alleging something like this. I think it's obsurd to already be so absolutely convinced she'd make it up for the lulz or noteriety. 

For the bands sake, we shouldn't boycott them or whatever until afterwards. For the girl's sake, we shouldn't speculate about her being a wolf crying attention seeker.


----------



## Overtone (Sep 12, 2017)

What mindset is that? And what does that mindset have to do with being female?


----------



## ArtDecade (Sep 12, 2017)

lewis said:


> are you female?
> 
> because if so that would explain your mindset. (Im not saying you are wrong/right vs anyone else - was more an observation)



You have to be female to have that mindset? You have seriously boggled my mind with that statement.


----------



## lewis (Sep 12, 2017)

ArtDecade said:


> You have to be female to have that mindset? You have seriously boggled my mind with that statement.


as in its much easier to relate to a woman being raped, if your a woman?

whats so mind boggling about that?.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Sep 12, 2017)

Hi folks, female here. Been raped before too. (after a show no less, though not by a band member.) Just a friendly reminder that all this blind speculation, and siding against (albiet under the guise of the whole "innocent until guilty" thing, your biases are clear) her because of said speculation, is exactly why I tried killing myself before (reluctantly) telling anyone. Coming forward about rape isn't fun. I still hate talking about it. I hate remembering it. I hate seeing people give such a large benefit of the doubt to the accused, while treating the accuser as suspect.

Let the courts do their thing and don't talk about how "some women" like to make stuff up out of the blue. True or not, (surprise, men do it too) you don't know her and as such you should probably err on the side of caution and not speak in such a way that might scare anyone in the future from sharing what happened to them. Remember that you, and everyone, has spectators. People like me, or her, are always watching and listening. I'm not confident I would come forward in the future either judging by how I was treated the last time.

Take this perspective how you will.


----------



## Overtone (Sep 12, 2017)

lewis said:


> as in its much easier to relate to a woman being raped, if your a woman?
> 
> whats so mind boggling about that?.



If that was the statement you'd made, we wouldn't be confused.


----------



## HeavyMetal4Ever (Sep 12, 2017)

Anyone that thinks rape happens less than false allegations of rape is kidding themselves. If you accept this then surely you would give the benefit of the doubt to the self professed victim, not the alleged perpetrator?


----------



## lewis (Sep 12, 2017)

Overtone said:


> If that was the statement you'd made, we wouldn't be confused.


thought it was easy enough to interpret that was what I meant.
My bad if it isnt.


----------



## wankerness (Sep 12, 2017)

lewis said:


> as in its much easier to relate to a woman being raped, if your a woman?
> 
> whats so mind boggling about that?.



What would be the point of that question? The first one *sounded like* "oh of course you think that if you're a girl, real men would side with Decapitated against this liar." The other one sounds like an attempt to backtrack, unless you were just trying to hit on me! AHHHH

If it was truly innocent, just be more careful in threads like this, haha.

And no, I'm not a girl, I just deal a lot more with women IRL than I deal with metal tough guys and thus tend to react negatively to the common reaction of "look at the woman trying to bring down the GREAT MAN" that I usually see on male-driven message boards. It definitely does happen once in a while, but so far this situation has me siding entirely with the victim until we hear otherwise. Horrible things tend to happen to rape victims who try to do anything about it, ESPECIALLY when they make any accusation against men with any kind of power or fame. She's going to get absolutely raked over the coals by the scum of the internet community regardless of the verdict.


----------



## Nicki (Sep 12, 2017)

I don't know why all 4 were arrested when it's alleged that it was Michal and Rafal were the ones involved.

Even if they get free and clear of the charges, that kind of thing hangs over your head for the rest of your life and people are always left wondering. Their reputation is damaged and is irreparable. The only form of damage control is to cut Michal and Rafal loose. Sure, they get hung out to dry, but it's the only way the band can have a hope of continuing on.


----------



## wankerness (Sep 12, 2017)

Nicki said:


> *I don't know why all 4 were arrested when it's alleged that it was Michal and Rafal were the ones involved.*
> 
> Even if they get free and clear of the charges, that kind of thing hangs over your head for the rest of your life and people are always left wondering. Their reputation is damaged and is irreparable. The only form of damage control is to cut Michal and Rafal loose. Sure, they get hung out to dry, but it's the only way the band can have a hope of continuing on.



Probably arrested as accessories, or depending on what happened, she didn't KNOW which ones had done it? I don't know. If you participated in getting her into the situation you're not exactly innocent. And if one of them just stood by and let it happen knowingly, I don't think he can be charged with anything in the US (though he could in some other countries), but I wouldn't shed any tears over his rep being ruined. Guess we'll find out what the story is at some point. If he truly had nothing to do with it, I don't think his career is over or that he'll be unhireable, he just might have to change the band name and would obviously have to find new members!!


----------



## bostjan (Sep 12, 2017)

They were all four arrested for kidnapping. I don't think all four have been charged with rape.


----------



## lewis (Sep 12, 2017)

wankerness said:


> What would be the point of that question? The first one *sounded like* "oh of course you think that if you're a girl, real men would side with Decapitated against this liar." The other one sounds like an attempt to backtrack, unless you were just trying to hit on me! AHHHH
> 
> *If it was truly innocent, just be more careful in threads like this, haha*.
> 
> And no, I'm not a girl, I just deal a lot more with women IRL than I deal with metal tough guys and thus tend to react negatively to the common reaction of "look at the woman trying to bring down the GREAT MAN" that I usually see on male-driven message boards. It definitely does happen once in a while, but so far this situation has me siding entirely with the victim until we hear otherwise. Horrible things tend to happen to rape victims who try to do anything about it, ESPECIALLY when they make any accusation against men with any kind of power or fame. She's going to get absolutely raked over the coals by the scum of the internet community regardless of the verdict.




yeah it was harmless. I only asked because of your username etc. 
Shouldnt have to be "careful" but I take your point.
Apologies to anyone who misinterpreted what I meant.


----------



## BusinessMan (Sep 12, 2017)

silverabyss said:


> This all really sucks if true because Vogg is one of my heroes, just like John Parkin was



Really it does suck for those off us Vogg has inspired. He is one of the players that really got me into guitar playing. I really hope these accusations are false, but damn it sure as hell looks like they aren't. Either, it's a shitty situation for the band and the victim. And then there's the collateral damage to the metal community, giving us the stigma that we're all rapists because we "listen to death metal".


----------



## wankerness (Sep 12, 2017)

BusinessMan said:


> Really it does suck for those off us Vogg has inspired. He is one of the players that really got me into guitar playing. I really hope these accusations are false, but damn it sure as hell looks like they aren't. Either, *it's a shitty situation for the band* and the victim. And then there's the collateral damage to the metal community, giving us the stigma that we're all rapists because we "listen to death metal".



Well, if they're true, then it's not a shitty situation for the band, they deserve it!

I remember about 10 years ago in a music and gender class I gave a big presentation on metal (the class was probably like 2/3 women). I mostly talked about metal bands with women as the singers, especially ones that had mellowed over time (ex The Gathering), but I also did some other random stuff highlighting various songs about gender from other bands. Most people found most of it interesting and no eyebrows were raised. Except, I included Cannibal Corpse's "F'kd with a Knife" and "Stripped Raped and Strangled" and said something like "they're just adolescent attempts to shock, I don't get the impression the band or the metal scene actually hates women," cause that was my personal viewpoint at the time. Naturally, NO ONE else in the class bought it and after the presentation almost all the questions were like "what the hell is wrong with them and anyone who listens to them!!" Over the years, I've started to see why they reacted that way. Really, to produce stuff like that legitimately DOES require a huge lack of respect for the other gender, even if it was made somewhat "tongue in cheek," and yes, some of the fans who like that stuff legitimately are psychos. And I didn't even include bands I find far more heinous like Whitechapel!

This is all a total tangent. It's just an anecdote about how I think us metal fans don't realize just how bad we (and many bands) look to the opposite sex, and this really is a huge confirmation of exactly what "regular" people think already.  If these guys are guilty, I hope they throw the book at them and there's plenty of public condemnation from other bands on the scene, and that the victim doesn't get attacked by the metal community et large.


----------



## feraledge (Sep 12, 2017)

BusinessMan said:


> And then there's the collateral damage to the metal community, giving us the stigma that we're all rapists because we "listen to death metal".


This is not an issue at all.
1) we know about this because we know the band. The arrest made local news.
2) It's not like Decapitated dudes, if guilty, are the first rapists in the metal world. Sad but true. 
3) There's too much sketchy shit in metal to think we're cohesive enough to worry about "our" PR.
4) Just be declarative and clear about this: rapists are fucking scum and deserve no place on this earth, much less in any scene.

Decapitated put out some good albums. At this point, Vogg is the only original member even? My band played with them before the accident, I didn't meet them. My drummer said Vivek seemed down to earth. Is anyone here friends with them? Can anyone say they have a reason to believe they would never do something like this other than them having written music you like? 
How hard is it to just say "Fuck them" and walk away if this is true, as it seems to be.
Making good music says nothing about character. And I've had to publicly disown bands way too many times to hesitate in doing it again. Phobia was a huge influence on me in the early 90s, but Shane beat up his GF at Maryland Death Fest and I tossed my shirts/CDs and never looked back. No music is that good that it can overcome horrible people.


----------



## vilk (Sep 12, 2017)

So like the writers for Criminal Minds must lack respect for women because they are constantly getting raped and murdered on that show? After all since it legitimately DOES require a huge lack of respect for the other gender to write about murder in a creative setting?

idk, I've always sorta see gore/murder lyric content as an extension of like serial murder pulp novels. Of which there are tons. My mom reads them all the time, and I'm fairly sure her favorite author is a woman. Blanking on the name though...

edit: I texted her, it's Mary Higgins Clark


----------



## Type_R3387 (Sep 12, 2017)

silverabyss said:


> This all really sucks if true because Vogg is one of my heroes, just like John Parkin was


Me too, friend...Ive always been a huge fan of his playing as well as Decapitated themselves. I do have something on my mind that I noticed though....A while back, about the beginning of July (mere days before the album release), I was browsing Itunes and decided to look up Decapitated. Upon doing so, I noticed that Anticult was listed and already had reviews. A couple reviews stated peoples' approval of the singles that had been released and their anticipation for the new album. However, one review struck me as very odd. It was titled "KILL PEOPLE" and read "Kill people in the state of Washington to this!". When I went back to see if it was there yesterday, it had been removed. While its not a murder, it's very errie that this occurred in the state that was mentioned in the comment. It could be a coincidence.... I really wish I would have screenshot it as I probably sound like Im talking shit.


----------



## noise in my mind (Sep 12, 2017)

If she was raped, then everyday for the rest of her life she will have to remember it. I think it's one of the worst things you can do to someone.


----------



## Type_R3387 (Sep 12, 2017)

I just don't get it, if it really is true. You're a well respected band in the death metal community and you're touring North America. You'll travel across dozens of cities and see probably hundreds of women at your shows (in total...I understand that there will be far more men as a whole.) In fact, there just may be a few ladies that WOULD be interested in some after show "activities". Of all of them, why would you stoop so low as to force yourself upon an unwilling one? Even if she was cool with it at first and then suddenly shifted gears, all bets should have been off. Respect the woman, as it is her choice. Not only is it jeopardizing your career, it's forever altering someone's life in a terrible way. Im really trying to stay positive and hope for these guys to be truly innocent, but the evidence is looking shady. I will give Vogg credit for being honest and giving a sample. Such as a shame as I was so damn excited to see them play here in Michigan...


----------



## Ebony (Sep 12, 2017)

wankerness said:


> She's going to get absolutely raked over the coals by the scum of the internet community regardless of the verdict.



And if she turns out to be a liar, she will deserve every last syllable typed by this "scum of the internet".

I agree with the sentiment of neutrality, my distaste for rape and fake rape allegations are identical in degree.
So far the only thing we _definitively_ know is that someone is guilty of one or the other_._


----------



## JohnIce (Sep 12, 2017)

Type_R3387 said:


> I just don't get it, if it really is true. You're a well respected band in the death metal community and you're touring North America. You'll travel across dozens of cities and see probably hundreds of women at your shows (in total...I understand that there will be far more men as a whole.) In fact, there just may be a few ladies that WOULD be interested in some after show "activities". Of all of them, why would you stoop so low as to force yourself upon an unwilling one?



Lots of dudes can't handle being well respected and successful without developing god complexes and starting to think they can get away with anything, especially with "groupies". Sweden's metal scene isn't very big and everybody knows everybody, and I've seen some disgusting displays of misogyny and assorted ego asshatery from more well respected rockstars than I can count. They're really just insecure little boys underneath it all. Throw a bit of alcohol in them and they'll be standing on a table trying to pick a fight with anyone who won't say their band is the best in the world (that's an actual event, not gonna name names but some people on this board owns his signature guitar). So yeah, while I'll never understand how you could rape somebody, I see the symptoms (inflated sense of power and innacountability) fucking everywhere in the metal scene.


----------



## Mathemagician (Sep 12, 2017)

lewis said:


> are you female?
> 
> because if so that would explain your mindset. (Im not saying you are wrong/right vs anyone else - was more an observation)



What the fuck does this even mean? Are you suggesting that only women would stop someone from eating raped? 

Why exactly are you getting at? That "a woman" would be more willing to believe a woman may have been raped? 

It's always painful seeing comments from people immediately supporting an entertainer and leaning towards the rape accuser being a liar - everyone wants to feel "smart" and that "no way are they fooling me". 

If she's lying it'll come out. 

But even if she initially WANTED to have sex with them and got on the bus willingly, but changed her mind at any point - if someone keeps going then it's rape.


----------



## oracles (Sep 12, 2017)

wankerness said:


> Really, to produce stuff like that legitimately DOES require a huge lack of respect for the other gender, even if it was made somewhat "tongue in cheek,"



No, it absolutely doesn't. That's straw grasping at its finest.


----------



## marcwormjim (Sep 13, 2017)

Mathemagician said:


> Are you suggesting that only women would stop someone from eating raped?



Was just about to suggest this.


----------



## wankerness (Sep 13, 2017)

If you read follow-up posts from that guy, I think he just blundered into the thread and didn't mean what his first post looked like. Either way, he's been bashed enough!


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Sep 13, 2017)

I don't understand why this thread contains 3 pages of talk trying to figure out who 'deserves' the benefit of the doubt.
They're _allegations_. Not convictions. Until there's evidence or a ruling one way or another, as far as my nihilistic ass is concerned, both parties can get bent. After evidence is found or a conviction is put through, then we know the truth and can crucify accordingly.

I never understood why people get so invested in cases like this they aren't involved in, to the point where they already have their mind made up on what's true or not. Half you guys are saying "I'm holding off on my judgement *but*-" and it's clear you already decided whether or not they did it.

Sure bands do awful things (l0l hi Varg). Sure people also make up BS to get people in court.
And, more importantly, there is also a _*metric shit-ton*_ of grey area in between, any combination of which is likely to be at play here.
Which is why the legal system exists in the way that it does.
So that nothing happens until we go through the process and know what went down.

I don't think the band picked this chick up and got graphic with her. Because that'd be beyond stupid.
I also don't think this chick just decided she was going to ruin these guys for no reason. Because that'd be ridiculous.
The band does not deserve my support just because they're a metal band. For what it's worth, I could give a damn about Decapitated.
The woman does not deserve my support just because she's a woman. _This does not mean I doubt her claims, this means that I don't intrinsically *believe* them just because she pressed them._
You guys, and I, should just sit back and watch as the chaos unfolds.


----------



## lewis (Sep 13, 2017)

Ordacleaphobia said:


> I don't understand why this thread contains 3 pages of talk trying to figure out who 'deserves' the benefit of the doubt.
> They're _allegations_. Not convictions. Until there's evidence or a ruling one way or another, as far as my nihilistic ass is concerned, both parties can get bent. After evidence is found or a conviction is put through, then we know the truth and can crucify accordingly.
> 
> I never understood why people get so invested in cases like this they aren't involved in, to the point where they already have their mind made up on what's true or not. Half you guys are saying "I'm holding off on my judgement *but*-" and it's clear you already decided whether or not they did it.
> ...



This is well said, and this point at the bottom is what I was trying to suggest earlier in my heavy handed, poorly worded post.

Im just watching now as you say


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 13, 2017)

lewis said:


> yeah it was harmless. I only asked because of your username etc.
> Shouldnt have to be "careful" but I take your point.
> Apologies to anyone who misinterpreted what I meant.


You better be careful. The "All men are rapists! #YesAllMen" gang are watching and waiting.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 13, 2017)

BusinessMan said:


> And then there's the collateral damage to the metal community, giving us the stigma that we're all rapists because we "listen to death metal".


Anyone that'd believe that doesn't have much of a brain to begin with. Then again, we're talking about Americans, who generally don't look into things for themselves, and just believe whatever soundbyte the moron on TV/radio tells them.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 13, 2017)

wankerness said:


> Well, if they're true, then it's not a shitty situation for the band, they deserve it!


I think he meant if they didn't do it. Then again, you seem pretty adamant to crucify them already.


----------



## lewis (Sep 13, 2017)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> You better be careful. The "All men are rapists! #YesAllMen" gang are watching and waiting.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 13, 2017)

JohnIce said:


> Lots of dudes can't handle being well respected and successful without developing god complexes and starting to think they can get away with anything, especially with "groupies". Sweden's metal scene isn't very big and everybody knows everybody, and I've seen some disgusting displays of misogyny and assorted ego asshatery from more well respected rockstars than I can count. They're really just insecure little boys underneath it all. Throw a bit of alcohol in them and they'll be standing on a table trying to pick a fight with anyone who won't say their band is the best in the world (that's an actual event, not gonna name names but some people on this board owns his signature guitar). So yeah, while I'll never understand how you could rape somebody, I see the symptoms (inflated sense of power and innacountability) fucking everywhere in the metal scene.


Ola tried to fight people while drunk after jumping up on a table? Not sure if that's sad and pathetic or incredibly funny. Maybe both?


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 13, 2017)

oracles said:


> No, it absolutely doesn't. That's straw grasping at its finest.


I love my horror films, you know, because I'm a hateful, misogynist. Obviously the ONLY reason someone would enjoy a horror film. 

This is sarcasm for anyone who's turned their brain off or turned it into a bedpan.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 13, 2017)

Ordacleaphobia said:


> I don't understand why this thread contains 3 pages of talk trying to figure out who 'deserves' the benefit of the doubt.
> They're _allegations_. Not convictions. Until there's evidence or a ruling one way or another, as far as my nihilistic ass is concerned, both parties can get bent. After evidence is found or a conviction is put through, then we know the truth and can crucify accordingly.
> 
> I never understood why people get so invested in cases like this they aren't involved in, to the point where they already have their mind made up on what's true or not. Half you guys are saying "I'm holding off on my judgement *but*-" and it's clear you already decided whether or not they did it.
> ...


Referring solely to Varg's murder of Euronymous, and not his personal beliefs as well as other shit, I think it's unfair to include his name in this. Apparently his lawyer fucked him, and it's in police reports from people within the scene that it was pretty common knowledge that Euronymous planned to take him out to the woods, tie him up, torture him, and kill him. The judge, apparently, ruled that basically that, "Yes, that's true, but there's no way he could have known that, so let's give him twenty years" or whatever his sentencing was.

As for the rest of the shit Varg he has done, that's his bullshit to answer for.

EDIT: Oh, and the rest: I almost forgot, but I agree with the rest of what you said, pretty much.


----------



## exo (Sep 13, 2017)

Everyone wants to vilify someone in this situation......but it's ALSO entirely possible the no-one involved was in a state to give legal consent to anything.

If she's too fucked up to say "no", but WANTS to in her head,and he's to fucked up to understand how fucked up she is and that she's not into it, where does the fault lie from a legal perspective? What if it's just a super shitty, terrible situation where NO-ONE was in any state to give consent?


It's also equally possible that someone in the situation is just absolute scum of the earth.


Point is we don't know, yet we always rush to vilify SOMEONE when a story like this comes out.....and it's why I feel like we all sorta need to sit down, shut up, and let the legal process and evidence reveal what it will before we start judging a situation.......


----------



## Sogradde (Sep 13, 2017)

exo said:


> If she's too fucked up to say "no", but WANTS to in her head,and he's to fucked up to understand how fucked up she is and that she's not into it, where does the fault lie from a legal perspective? What if it's just a super shitty, terrible situation where NO-ONE was in any state to give consent?


When both parties were unable to give consent, judges (at least in the US) tend to rule in favour of women though, because reasons. Let's not pretend the system is fair right now as women can basically go about accusing everyone of raping them without ever having to face serious repercussions. I remember a quite recent case where a woman accused 12 or 13 different people of raping her over the course of a couple of years. All of those cases were made up and she ended up getting a slap on the wrist. 

It's also quite reasonable that people tend to be empathetic towards the party that they can identify with the most - in this case males - that's psychology 101. This is also the reason why nearly everyone int his thread, including the people who claim the moral high ground, feel bad about terrorist attacks in the west, while they just shrug over 50 gazillion dead kids in africa.


----------



## exo (Sep 13, 2017)

Well, I don't really identify with either party, since I've been with my wife for 24 years in December, and wouldn't even entertain the idea of dropping my zipper for anyone else. Maybe THAT is where my bias lies in this case.

It's a fucked up situation no matter HOW you look at it, and I'm just another person trying to make sense of a situation that DOESN'T.


----------



## marcwormjim (Sep 13, 2017)

Don't say that about your situation, man. One can always get back in the game.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 13, 2017)

marcwormjim said:


> Don't say that about your situation, man. One can always get back in the game.


I think you misunderstood.


----------



## exo (Sep 13, 2017)

marcwormjim said:


> Don't say that about your situation, man. One can always get back in the game.



Dude....you're a dick. An entertaining one......but a dick nonetheless


----------



## JohnIce (Sep 13, 2017)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Ola tried to fight people while drunk after jumping up on a table? Not sure if that's sad and pathetic or incredibly funny. Maybe both?



Off-topic, but just to be clear it wasn't Ola  I've bumped into him too but he's always been a sweetheart, I don't see him being that kind of guy. Either way, I was just using that particular event as one example to show that being well respected doesn't automatically build character or humility. I absolutely wasn't trying to call anyone in particular out, it's not what I come to this forum for.


----------



## wankerness (Sep 13, 2017)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> I love my horror films, you know, because I'm a hateful, misogynist. Obviously the ONLY reason someone would enjoy a horror film.
> 
> This is sarcasm for anyone who's turned their brain off or turned it into a bedpan.



I didn't say ANYTHING about listening, and I'm only referring to a subset of those kinds of lyrics. So, the same straw-grasping can apply to trying to blow the statement back up the other way!

With horror movies, it's the same deal. There are thousands of movies about murder and rape that don't set off any alarms. It's my preferred genre! It's the handful of ones like New York Ripper that I think really do reflect on the writer/director that I'd compare.


----------



## wankerness (Sep 13, 2017)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> You better be careful. The "All men are rapists! #YesAllMen" gang are watching and waiting.


Give me a break. Ive been called out as a victim blamer on sites like that (ex, the AV club).

EDIT: To specify, it's because I get pissed when there are public allegations with literally no evidence and sometimes not even AN ACCUSER (ex, look up stuff about Louis CK) and everyone immediately pillories them for being guilty. The Louis CK thing is especially ridiculous since the only person EVER quoted on him being a sexual assaulter VERY SPECIFICALLY SAID that she wasn't talking about him, and everyone was like "of course she'd say that! He's famous!!!" Ridiculous. A case like this with plenty of physical evidence is a different matter entirely.


----------



## Zalbu (Sep 13, 2017)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> You better be careful. The "All men are rapists! #YesAllMen" gang are watching and waiting.


But have no fear, because the sentient fedoras who are ready to stand up to the evil feminazis who oppress the poor men are here to save the day!

And Varg fucked himself by murdering Euronymous, what justification did he have to kill Euronymous? The Norwegian court stated themselves that Euronymous had plans to kill him so Varg could've just injured him, left him there and contacted the police but he says in his Youtube videos that he murdered him as a form of preventive self-defense so Euronymous wouldn't attack him again. He barely even consider himself as a murderer.

Back on topic, in what fantasy land do you people live in where women apparently lie about getting raped all the time? Exactly what would they gain from it when they have a hard enough time being believed in the first place when they get raped?

Decapitated are innocent until proven guilty but saying stuff like "lying about getting raped is as bad as getting raped" is headassery of the first degree. The alleged victim always deserves the benefit of the doubt over the alleged perpetrators because the amount of rape allegations that turns out to be fake is so small that it's barely of statistical significance, especially not when you factor in the amount of rapes that doesn't even get reported in the first place as well as the ones that actually lead to the rapist getting convicted. The numbers I've seen puts the amount of false rape allegations at around 2-8%.


----------



## TedEH (Sep 13, 2017)

Zalbu said:


> Exactly what would they gain from it


I feel like we've danced around the idea that the power to intentionally ruin someone with a claim like that is a thing. I'm not suggesting that's what happened- I'm firmly in the "don't assume either party is guilty or innocent" camp- but I don't think it's fair to say there's zero to gain from false accusations. If someone had a beef with the band and wanted to ruin their careers, this would be a way to do it. And it would work. The band could very well be ruined at this point. You also can't rule out motivations that don't "make sense to you", since you're not the one in question. The motivations don't have to make sense to you. They don't have to make sense at all. It could be anything from wanting attention, to wanting to ruin the band, to some sort of awkward almost-consent-but-changed-their-mind-last-minute situation, and it's equally possible that the band is made up of sh*tty human beings who really did assault someone. Maybe they'd be likely to do it again. Maybe they do it all the time and we never hear about. We don't gain anything by trying to guess at everyone's motivations, or guess what actually happened. We're not in any position to "solve the mystery" from our computers.


----------



## vilk (Sep 13, 2017)

Also, we've kinda danced around the idea that sometimes there are rapes that aren't mutually understood to be rape by both parties involved. If this wasted girl started getting busy with two wasted Polish dudes who may or may not be any good at understanding English, I could imagine a situation where she feels raped but the men don't even realize it.


----------



## Ebony (Sep 13, 2017)

Zalbu said:


> Decapitated are innocent until proven guilty but saying stuff like "lying about getting raped is as bad as getting raped" is headassery of the first degree.



It _is _just as bad when taken to its conclusion for most of the victims. Denying that as a fact is the only _actual_ headassery and proves you have no idea of what you're talking about.



Zalbu said:


> The numbers I've seen puts the amount of false rape allegations at around 2-8%.



No-one is denying that the crime of rape is much more _abundant_ than the crime of fake allegations.


----------



## Sogradde (Sep 13, 2017)

Zalbu said:


> The numbers I've seen puts the amount of false rape allegations at around 2-8%.


Breh, you may wanna have a look at this link.
This is a similar scenario to the "1 in 4 college girls gets raped on campus!" fearmongering present in the states, which is thrown around alot but was actually made up decades ago and parroted without looking into it. 

The uncomfortable truth is: we don't know the actual number but data suggests it's quite a bit higher.

And before someone asks again why women would make that up; people are dicks, men and women alike. That's why.


----------



## bostjan (Sep 13, 2017)

Zalbu said:


> Decapitated are innocent until proven guilty but saying stuff like "lying about getting raped is as bad as getting raped" is headassery of the first degree. The alleged victim always deserves the benefit of the doubt over the alleged perpetrators because the amount of rape allegations that turns out to be fake is so small that it's barely of statistical significance, especially not when you factor in the amount of rapes that doesn't even get reported in the first place as well as the ones that actually lead to the rapist getting convicted. *The numbers I've seen puts the amount of false rape allegations at around 2-8%*.



And how is that determined? I'm calling shenanigans on the grounds that that statistic cannot even be measured as stated, and studies that have claimed to have done so have always been met with tons of conttroversy. There are allegations that lead to convictions, which is astonishingly only around 2% (https://www.rainn.org/statistics/criminal-justice-system). But to say that such is evidence that 98% of allegations are false is stupid.

Here's a study from the 1990's, which was the most recent I could readily find (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...OO.PDF&usg=AFQjCNFk6PSOl4-BX2ZHXvJLlx_bNcIGHg). Out of 260300 charges pressed, 34650 arrests were made, which led to 21655 convictions. That's 8% of allegations turning into convictions, or 62% of arrests turning into convictions. Now, I don't think that says anything about false allegations per se, but it certainly does not jive at all with the source-free statistics you posted.

First off, statistics on somethings as simple as how many rape convictions occured in the USA in, say, 2015, are not even that easy to trace. How many charges were pressed is even more difficult to measure. So now, we are going to go out on the limb of determining how many claims were false, independent of using how many charges led to convictions?

If you want to bring statistics into this sort of heated discussion, you might want to think twice before trying to make a point.


----------



## Zalbu (Sep 13, 2017)

Ebony said:


> It _is _just as bad when taken to its conclusion for most of the victims. Denying that as a fact is the only _actual_ headassery and proves you have no idea of what you're talking about.
> 
> No-one is denying that the crime of rape is much more _abundant_ than the crime of fake allegations.


Nope, because one person got raped and the other person didn't. It literally, objectively isn't just as bad.



Ebony said:


> No-one is denying that the crime of rape is much more _abundant_ than the crime of fake allegations.


Except for all the people that do, of course.



Sogradde said:


> Breh, you may wanna have a look at this link.
> This is a similar scenario to the "1 in 4 college girls gets raped on campus!" fearmongering present in the states, which is thrown around alot but was actually made up decades ago and parroted without looking into it.
> 
> The uncomfortable truth is: we don't know the actual number but data suggests it's quite a bit higher.
> ...


This still doesn't factor in the number of rapes that never get reported, more than half of rapes doesn't get reported, and how likely is it that somebody wouldn't report it to the police if they're out to ruin someones lives or whatever? There are slightly bigger issues to worry about when rapists barely even get arrested, let alone convicted in the rape cases that do get reported to the police.


----------



## bostjan (Sep 13, 2017)

Zalbu said:


> Nope, because one person got raped and the other person didn't. It literally, objectively isn't just as bad.



This statement infurates me. So it's perfectly fine to ruin someone's rest of their life in one way, but not in another way? 

Look, this discussion has gotten really off into philosophical territory and it's all been pretty tasteless, if you ask me. I have contributed to that, and I apologize for doing so.

I propose that we simply try to be more measured and respectful in this thread.


----------



## Ebony (Sep 13, 2017)

Zalbu said:


> Nope, because one person got raped and the other person didn't. It literally, objectively isn't just as bad.



Firstly, alot of the victims of fake allegations receive physical abuse after the fact so that isn't true either.

But if you think physical violence always trumps psychological abuse (which ironically is why rape is considered worse than a bloody beating in the first place) by all means indulge yourself.

And please share that viewpoint with all the millions upon millions of people chained to a life in PTS-centres, doomed to never-ending self-destruction. God knows, they need a good laugh.


----------



## vilk (Sep 13, 2017)

I'm sure things aren't this way in Norway, but here in the United States, being sent to prison = being sent to a systematized brutal rape and beating facility. To a degree, sending a man to prison on false allegations is equivalent to raping him 100x over. 

Edit: Actually, sending a man to prison even for having truly committed a crime is still sending him to a systematized brutal rape and beating facility...


----------



## Zalbu (Sep 13, 2017)

bostjan said:


> This statement infurates me. So it's perfectly fine to ruin someone's rest of their life in one way, but not in another way?
> 
> Look, this discussion has gotten really off into philosophical territory and it's all been pretty tasteless, if you ask me. I have contributed to that, and I apologize for doing so.
> 
> I propose that we simply try to be more measured and respectful in this thread.


Why would either of them be okay? If being told that getting raped is worse than not getting raped infuriates you then you probably shouldn't enter threads like this in the first place.



Ebony said:


> But if you think physical violence always trumps psychological abuse (which ironically is why rape is considered worse than a bloody beating in the first place) by all means indulge yourself.


Rape is both psychological and physical violence, being accused of rape is neither in a vast majority of cases and just psychological violence in the remaining cases. If you have some information that would show the opposite then I'd love to read it.

Here's the latest study I can find, out of more than 5000 prosecutions of rate, 35 were found to be false. How many of them do you think are sitting in prison rotting away right now?

http://www.webcitation.org/6ItPWbBj...h/perverting_course_of_justice_march_2013.pdf


----------



## Blytheryn (Sep 13, 2017)

It seems like all the social media is down. Wasn't down the other day.


----------



## bostjan (Sep 13, 2017)

Zalbu said:


> If being told that getting raped is worse than not getting raped infuriates you then you probably shouldn't enter threads like this in the first place.
> 
> 
> Rape is both psychological and physical violence, being accused of rape is neither in a vast majority of cases and just psychological violence in the remaining cases.
> ...



That study is for how many rape allegations in the UK turned into convictions for perverting the course of justice. To get to that point, the accuser would have to tamper with evidence.

You are just being belligerent at this point, purposely misrepresenting what I said to try to piss me off even more.

Have a nice day.


----------



## Mathemagician (Sep 13, 2017)

Even with the (very) small number of rape allegations that do end up being false - victims should get the support and respect they deserve until ti all comes out. 

Do you know what the process of pursuing rape allegations is? Do you know how hard accusers (women especially) get raked over the coals, and how EVERYONE involved tries to paint them as having "asked for it"? 

Ask any woman who has pressed charges and followed through the process. They would tell you 1000 times that it was fucking brutal. And some women would even choose not to go through the process again if they could go back, because being forced to relive the crime and getting drilled on it as though THEY were lying was torture. 

Ask one of these men who claim that "false rape claims" are so common if they would like to be taken seriously if they were raped by a man - the tone changes considerably. 

Rape is serious and must be taken seriously. Lying about it is a crime. Very few people are willing to commit a crime for the sake of a lie. 

There's a dilemma in crime/law: if your laws support the accuser more you may occasionally have an innocent person incarcerated, and if you support the accused more you may have bad people go free. It's why we have a legal process 

But choosing to believe that rape allegations are "often false" is up there with denying climate change on the scale of "I choose to believe whatever I want regardless of facts". 

Siding with/against before the case proceeds just tells people one has an agenda to push.


----------



## Zalbu (Sep 13, 2017)

bostjan said:


> That study is for how many rape allegations in the UK turned into convictions for perverting the course of justice. To get to that point, the accuser would have to tamper with evidence.
> 
> You are just being belligerent at this point, purposely misrepresenting what I said to try to piss me off even more.
> 
> Have a nice day.


So you didn't even read the article, there were even less charges for wasting police time than for perverting the course of justice. Nice talking to you!



> There were 121 suspects whose cases involved allegedly false rape complaints. Of these, 35 were prosecuted: 25 for perverting the course of justice and ten for wasting police time.


----------



## Sogradde (Sep 13, 2017)

Zalbu said:


> This still doesn't factor in the number of rapes that never get reported,


This is true. 


Zalbu said:


> more than half of rapes doesn't get reported


This is straight up fiction, unless you can provide credible sources.

Don't get me wrong, I don't deny that it happens but claiming to know the percantage of something that is by definition immeasurable sounds foolish at best.


----------



## lewis (Sep 13, 2017)

Zalbu said:


> But have no fear, because the sentient fedoras who are ready to stand up to the evil feminazis who oppress the poor men are here to save the day!
> 
> And Varg fucked himself by murdering Euronymous, what justification did he have to kill Euronymous? The Norwegian court stated themselves that Euronymous had plans to kill him so Varg could've just injured him, left him there and contacted the police but he says in his Youtube videos that he murdered him as a form of preventive self-defense so Euronymous wouldn't attack him again. He barely even consider himself as a murderer.
> 
> ...



The same thing you gain from actually raping someone. Nothing. (other than the punishment afterwards that is)


----------



## Zalbu (Sep 13, 2017)

Sogradde said:


> This is true.
> 
> This is straight up fiction, unless you can provide credible sources.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I don't deny that it happens but claiming to know the percantage of something that is by definition immeasurable sounds foolish at best.


This puts the number of reported rapes and sexual assaults at 34% so the number of rapes is even lower than that. Just Google and take your pick, it's not exactly a secret that rape is grossly underreported.
https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5111


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 13, 2017)

wankerness said:


> Give me a break. Ive been called out as a victim blamer on sites like that (ex, the AV club).
> 
> EDIT: To specify, it's because I get pissed when there are public allegations with literally no evidence and sometimes not even AN ACCUSER (ex, look up stuff about Louis CK) and everyone immediately pillories them for being guilty. The Louis CK thing is especially ridiculous since the only person EVER quoted on him being a sexual assaulter VERY SPECIFICALLY SAID that she wasn't talking about him, and everyone was like "of course she'd say that! He's famous!!!" Ridiculous. A case like this with plenty of physical evidence is a different matter entirely.


I wasn't referring to you. Hell, it was mostly a joke about those types being all over Twitter.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 13, 2017)

Zalbu said:


> But have no fear, because the sentient fedoras who are ready to stand up to the evil feminazis who oppress the poor men are here to save the day!
> 
> And Varg fucked himself by murdering Euronymous, what justification did he have to kill Euronymous? The Norwegian court stated themselves that Euronymous had plans to kill him so Varg could've just injured him, left him there and contacted the police but he says in his Youtube videos that he murdered him as a form of preventive self-defense so Euronymous wouldn't attack him again. He barely even consider himself as a murderer.
> 
> ...


Oh, god. Not the fedora crew.


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Sep 13, 2017)

Mathemagician said:


> Do you know what the process of pursuing rape allegations is? Do you know how hard accusers (women especially) get raked over the coals, and how EVERYONE involved* tries to paint them as having "asked for it"*?
> Ask any woman who has pressed charges and followed through the process. They would tell you 1000 times that it was fucking brutal. And some women would even choose not to go through the process again if they could go back, because being forced to relive the crime and getting drilled on it as though THEY were lying was torture.



I told myself I wasn't going to post in this thread again, but my god *please*, spare me.
For all of the talking points I'm forced to listen to about this reasoning, not once have I ever _SEEN_, not once have I ever _HEARD_, not once have I ever even _READ _about this actually happening. (And before you link me some article complaining about twitter trolls saying mean things on the internet, please take a moment to ask yourself if you're really being intellectually honest here first)
ESPECIALLY after this phrase has been parroted throughout society consistently throughout the past....what...10 years? 

What you're talking about here is likely a perception misconstrued from the treatment the accuser receives during the process, detailed at the end of this quote here. And that part invokes genuine sympathy from me, because that's got to be horrific.
But at the same time, I wouldn't have it any other way. They *NEED *to get grilled up and down about every aspect of the event because rape is such a hard thing to prove and it's such a serious allegation. And _IF _they're guilty, everyone involved _*ABSOLUTELY *_wants to lock that sucker up and probably worse. BUT, if they're _NOT _guilty, they just jumped up to playing through life on hard mode. Because even if that's where it stops, the accusation still follows them. In <CURRENT YEAR>, a large swathe of people aren't satisfied with what the courts come up with. There will be people that still think he did it. Hell, there will be people that still just _aren't sure_ and even that is enough to drastically affect someone's daily life. Not to mention that by the time we've gotten to this point where we even have a verdict, this guy has likely had his car smashed, windows broken, house spray painted, likely been jumped, his family has been harassed, and had been alienated by everyone he knows. Now imagine what happens after we find him guilty, and all of the terrible things that would come with that. Then imagine that happening to someone who was falsely convicted because the prosecution wasn't worked enough, and they got the wrong guy. Doesn't even have to malicious, could have been simple mistaken identity, and this poor sap just wandered into hell.

So yeah. It sucks and I don't envy anyone involved, even the officer that has to do the questioning. But if things get that far, there's no other way around it.
To me (and likely a lot of you), the only crime to be accused of worse than rape is murder; and think about how seriously we take murder cases. Think about the overwhelming amount of sympathy people feel for the people wrongfully accused of murder.

Again, I'm not really in either camp. I honestly have no opinion on this specific case because I have no facts and thus do not care yet.
This post is really just to illustrate that just because something is ugly doesn't mean that it doesn't serve a purpose. And because the 'asking for it' thing irritates the absolute shit out of me.


----------



## brutalwizard (Sep 13, 2017)

So everyones is pumped for nail the mix this month right?


----------



## Ataraxia2320 (Sep 13, 2017)

brutalwizard said:


> So everyones is pumped for nail the mix this month right?



At the moment its the 60 foot elephant in the room. The NTM guys dont want any discussion on their pages which is understandable but its a weird vibe this month because of it. 

No point in letting an amazing mix go to waste though. I mean Daniel Bergstrand had nothing to do with any of the events that happened.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Sep 13, 2017)

Ordacleaphobia said:


> I told myself I wasn't going to post in this thread again, but my god *please*, spare me.
> For all of the talking points I'm forced to listen to about this reasoning, not once have I ever _SEEN_, not once have I ever _HEARD_, not once have I ever even _READ _about this actually happening. (And before you link me some article complaining about twitter trolls saying mean things on the internet, please take a moment to ask yourself if you're really being intellectually honest here first)
> ESPECIALLY after this phrase has been parroted throughout society consistently throughout the past....what...10 years?
> 
> ...



It's never quite worded so bluntly, but it is often heavily implied. "How much did she drink? Why did she think she was invited on the bus." And let us not forget the precious "you can't rape a guy... How can you maintain a hard on?"

These, among tons of other examples, are ways of saying "they asked for it" without saying it outright. It happens, and I've already read plenty of it in various comment sections about this case. Just throwing that out there.


----------



## bostjan (Sep 13, 2017)

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-teardrop-rapist-man-exonerated-prison20151123-story.html

https://newsone.com/509452/convicted-rapist-exonerated-by-dna-after-30-years-in-prison/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Alexander_(exonerated_convict)

To anyone who says the above is impossible.


----------



## JohnIce (Sep 13, 2017)

bostjan said:


> http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-teardrop-rapist-man-exonerated-prison20151123-story.html
> 
> https://newsone.com/509452/convicted-rapist-exonerated-by-dna-after-30-years-in-prison/
> 
> ...



No one is saying that. The argument is that it's less common than many people think. Kind of like shark attacks.


----------



## ArtDecade (Sep 13, 2017)

Chokey Chicken said:


> And let us not forget the precious "you can't rape a guy... How can you maintain a hard on?"



Lots of guys get raped... by other guys with hard-ons, too. Its not always a male/female encounter.


----------



## Zalbu (Sep 13, 2017)

What goes through a persons mind that makes them enter a thread about a woman that's allegedly been raped to start blubbering about how there's actually people who gets falsely accused of rape as well?


----------



## Ataraxia2320 (Sep 13, 2017)

It appears the Decapitated Nail the Mix has been cancelled.

Mixing Future Breed Machine by Meshuggah now instead.

As much as I like Meshuggah its going to be strange to move from a super polished metal production to a production which, although revolutionary for it's time, is not exactly a go to reference for modern engineers.


----------



## bostjan (Sep 13, 2017)

JohnIce said:


> No one is saying that. The argument is that it's less common than many people think. Kind of like shark attacks.


Ok.
Well, I don't know how common "people think" it is. Do you?


Zalbu said:


> What goes through a persons mind that makes them enter a thread about a woman that's allegedly been raped to start blubbering about how there's actually people who gets falsely accused of rape as well?


Easy, look through the thread and just read how it escalated to that point. Especially with compative language like


> Back on topic, in what fantasy land do you people live in where women apparently lie about getting raped all the time?


and


> what do you think this girl would make this story up for? It's not like rape accusers ever get anything positive out of doing it


Because some people here were saying they wanted people to withhold judgement, or, in the worst instance I saw, were "cynical."


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Sep 13, 2017)

Zalbu said:


> What goes through a persons mind that makes them enter a thread about a woman that's allegedly been raped to start blubbering about how there's actually people who gets falsely accused of rape as well?



People don't want their favorite bands to be shitty people.


----------



## bostjan (Sep 13, 2017)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> People don't want their favorite bands to be shitty people.


Yeah, that too!


----------



## Blytheryn (Sep 13, 2017)

Is there actually any news on the situation?


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Sep 13, 2017)

Blytheryn said:


> Is there actually any news on the situation?



http://www.metalsucks.net/2017/09/1...uld-remain-in-los-angeles-jail-up-to-30-days/


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Sep 13, 2017)

ArtDecade said:


> Lots of guys get raped... by other guys with hard-ons, too. Its not always a male/female encounter.



True but irrelevant to the point I was making. Just because it's not exactly a factor every time doesn't make it a non-factor all the time.

That's also discrediting male on male acts where the victim still gets an erection for _whatever_ reason.


----------



## Zalbu (Sep 13, 2017)

bostjan said:


> Ok.
> Well, I don't know how common "people think" it is. Do you?
> 
> Easy, look through the thread and just read how it escalated to that point. Especially with compative language like
> ...


...so an example of 3 people is proof that it "happens all the time"? Nope, still don't see how that warrants pulling the attention away from the of victims of actual rape, but hey, keep fighting the good fight.


----------



## Rawkmann (Sep 13, 2017)

Zalbu said:


> ...so an example of 3 people is proof that it "happens all the time"? Nope, still don't see how that warrants pulling the attention away from the hundreds of thousands of victims of actual rape, but hey, keep fighting the good fight.



Just because it's something that happens less frequently does that mean it's not worth talking about? This topic is pretty hard to approach, but feeling bad for people who get their lives ruined by false rape accusations doesn't mean the same people don't have sympathy for actual victims of rape whose lives were ruined.


----------



## Zalbu (Sep 13, 2017)

Rawkmann said:


> Just because it's something that happens less frequently does that mean it's not worth talking about? This topic is pretty hard to approach, but feeling bad for people who get their lives ruined by false rape accusations doesn't mean the same people don't have sympathy for actual victims of rape whose lives were ruined.


No, it's not worth talking about in a thread where a well known band in the metal scene are suspected for kidnapping and group raping a woman. You're free to head on over to the off topic section and create a thread about it where you won't come off as an insensitive mens rights activitst.


----------



## bostjan (Sep 13, 2017)

Zalbu said:


> ...so an example of 3 people is proof that it "happens all the time"? Nope, still don't see how that warrants pulling the attention away from the hundreds of thousands of victims of actual rape, but hey, keep fighting the good fight.



That's clearly not what I said.

I've offered to take this offline, yet here we are in public again, and you just can't help but put words in my mouth for the fifth time now.

Meanwhile you keep going off about how being falsely accused of rape is no big deal, and then ask what would possibly be the agenda of people bringing up the possibility of a false accusation in response to others who assumed the band is guilty.

Man, you are so far in the wrong on this one that I don't even know where to go with this anymore.

Even with as much of a jerk you have been to me in this thread, I truly and deeply hope no one ever brings any sort of false allegations against you. I hope you never lose a job or get expelled from school and have to spend 30 days or more in jail just because some nutty person claims you did something you didn't do. But, whether you say it hapens or not, it happens. Chances are that it won't happen to you, but I can name three people off the top of my head that I know personally who have had exactly that happen to them, and the charges were, in each and every case, proven false. Here in the USA, when it's your word against someone else's word, you have to prove your case, usually from behind bars where you have no freedom to move, no one on your side, and no one in law enforcement advocating for you, so, odds are, if you end up in that situation, you will be unable to do anything to defend yourself. But I hope it never happens to you, regardless of what you think of me.


----------



## bostjan (Sep 13, 2017)

Zalbu said:


> No, it's not worth talking about in a thread where a well known band in the metal scene are suspected for kidnapping and group raping a woman. You're free to head on over to the off topic section and create a thread about it where you won't come off as an insensitive mens rights activitst.


Since when is the goal not equal rights for men and women?!


----------



## Zalbu (Sep 13, 2017)

bostjan said:


> Since when is the goal not equal rights for men and women?!


Sorry, I think I missed the memo that feeling the need to remind people that women who falsely accuse men of rape exists every time a case like this pops up is supposed to help further the goal for equal rights for men and women


----------



## Ebony (Sep 13, 2017)

Zalbu said:


> What goes through a persons mind that makes them enter a thread about a woman that's allegedly been raped to start blubbering about how there's actually people who gets falsely accused of rape as well?



"Allegedly". You answered your own question.


----------



## Zalbu (Sep 13, 2017)

Ebony said:


> "Allegedly". You answered your own question.


Not really, because the chances of that happening is statistically insignificant when there's hundreds of thousands of actual rapes happening every year in the US. How come that the people who are so concerned about the phenomenon of false rape accusations only speak up when they hear of a woman allegedly being raped? Could it be that they have an agenda to push?


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Sep 13, 2017)

Rawkmann said:


> Just because it's something that happens less frequently does that mean it's not worth talking about? This topic is pretty hard to approach, but feeling bad for people who get their lives ruined by false rape accusations doesn't mean the same people don't have sympathy for actual victims of rape whose lives were ruined.



The problem is with wording. Even this quoted post seems to possibly imply that this girl wasn't actually raped. We don't know if she was yet. The fact of the matter is that both parties need to be given the benefit of the doubt until actual evidence is presented. We shouldn't be calling the members of the band monsters the same way we shouldn't be calling the girl a liar or faker or whatever. 

I won't lie, I'm inclined to believe her, but I'm not going to suggest or encourage people to label the band rapists yet. It hasn't been proven and as such, they deserve as much of the benefit of the doubt.


----------



## Rawkmann (Sep 13, 2017)

Chokey Chicken said:


> Even this quoted post seems to possibly imply that this girl wasn't actually raped. We don't know if she was yet.



Was in no way trying to imply one way or the other. I have no bias towards either side at this point as there's not really enough verified information to make an informed judgment.


----------



## farren (Sep 13, 2017)

Holy shit are these guys naive for not *each hiring their own counsel*.

It's time to think about yourselves, boys. If you are guilty, then some of you are no doubt legally worse off than others. Do you really want to stand with each other behind the same legal team, even at this early juncture? Stop thinking like a goddamn band and start thinking like people who could end up in prison.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Sep 13, 2017)

Rawkmann said:


> Was in no way trying to imply one way or the other. I have no bias towards either side at this point as there's not really enough verified information to make an informed judgment.



Which is why wording is incredibly important. You are indeed correct with this post though.


----------



## bostjan (Sep 13, 2017)

Zalbu said:


> Sorry, I think I missed the memo that feeling the need to remind people that women who falsely accuse men of rape exists every time a case like this pops up is supposed to help further the goal for equal rights for men and women


Dude, neither one of us even brought it up in the first place. We're arguing about it because you literally said it wasn't that bad if it was a false accusation! Then you are telling people to get out of the thread if they disagree with your values! I honestly can't find any common ground with you on this one. Do you even think there should be a trial? Maybe we can agree that there should be a trial. No?


----------



## Ebony (Sep 13, 2017)

Zalbu said:


> How come that the people who are so concerned about the phenomenon of false rape accusations only speak up when they hear of a woman allegedly being raped?



I believe most of the posts (including my own) in this threat about false accusations has been made in response to the people who jump to conclusions about a case they know nothing about. Nothing more, nothing less.

Just because one crime is more likely to have happened than another doesn't mean it is correct to jump to conclusions in favor of the most likely one, and when you jump on people for pointing that out it makes it seem like _you_ have an agenda.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Sep 13, 2017)

So one of the bands on the bill dropped from the tour. 

https://www.facebook.com/venomprison/posts/825963887562350


----------



## bostjan (Sep 13, 2017)

To reiterate: The women who come forward are heroes. They should never be vilified. There are more than two dozen advocacy groups whose sole purpose is to help with that process in the USA. Maybe most women do not know that. For those who might stumble upon this thread, here are jsut a few of them that can provide you with information and even resources to help you:

https://centers.rainn.org/
www.womenslaw.org
rvap.org
www.theadvocacycenter.org/services/
https://www.rapevictimadvocates.org

On the other hand, for people falsely accused of rape, there are no advocacy groups specifically chartered to help you, so good luck. Hope you have a huge stack of cash on hand that you weren't planning on spending, to hand over for a good lawyer. You can look into some of the same advocacy groups who work on protecting people from other false accusations, though. But, since you are going to be locked up in a jail cell without any access to the outside world, I guess it doesn't matter if I post the websites for those groups.

For these guys, I can honestly say that if I had to guess, something very bad happened. Exactly what, I can't say with any modicum of certainty at this point. Either way, their goose is cooked. They'll be in jail awaiting extradition. I highly doubt the judge is going to be a fan. It seems that these alleged witnesses are not materializing at this point... if they did half of what they are alleged to have done, then they deserve it, but they absolutely deserve a fair trial in all of this.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Sep 13, 2017)

They'll get a trial, and hopefully sooner than later. They better be extradited quick and not after thirty or whatever days. If they're innocent, that's even longer for them to wait. If they're guilty, then the girl has to keep this at the forefront of her mind longer. It's a lose/lose for everyone involved the longer it takes.


----------



## bostjan (Sep 13, 2017)

Chokey Chicken said:


> They'll get a trial, and hopefully sooner than later. They better be extradited quick and not after thirty or whatever days. If they're innocent, that's even longer for them to wait. If they're guilty, then the girl has to keep this at the forefront of her mind longer. It's a lose/lose for everyone involved the longer it takes.


The moment the "losing" occurred was the moment this all started. I fully expect the alternative news to be all over this. I really hope the two women involved in making the accusation manage to remain anonymous.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 13, 2017)

bostjan said:


> The moment the "losing" occurred was the moment this all started. I fully expect the alternative news to be all over this. I really hope the two women involved in making the accusation manage to remain anonymous.


Two? I thought it was just one? I guess I missed something.


----------



## farren (Sep 13, 2017)

The band has been past-tensed and -2017'd on Wikipedia.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Sep 13, 2017)

farren said:


> The band has been past-tensed and -2017'd on Wikipedia.



No one's announced a breakup, so this was probably someone jumping the gun on Wikipedia.


----------



## farren (Sep 13, 2017)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> No one's announced a breakup, so this was probably someone jumping the gun on Wikipedia.



I'm sure. I just found it amusing--whoever made the edit is clearly wrong, but in the long-term, it is probably safe to assume... Wikipedia is very often "right" as to the conclusion before it's actually fact.


----------



## anomynous (Sep 13, 2017)

The band did delete all of their social media


----------



## kamello (Sep 13, 2017)

Ordacleaphobia said:


> I told myself I wasn't going to post in this thread again, but my god *please*, spare me.
> For all of the talking points I'm forced to listen to about this reasoning, not once have I ever _SEEN_, not once have I ever _HEARD_, not once have I ever even _READ _about this actually happening. (And before you link me some article complaining about twitter trolls saying mean things on the internet, please take a moment to ask yourself if you're really being intellectually honest here first)
> ESPECIALLY after this phrase has been parroted throughout society consistently throughout the past....what...10 years?



all valid points, but *Secondary Victimization* is a real issue, and I've seen it countless times, up from the cases I've had to study, down to beloved friends who have faced the hell that is a rape on itself, and all the shit that it involves later

Hell, here in Chile a little 15 years old girl was drugged, raped and killed a few days ago by a man (around 22 years old) that she met on facebook, and a good ammount of people were insisting that she was responsable of her rape because of ''being a slut'' 



still, it boggles my mind as how people can't just do... 

this


Mathemagician said:


> Even with the (very) small number of rape allegations that do end up being false - victims should get the support and respect they deserve until ti all comes out.




and this


Chokey Chicken said:


> The fact of the matter is that both parties need to be given the benefit of the doubt until actual evidence is presented. We shouldn't be calling the members of the band monsters the same way we shouldn't be calling the girl a liar or faker or whatever.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Sep 13, 2017)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Two? I thought it was just one? I guess I missed something.



The friend who eventually got pulled over is also involved. Allegedly she didn't get the brunt of it, but she was involved and harassed. To the point where she ended up with bruised/scraped knees, again allegedly. 

(Using the term "allegedly" so as not to accuse one party or the other, not to cast doubt one way or the other.)


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 13, 2017)

Chokey Chicken said:


> The friend who eventually got pulled over is also involved. Allegedly she didn't get the brunt of it, but she was involved and harassed. To the point where she ended up with bruised/scraped knees, again allegedly.
> 
> (Using the term "allegedly" so as not to accuse one party or the other, not to cast doubt one way or the other.)


Ah, I see. Thanks for clearing that up.


----------



## RG503 (Sep 13, 2017)

they gang raped her in a bathroom and she had bruises consistent with being restrained.

i hope they throw the book at those little emo wannabe metal nubs.


----------



## farren (Sep 13, 2017)

RG503 said:


> they gang raped her in a bathroom and she had bruises consistent with being restrained.
> 
> i hope they throw the book at those little emo wannabe metal nubs.



I'm trying not to jump to conclusions, but all of what we know points to these being legitimate charges.

The thing that speaks to me the most is the timing of the report, more or less right after the alleged crime. The girl was probably intoxicated, yet she reported promptly--no time or frame of mind for scheming or getting one's story straight (and let's be honest--a Polish death metal band is not a lucrative target for this kind of thing in the first place). The fact that she was uncomfortable and wanted to leave, yet thought she could safely use the restroom, tells me all I need to know about her mental acuity and vulnerability at the time.

Still hope these Poles know the American justice system is a game, and it ain't a team sport. I don't care if they're a band of brothers--when one legal team represents all of them, there's a conflict of interest if one member has the opportunity to get off light at the expense of others. A good lawyer will make sure the least guilty among them doesn't do something 'noble' that he will regret for the rest of his life.


----------



## BusinessMan (Sep 13, 2017)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Anyone that'd believe that doesn't have much of a brain to begin with. Then again, we're talking about Americans, who generally don't look into things for themselves, and just believe whatever soundbyte the moron on TV/radio tells them.



There is a lot of f!cking stupid people in America let me tell you that. And I'm sure there's already a bunch of people that believe my statement without a doubt


----------



## farren (Sep 13, 2017)

I was just telling my mom last week how some of the nicest people in the world are in Death Metal bands, like Mikael Stanne and Alex Webster. Wonder if this story has reached her yet...


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 13, 2017)

farren said:


> I was just telling my mom last week how some of the nicest people in the world are in Death Metal bands, like Mikael Stanne and Alex Webster. Wonder if this story has reached her yet...


Way to go, you jinxed us.


----------



## Metropolis (Sep 14, 2017)

From Decapitated's facebook;

"While we are not perfect human beings, we are not kidnappers, rapists, or criminals. As such, we strongly deny the allegations that have recently been brought against us.

We ask that everyone please reserve their judgement until a definitive outcome has been reached, as charges have yet to be pressed. Full testimony and evidence will be presented in due time, and we have faith in that process.

As there is uncertainty regarding a timeline for prospective proceedings and out of respect for fans and promoters, due to the severity of the claims, we have cancelled all planned touring.

All social media platforms have been temporarily disabled as they have been used as destinations for defamatory and malicious remarks. We would like to point out that the statements in the published police report were given prior to an arrest. At that point, no member of the band was aware of an active warrant being issued."


----------



## drmosh (Sep 14, 2017)

I also cannot believe that they would a) be the kind of people capable of gang raping someone, and b) be stupid enough to do something as awful as what they're accused of.
I hope I am right


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Sep 14, 2017)

Fair statement, but unsurprisingly some gross comments. Weird how hypocritical people can be.


----------



## Edika (Sep 14, 2017)

This is quite the story I must say. A few things don't add up from both sides but it makes sense as there's not a lot of information about the case.

From the Decapitated side it seems that the band members statements that have come out are contradictory and some of them a bit creepy. It's not the full statements though and there is a language barrier.

From the other side I don't understand why the friend that got out of the bus relatively untouched didn't immediately call the police as she was aware what was happening to her friend. Maybe she did and I missed something.

Anyway we'll see how things evolve.


----------



## bostjan (Sep 14, 2017)

Edika said:


> This is quite the story I must say. A few things don't add up from both sides but it makes sense as there's not a lot of information about the case.
> 
> From the Decapitated side it seems that the band members statements that have come out are contradictory and some of them a bit creepy. It's not the full statements though and there is a language barrier.
> 
> ...


Calling police right away would be the right thing to do, but I can see why she might have been afraid or felt it wasn't her best choice at the time. It's impossible to say what a person would do in such a situation.
I have a lot of questions about this myself, but it's not really my place to speculate. It'll probably be a few weeks before there's really enough information out there to piece it together any more clearly.

Even if a witness comes forward and says "yeah, man, they didn't do it," I'd say it's still raise the question of who this witness is and why the witness would say that. Calling for unnamed witnesses to come forward could be a legitimate plea for help from concertgoers or, conceivably, it could be an appeal to strangers for someone to make something up. I don't know either way. With the way this has gone so far, someone in the band is going to have to change his story, maybe all of them will. With one attorney for the entire band (is that even going to be allowed?!), I think there may be a 99% chance that the band's career is over forever. Even if Vogg somehow misspoke or was misquoted, and the lawyers try to explain it all away somehow, I don't see too many venues hiring the band to appear on their bill. If they stick with their current statements and then, say, Rasta pleads guilty or something, then I wouldn't even imagine how their lawyer would try to salvage any part of the case.

I guess if, and this is a way-out-there hypothetical, but if the tour manager or someone else fairly official-like comes forward and says that the girl both arrived and departed from the bus happily, then the single lawyer approach might end up helping them legally.


----------



## BusinessMan (Sep 14, 2017)

This story just keeps getting more and more confusing with time rather than it being cleared up. No one of us can make any kind of call, aside opinions, given the tidbits of information that are available to the general public.

EDIT: Something that just popped into my head that I'm sure has been brought up before. The band had been touring for a couple weeks here in the US before this incident (and I'm sure banging groupies and getting wasted in the other cities). My question is why this specific city, and none of the cities after the incident supposedly took place were there reports placed? Could be they really did get rapey, or someone just regretted something they did?


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 14, 2017)

Chokey Chicken said:


> Fair statement, but unsurprisingly some gross comments. Weird how hypocritical people can be.


Which are the gross comments? In this thread?



bostjan said:


> Even if Vogg somehow misspoke or was misquoted, and the lawyers try to explain it all away somehow


I must've missed this. What'd he say that was possibly misspeaking?


----------



## Ebony (Sep 14, 2017)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Which are the gross comments? In this thread?



I think she meant the facebook statement comment-section.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 14, 2017)

Ebony said:


> I think she meant the facebook statement comment-section.


Ah


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Sep 14, 2017)

Yup, on facebook. A lot of "innocent until proven guilty. I believe you guys, shes just a whore looking for her 15 minutes."

As for them touring for weeks and having no issues, it doesn't say a whole hell of a lot one way or the other.

As for what Vogg said, it's in the readily made information. I could be remembering incorrectly, but he outright contradicted someone. Something along the lines of he saw two of them, one of which was Wiecek having sex with her. Wiecek said he was on the couch and didn't see what happened which is clearly contrary to performing sex acts with her.

But, again, who knows? The language barrier might play a role here.

Edit: ripped from the story:



> Lysejko, the drummer, “made no comment other than he did not know who the girls were” when shown a picture of them. “He said he would not talk without using a translator,” court documents say.
> 
> Kieltyka, the lead guitarist, told detectives he saw both Piotrowski and Wiecek engaged in a sex acts with the woman in the bathroom. He agreed to have a DNA swab collected as evidence.
> 
> ...


----------



## Ataraxia2320 (Sep 14, 2017)

Chokey Chicken said:


> Yup, on facebook. A lot of "innocent until proven guilty




What's wrong with this aspect of what they are saying? This is how the justice system works...


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 14, 2017)

Ataraxia2320 said:


> What's wrong with this aspect of what they are saying? This is how the justice system works...


It's the second bit I think that they had an issue with, but if they have an issue with that as well, then... yeah.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 14, 2017)

Chokey Chicken said:


> Yup, on facebook. A lot of "innocent until proven guilty. I believe you guys, shes just a whore looking for her 15 minutes."
> 
> As for them touring for weeks and having no issues, it doesn't say a whole hell of a lot one way or the other.
> 
> ...


Thanks.


----------



## SD83 (Sep 14, 2017)

drmosh said:


> I also cannot believe that they would a) be the kind of people capable of gang raping someone, and b) be stupid enough to do something as awful as what they're accused of.


This. And this is what goes to my mind pretty much every time. I thought about this rather a lot after reading the news & this thread and... maybe, just maybe, some of this "maybe she is just telling lies" comes from ones lack of understanding how something like rape can still happen. I can understand a lot of crimes. Fraud, theft, I can easily understand why you would shoot somebody in the face. Or run somebody over with your car, back up, and then set all on fire. I can't understand rape. It's about as absurd as kidnapping a plane and crashing it into a skyscraper. That was another of those "nah, that can't be, no one can be THAT insane" moments. And I know at least case where a woman (in that case his girlfriend) threatend a friend of mine to do exactly that, accuse him of rape, if he ever left her (or, several times, to kill herself if he did that). Mental health, or lack thereof, is hardly ever visible from the outside. The more disturbing thing is that at some times it felt like half the women I knew, judging by those that I knew well enough, had been victim to rape, or attempted rape, or close enough to it it hardly makes a difference. No one ever got locked up because of that. Not a single person. And according to official statistics, even of the cases that get reported, the accused are convicted in 8.4% of the cases. So... fake accusations are a possibility, always, and one I'd love to believe in, because it's easier. Then you could say "see, they're just normal people like you and me, they wouldn't do something". Else one might realise if people like you and me could do that, maybe you and me, maybe with a bit of drugs and power... it's easier to think it's just made up. Though rather unlikely. Either way, it's disturbing people would do that. And almost as disturbing how people react to it on social media.


----------



## Ataraxia2320 (Sep 14, 2017)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> It's the second bit I think that they had an issue with, but if they have an issue with that as well, then... yeah.



This is what I thought at first too, but he started his quote mid sentence so I assume that part is there for a reason.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Sep 14, 2017)

Ataraxia2320 said:


> This is what I thought at first too, but he started his quote mid sentence so I assume that part is there for a reason.



My issues was with saying they're innocent until proven guilty, then immediately passing judgement on the girl. (who should also be considered innocent until proven guilty.) It's just an absurd level of hypocrisy.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 14, 2017)

Chokey Chicken said:


> My issues was with saying they're innocent until proven guilty, then immediately passing judgement on the girl. (who should also be considered innocent until proven guilty.) It's just an absurd level of hypocrisy.


Just posing the question, so don't shoot me, but what should happen if it turns out a woman is lying about rape in a legal case where the other person ends up going to prison? Not necessarily regarding this case or anything, but in general. I'm curious is all.


----------



## wankerness (Sep 14, 2017)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Just posing the question, so don't shoot me, but what should happen if it turns out a woman is lying about rape in a legal case where the other person ends up going to prison? Not necessarily regarding this case or anything, but in general. I'm curious is all.



Now THAT really almost never happens. Coincidentally....



bostjan said:


> http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-teardrop-rapist-man-exonerated-prison20151123-story.html
> 
> https://newsone.com/509452/convicted-rapist-exonerated-by-dna-after-30-years-in-prison/
> 
> ...



I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "the above," but if you mean "FALSE RAPE ACCUSATION BY LYING WOMAN," not one of these is applicable here. These are all guys picked up by cops and then paraded in front of victims by cops, with the cops desperately wanting to close the cases so all those rapes got marked as crimes solved in their statistics. As you see in the links, only one of those cases even has a single woman that definitively identified one of those guys as her rapist, and naturally it was after cops found him and showed him to her (I'm guessing she didn't get the best look at him while being raped at night). They all seem to involve cops picking up some guy that vaguely resembles a composite sketch, parading the guy around in front of the victim trying to get them to identify him as the perp, and then whisking them off to trial where they couldn't afford a real lawyer cause they were poor non-white men. I would blame the legal system over the "accusers" in every single one of these cases, not a single one of these guys were picked out by the victims and then brought to the cops.

In THIS case, there is absolutely no question that these people had very rough sex at the minimum.

The only actual intentional "false rape accusation revenge" stories I have ever read about involving the legal system tended to be either 1) people trying to extort money from a rich person (and who knows how many of them are actually false, considering things like Bill Cosby, found innocent when everyone on the planet knows he's actually a serial rapist) and 2) usually really trashy, petty revenge plots involving things like a woman trying to make her ex-husband lose all custody rights forever. And yes, there are legal repercussions for these people!*

*Well, in #2, anyway. I do think #1 happens sometimes with no repercussions for the accuser. For example, I'm still not convinced Michael Jackson was a molester, but the families of the victims still got massive payouts, sometimes just to keep quiet. Who knows.


----------



## cardinal (Sep 14, 2017)

The police and DAs will do their jobs. Speculation just causes more damage. Kidnapping and rape obviously are crimes and torts. Lying to police also is a crime and the resulting harm a tort. Just trust the legal system to get to the bottom.


----------



## BIG ND SWEATY (Sep 14, 2017)

What in the fuck is a tort?


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 14, 2017)

BIG ND SWEATY said:


> What in the fuck is a tort?


"A wrongful act or an infringement of a right."


----------



## farren (Sep 14, 2017)

I fucking love lemon torts.


----------



## cardinal (Sep 14, 2017)

BIG ND SWEATY said:


> What in the fuck is a tort?



Basically a wrongful act that can entitle the victim to compensation. Like the civil lawsuits where someone gets hurt and sues the wrongdoer for money.


----------



## BIG ND SWEATY (Sep 14, 2017)

cardinal said:


> Basically a wrongful act that can entitle the victim to compensation. Like the civil lawsuits where someone gets hurt and sues the wrongdoer for money.





Spaced Out Ace said:


> "A wrongful act or an infringement of a right."


Thanks dudes, I guess I never knew there was a proper term for that


----------



## bostjan (Sep 14, 2017)

wankerness said:


> Now THAT really almost never happens. Coincidentally....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ok, obviously my post was not in response to his.
To respond to your claim, read:
Kanin, Eugene J., "False Rape Allegations", _Archives of Sexual Behavior_, Vol. 23, No. 1, Feb 1994.


> Regarding this study, 41% (n = 45) of the total disposed rape cases
> (/i = 109) were officially declared false during this 9-year period, that is,
> by the complainant's admission that no rape had occurred and the charge,
> therefore, was false.



That's a high number, 41%. And the sample is statistically significant at 109. Stop saying this never happens, because it does happen. If you don't want to draw attention to the fact that it happens, don't bring it up.


----------



## feraledge (Sep 14, 2017)

bostjan said:


> Ok, obviously my post was not in response to his.
> To respond to your claim, read:
> Kanin, Eugene J., "False Rape Allegations", _Archives of Sexual Behavior_, Vol. 23, No. 1, Feb 1994.
> 
> ...


There's a lot of criticism of Kanin, David Lisak a chief proponent among them. He points out that the "false allegations" were based off of police reports and that's a considerable issue to deal with. Also what constitutes rape for police in the early-mid 90s is, by virtually all accounts, going to be very generous to the perpetrators compared even to now. And that they most definitely are.
There's a bit of a patriarchy issue that tends to foster the rape crisis situation. I feel that shouldn't have to be said.


----------



## bostjan (Sep 14, 2017)

feraledge said:


> There's a lot of criticism of Kanin, David Lisak a chief proponent among them. He points out that the "false allegations" were based off of police reports and that's a considerable issue to deal with. Also what constitutes rape for police in the early-mid 90s is, by virtually all accounts, going to be very generous to the perpetrators compared even to now. And that they most definitely are.
> There's a bit of a patriarchy issue that tends to foster the rape crisis situation. I feel that shouldn't have to be said.


Here is some example text, regarding the methodology. Read the paper for specifics.


> An 18-year-old wroman was having sex with a boarder in her mother's house for a
> period of 3 months. When the mother learned of her behavior from other boarders,
> the mother ordered the man to leave. The complainant learned that her lover was
> packing and she went to his room and told him she would be ready to leave with
> ...



These are from police reports, but, well, umm, police reports are the one and only medium where data like this would exist.

If the criterion for a "false claim" is that it had to go to court, and end up being universally determined as a complete waste of time, then you are just moving the goal posts together until they are touching.

I'm saying this as a person old enough to have seen these sorts of cases in court, first hand. Two of my own friends were even accused of rape, neither of them were convicted. Both of them still went to jail and had their lives ruined because of this kind of thing. It frustrates me to no end to see so many people saying it never fucking happens, just as it frustrates actual rape victims when people say that it always happens. It's not never and it's not always. It's enough to be a problem for people close to me twice now. And those are just cases where I knew the people accused closely. It just happened to a friend of a friend of mine a couple years ago. In that case, the guy was married. He lost his job, went to jail, and his wife got an at fault divorce, because he was in jail. After he was acquitted, do you think his wife took him back? Sure, you might say that there was reasonable suspicion because it went to court, but all they had to go on was the girl's word before pressing charges.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 14, 2017)

bostjan said:


> Ok, obviously my post was not in response to his.
> To respond to your claim, read:
> Kanin, Eugene J., "False Rape Allegations", _Archives of Sexual Behavior_, Vol. 23, No. 1, Feb 1994.
> 
> ...


This. I don't care to go through it with wankerness, but I think his assertion that it "almost never happens" was absurd.


----------



## feraledge (Sep 15, 2017)

I've never said it doesn't happen, but it doesn't happen often and certainly not 41% of the time.
Polygraphs were a huge part of Kanin's study and their reliability has since been largely discredited.
Police coercion in testimony is a huge issue as well. You can't overlook this and then respond to methodological problems with a largely criticized paper by citing that paper.
I have known people who have had false allegations of rape. I havr also known someone who I ended up standing with against allegations that were shaky only to find out he had raped one other friend of mine at that time and had attempted sleaze with a handful of other women. 20 years later and I'll still beat his fucking ass if I see him.
But while I've seen, personally, an instance of ACTUAL false allegations, I know a lot of women and a handful of men who were raped. Way, way, way too many. Statistically speaking, more than I know. So to think that false accusations are somehow anywhere near the issue that rape culture just enrages me.

And as a dude who has toured a lot and I've known many people in "bigger" metal bands, I've had to call out and confront way too many instances like this personally. A lot of band dudes might be rad as shit and then sleazy as fuck where you aren't seeing it. I know of anarcho-feminist crusters manipulating teenage girls in true predator fashion. And people fall for it, but it doesn't make this shit okay.
So when you see snippets of interviews these dudes did where they're saying this girl came on the bus willingly, that's just a huge nod to this rapist mentality where they felt consent was implicit. It never is.
And while this all may not be truly what happened, the chances that it's not true aren't looking good and I see people defending them like they would know better. Why would anyone just presume that to be true??
Because the girls got on the bus willingly?


----------



## wankerness (Sep 15, 2017)

bostjan said:


> Ok, obviously my post was not in response to his.



What post WAS it in response to?

EDIT: While I am going to have to disengage from this soon, as I find it extremely bad taste to argue with anyone who can use the trump card of "I know people that had [thing I'm passionately against] happen to them," that study is a great example of how you can find anything that backs up your point on the internet. That guy is a massive anomaly in the sea of research, unsurprisingly - that report you quoted is from a small midwestern town, covered 109 cases, and used methodology very different from many other reports. And yes, I know he had a follow-up from a college campus where he concluded it was something more like 50%. Obviously, these studies are quoted ALL THE TIME on certain corners of the net.

Here's a MUCH, MUCH more comprehensively researched paper that finds it at 8%. Page 47 (as in, the page number on the bottom of the page, not the page of the PDF) is where you'll start finding the analysis.

http://webarchive.nationalarchives..../www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs05/hors293.pdf



> T h e re were 216 cases classified as false allegations: as a pro p o rtion of all 2,643 cases re p o rt e d to the police this amounts to 8 per cent; as a pro p o rtion of the 1,817 cases not pro c e e d i n g beyond the police stage it is 12 per cent (see Table 4.2). In only six of these cases was there evidence of anyone being arrested, and in only two cases were charges laid, although there w e re at least 39 named suspects. Six advice files were submitted to CPS, with respect to possible c h a rges being laid against the complainant for perv e rting the course of justice, and two were c h a rged. Intere s t i n g l y, most cases in this category had a forensic examination (82%, n=178), whilst far fewer made a formal statement to the police (58%, n=126), suggesting that this is a critical stage for the admission or designation of allegations as false.



Pasted from PDF and thus mangled. 

Soooo...out of 2643 cases, 8% involved false allegations? Clearly not "almost never," that was careless to say, but there's a more than 30% difference here and there's 25 times the cases studied. Here's my "i'mright.com" submission, I guess. But, clearly we're at a completely immobile impass as you are understandably immovable on this subject. Sorry to hear about your friends.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Sep 15, 2017)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Just posing the question, so don't shoot me, but what should happen if it turns out a woman is lying about rape in a legal case where the other person ends up going to prison? Not necessarily regarding this case or anything, but in general. I'm curious is all.



I won't speculate what should happen to her any more than I'll speculate what should happen to them.

The guilty party should be held legally responsible for their crime, whoever it may be.


----------



## lewis (Sep 15, 2017)

genuine question.
Is the sentencing for being found guilty of lying about rape, the same length of sentence of being found guilty of rape? Does anyone know?

Ive never thought about it before until this thread and its discussion.
For me, they should carry the same sentence but it probably does not work like that.


----------



## Zalbu (Sep 15, 2017)

Again, the percentages that people cite about how x% of rape accusations are false are only based on the amount of rapes that actually get reported to the police, and since a very conservative estimate is that more than half of rapes don't even get reported then it actually doesn't happen as often as people are lead to believe based on the studies on the subject.



bostjan said:


> Ok, obviously my post was not in response to his.
> To respond to your claim, read:
> Kanin, Eugene J., "False Rape Allegations", _Archives of Sexual Behavior_, Vol. 23, No. 1, Feb 1994.
> 
> ...


That study is horseshit


> Critics of Kanin's report include David Lisak, an associate professor of psychology and director of the Men's Sexual Trauma Research Project at the University of Massachusetts Boston. He states, "Kanin's 1994 article on false allegations is a provocative opinion piece, but it is not a scientific study of the issue of false reporting of rape. It certainly should never be used to assert a scientific foundation for the frequency of false allegations."[26]
> 
> According to Lisak, Kanin's study lacked any kind of systematic methodology and did not independently define a false report, instead recording as false any report which the police department classified as false. The department classified reports as false which the complainant later said were false, but Lisak points out that Kanin's study did not scrutinize the police's processes or employ independent checkers to protect results from bias.[14]
> 
> ...


Not a single person has ever said that false accusations of rape doesn't happen, just that it happens a lot less frequently than what people who cite garbage studies like the above claim.


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Sep 15, 2017)

wankerness said:


> But, clearly we're at a completely immobile impass as you are understandably immovable on this subject.



Isn't everyone, though?


----------



## bostjan (Sep 15, 2017)

wankerness said:


> What post WAS it in response to?
> 
> EDIT: While I am going to have to disengage from this soon, as I find it extremely bad taste to argue with anyone who can use the trump card of "I know people that had [thing I'm passionately against] happen to them," that study is a great example of how you can find anything that backs up your point on the internet. That guy is a massive anomaly in the sea of research, unsurprisingly - that report you quoted is from a small midwestern town, covered 109 cases, and used methodology very different from many other reports. And yes, I know he had a follow-up from a college campus where he concluded it was something more like 50%. Obviously, these studies are quoted ALL THE TIME on certain corners of the net.
> 
> ...


1. If you are trying to imply that I was responding to his question, which was posted several hours after my post, then you are just being a jerk. 
2. Ok, so, either you are backpedaling or just can't stand being wrong, because you went from saying that this sort of thing doesn't happen, to it doesn't happen any measurable portion of the time, to it happens 8% of the time. And, if you read the study you posted all the way through, you'll see that the 8% is not the total number of allegations that turned out to be false. It's just the number the police (again, in the UK, not USA) determined to be false where the allegor refused to drop charges willingly. This does not count those who changed their statements nor the ones where the physical evidence of assault was contradictory to the statement. Actually, if you add all of those up in your source, you see that the total number of inaccurate allegations at the police stage is about twice the conviction rate. I'm just not sure how you can spin that into "this almost never happens." The 8% you mentioned even explains why the police determined the allegations to be false, and explains it as revenge, another thing contradicting your earlier posts. 

If you want to convince me I'm wrong, try addressing my points by fact, not by hand-waving and fist-shaking and posting a paper from an entirely different culture than you refer that actually doesn't support your claims anyway.

What point are you wanting me to concede anyway? That it never happens? Why would I concede that? You just proved even more that it does happen. You want me to say that 1 out of 12 times it's a flat-out false allegation? I think I already conceded that before the discussion started. Or are you just mad at me and want me to concede something to make you feel vindicated?



Zalbu said:


> Again, the percentages that people cite about how x% of rape accusations are false are only based on the amount of rapes that actually get reported to the police, and since a very conservative estimate is that more than half of rapes don't even get reported then it actually doesn't happen as often as people are lead to believe based on the studies on the subject.


So studies say that the numbers in those studies are wrong? Where are you going with that?



Zalbu said:


> That study is horseshit
> 
> Not a single person has ever said that false accusations of rape doesn't happen, just that it happens a lot less frequently than what people who cite garbage studies like the above claim.


Why?
Except someone did, but we already went through that.


----------



## bostjan (Sep 15, 2017)

wankerness said:


> What post WAS it in response to?
> 
> EDIT: While I am going to have to disengage from this soon, as I find it extremely bad taste to argue with anyone who can use the trump card of "I know people that had [thing I'm passionately against] happen to them," that study is a great example of how you can find anything that backs up your point on the internet. That guy is a massive anomaly in the sea of research, unsurprisingly - that report you quoted is from a small midwestern town, covered 109 cases, and used methodology very different from many other reports. And yes, I know he had a follow-up from a college campus where he concluded it was something more like 50%. Obviously, these studies are quoted ALL THE TIME on certain corners of the net.
> 
> ...


1. If you are trying to imply that I was responding to his question, which was posted several hours after my post, then you are just being a jerk. 
2. Ok, so, either you are backpedaling or just can't stand being wrong, because you went from saying that this sort of thing doesn't happen, to it doesn't happen any measurable portion of the time, to it happens 8% of the time. And, if you read the study you posted all the way through, you'll see that the 8% is not the total number of allegations that turned out to be false. It's just the number the police (again, in the UK, not USA) determined to be false where the allegor refused to drop charges willingly. This does not count those who changed their statements nor the ones where the physical evidence of assault was contradictory to the statement. Actually, if you add all of those up in your source, you see that the total number of inaccurate allegations at the police stage is about twice the conviction rate. I'm just not sure how you can spin that into "this almost never happens." The 8% you mentioned even explains why the police determined the allegations to be false, and explains it as revenge, another thing contradicting your earlier posts. 

If you want to convince me I'm wrong, try addressing my points by fact, not by hand-waving and fist-shaking and posting a paper from an entirely different culture than you refer that actually doesn't support your claims anyway.

What point are you wanting me to concede anyway? That it never happens? Why would I concede that? You just proved even more that it does happen. You want me to say that 1 out of 12 times it's a flat-out false allegation? I think I already conceded that before the discussion started. Or are you just mad at me and want me to concede something to make you feel vindicated?



Zalbu said:


> Again, the percentages that people cite about how x% of rape accusations are false are only based on the amount of rapes that actually get reported to the police, and since a very conservative estimate is that more than half of rapes don't even get reported then it actually doesn't happen as often as people are lead to believe based on the studies on the subject.


So studies say that the numbers in those studies are wrong? Where are you going with that?



Zalbu said:


> That study is horseshit
> 
> Not a single person has ever said that false accusations of rape doesn't happen, just that it happens a lot less frequently than what people who cite garbage studies like the above claim.


Why?
Except someone did, but we already went through that.


----------



## Louis Cypher (Sep 15, 2017)

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/aug/24/woman-jailed-10-years-false-rape-claims-jemma-beale

This is an extreme case and I am only posting in response to some of the questions regarding sentencing for anyone making false accusations, however this woman made multiple false accusations and one of the men she accused spent 2 years in jail.

Think its worth pointing out the difference between his kind of extreme case and a case where the accused are found not guilty/lack of sufficient evidence to prosecute etc. Not read all the posts but does seem to have boiled down to either the band are guilty or the girl is lying and poss needs prosecuting. Rape isn't as clear cut as that. Unless there is clear evidence the accuser has falsely made these claims against the band I doubt there will be any charges brought against her.


----------



## Louis Cypher (Sep 15, 2017)

Apologies for the double post but these figures for the UK are relevant to some of the points being made

".....a statistic ... by the Rape Crisis charity which states that of 85,000 rapes of women in England and Wales every year, only 5.7 per cent result in a conviction. (Partly because only 15 per cent of women, claim the charity, will report rape to the police in the first place.)..... Last year, Crown Prosecution Service statistics reported a rise in rape referrals from the police of 11.3 per cent (6,855 referrals), a rise in prosecutions (4,643) and also in convictions (2,689). These conviction rates, claims DPP Alison Saunders, are the highest ever...."

Think its safe to say that the other 94.3% of women raped in the UK who either didn't report it or lost their case before or during trial were not all liars.

Edit: wanted to add how shocked I am by these stats.... of the 85,000 rapes committed a year, approx 13,000 are reported, of which less than 7000 are referred to the CPS for prosecution, of which 4600 are deemed worthy of a prosecution, and then only 2700 of these result in a conviction.... that's a 3% conviction rate based on the total number of rape cases committed a year..... Totally disgusted by this


----------



## bostjan (Sep 15, 2017)

wankerness said:


> Soooo...out of 2643 cases, 8% involved false allegations? Clearly not "almost never," that was careless to say, but there's a more than 30% difference here and there's 25 times the cases studied. Here's my "i'mright.com" submission, I guess. But, clearly we're at a completely immobile impass as you are understandably immovable on this subject. Sorry to hear about your friends.



You know what? I overreacted to your post earlier this morning. This quoted part is a pretty level-headed response, for the most part, and I don't know why, but I just read that again and it read to me totally different a moment ago than it did earlier. Sorry about that. It's too late to edit my post from a couple hours ago now.

If you retracted the two words that you said that upset me in the first place, then I should no longer have any reason to pick any bones with what you said, because that's pretty cool of you to bring that up as you did.

I'm sorry this went as far as it did, although, between you (@wankerness) and me, I don't think either of us said anything truly offensive. I hope you can at least agree with that sentiment on some level. The way certain things were quoted got me a little defensive, but I honestly don't know if that was your intent or not.

In a discussion about a heated topic like this, where, as the discussion gets more general than the subject at hand, other people's personal experiences get pulled in; and it's maybe too easy for me to get frustrated by another person's post and then to unjustly include your position in my responses to someone else.

For the record, my personal position on this has never been that some specific x% of allegations are completely made up, just that there are documented cases when it _has_ happened, and at the everyday-level, therefore, it is _possible_, although not the most likely outcome, and that's why no one deserves the benefit of the doubt any more or less than anyone else involved until the facts start to come out.

Back on topic, though, I have very mixed feelings about this case. I supported this band back in the Vogg/Vitek days, and then I just sort of stopped paying attention to them. I don't much like the thought that my money went to a gang of rapists and kidnappers, but that's neither here nor there in the legal case. I never personally met any of them, and I certainly cannot judge their character, let alone their guilt in a legal case that I know very little about. I also do not know the two women involved, or even know who they are, and I hope their identities remain anonymous at any rate.


----------



## Lada The Great (Sep 15, 2017)

Ö


Spaced Out Ace said:


> Just posing the question, so don't shoot me, but what should happen if it turns out a woman is lying about rape in a legal case where the other person ends up going to prison? Not necessarily regarding this case or anything, but in general. I'm curious is all.


----------



## Sogradde (Sep 15, 2017)

Did anyone actually bother to read the link I posted roughly 500 pages ago about how those statistics are acquired..?


----------



## farren (Sep 15, 2017)

bostjan said:


> You know what?
> 
> ...



What a faith-in-forum-humanity-reaffirming conclusion.


----------



## Zalbu (Sep 15, 2017)

Sogradde said:


> Did anyone actually bother to read the link I posted roughly 500 pages ago about how those statistics are acquired..?


Nope, because it doesn't make much of a difference when the numbers are acquired based on reported rapes when more than half of rapes doesn't even get reported to the police.


----------



## AngstRiddenDreams (Sep 15, 2017)

I'm not surprised that people who like posts using the term "libtard" seriously are here being skeptical about the credibility of sexual assault claims.
Edit: clarity


----------



## Zalbu (Sep 15, 2017)

AngstRiddenDreams said:


> I'm not surprised that people who use the term "libtard" seriously are here being skeptical about the credibility of sexual assault claims.


Yup, it's apparently very important to point out that there's a tiny fraction of women who lie about rape when tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of rapists go unpunished every year


----------



## bostjan (Sep 15, 2017)

AngstRiddenDreams said:


> I'm not surprised that people who use the term "libtard" seriously are here being skeptical about the credibility of sexual assault claims.


Wait, who said that?


----------



## AngstRiddenDreams (Sep 15, 2017)

bostjan said:


> Wait, who said that?


KnightBrolaire in the defacing monuments thread and people being skeptical here liked the post


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 15, 2017)

AngstRiddenDreams said:


> KnightBrolaire in the defacing monuments thread and people being skeptical here liked the post


Where did he post in this thread? Cuz I just searched all ten pages and he didn't.


----------



## AngstRiddenDreams (Sep 15, 2017)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> Where did he post in this thread? Cuz I just searched all ten pages and he didn't.


Yeah I meant to make the distinction that it's people posting here liking his post.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 15, 2017)

AngstRiddenDreams said:


> Yeah I meant to make the distinction that it's people posting here liking his post.


That's a bit of a stretch. People who liked his post might have never said "libtards" unironically in their lives.


----------



## AngstRiddenDreams (Sep 15, 2017)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> That's a bit of a stretch. People who liked his post might have never said "libtards" unironically in their lives.


Sure, but you're showing support for the use of the term by liking the post.


----------



## BIG ND SWEATY (Sep 15, 2017)

AngstRiddenDreams said:


> I'm not surprised that people who like posts using the term "libtard" seriously are here being skeptical about the credibility of sexual assault claims.
> Edit: clarity


Should people not be skeptical about these types of claims? These are serious charges that can ruin someones life even if they're dropped. I'm not saying people should jump to "she's a lying whore" or any other kind of victim blaming but its absurd to pick sides when NO ONE knows the details of that night except for the people involved. Skepticism isn't a bad thing.


----------



## Sogradde (Sep 15, 2017)

Zalbu said:


> Nope, because it doesn't make much of a difference when the numbers are acquired based on reported rapes when more than half of rapes doesn't even get reported to the police.



Sorry I can't take you serious anymore. This is a textbook example of a strawman: Making up shit in your head and argumenting against it, to dismiss a credible source.

I applaud you sir, good job.


----------



## Zalbu (Sep 15, 2017)

Sogradde said:


> Sorry I can't take you serious anymore. This is a textbook example of a strawman: Making up shit in your head and argumenting against it, to dismiss a credible source.
> 
> I applaud you sir, good job.


What are you talking about? I'm agreeing with you that the numbers are junk because the actual numbers are even lower. In what way did the link you posted factor in the number of rapes that go unreported? It doesn't, and neither does any other study that shows the percentage of how many rape accusations that are false which means that the actual percentage is even lower. Is this a difficult concept to understand, or what?


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 15, 2017)

AngstRiddenDreams said:


> Sure, but you're showing support for the use of the term by liking the post.


No, I'm not. I agreed with the sentiment of the post, not specific words used.


----------



## wankerness (Sep 15, 2017)

bostjan said:


> 1. If you are trying to imply that I was responding to his question, which was posted several hours after my post, then you are just being a jerk.



No, it was an honest question. I was trying to figure out what post your post quoting the study was in response to, since the first sentence of it sounded like it was answering a question, and the three posts directly above didn't seem to be what you were responding to. I was definitely not trying to be a jerk with that question, I was trying to actually trace the discussion.



bostjan said:


> You know what? I overreacted to your post earlier this morning. This quoted part is a pretty level-headed response, for the most part, and I don't know why, but I just read that again and it read to me totally different a moment ago than it did earlier. Sorry about that. It's too late to edit my post from a couple hours ago now.
> 
> If you retracted the two words that you said that upset me in the first place, then I should no longer have any reason to pick any bones with what you said, because that's pretty cool of you to bring that up as you did.
> 
> ...



I totally get everything you're saying here, and even if you hadn't posted this totally level-headed follow-up I would have left it at that instead of trying to drag out an argument.

I obviously didn't think you were some kind of woman-hating nut by any stretch of the imagination, and I agreed with most of what you said, I was just reacting to that particularly study which I'd seen before and sometimes deployed by actual bad people and was trying to only attack THAT, not you! And yes, like you quoted here, I had made some sloppy stupid statements that were rightly pointed out.

Anyway, I just try to know when to quit in a heated argument as soon as I've figured out a certain amount of ground that we are not going to have in common. This is even more my reaction in person, as well, since I work with things like rabid Donald Trump supporters and people who have tried to talk to me about CRISIS ACTORS, and it's a MUCH, MUCH more pleasant work environment if I focus on everything we have in common (which is plenty...well, actually I guess I avoid the crisis actor lady like the plague) instead of trying to nitpick some issue that really isn't that important to our lives and will only cause serious strife that we don't need to have. I like to go with the flow, man. Well, except in some limited cases where I find someone totally reprehensible and then don't let it lie.

So, in conclusion, no hard feelings, obviously. You're cool in my book!! Always have liked your posts.


----------



## AngstRiddenDreams (Sep 15, 2017)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> No, I'm not. I agreed with the sentiment of the post, not specific words used.


The sentiment being that being a liberal has negative connotation and that you hope they don't deface more.
Anyways, highly offtopic sorry


----------



## feraledge (Sep 15, 2017)

How does this become another argument along political lines? We're talking about RAPE. 
If you want to talk about statistics, I'd say that RAINN is a pretty good place to start since this is exactly what they do. Here's an infographic to make their research crystal clear:





2/3 of rapes go unreported. 
And for those who have faith in police and their investigations or their findings (again, a huge issue with Kannik), note that in just one instance, notorious fuckhead Sheriff Joe Arpaio had hundreds of sexual assault cases that they never even touched between 2005-2007: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/10/us/sheriff-joe-arpaio-criticized-over-handling-of-sex-crimes-cases.html
I get that people have differing views on politics and certainly the police. But to think there's some massive conspiracy that might result in granting equal footing to the many, many, many rapists out there and the handful of incidents where someone was locked up over false accusations is just beyond me.


----------



## iamaom (Sep 15, 2017)

So is that graphic assuming every rape case that goes to court the defendant is guilty of rape?


----------



## kamello (Sep 16, 2017)

lewis said:


> genuine question.
> Is the sentencing for being found guilty of lying about rape, the same length of sentence of being found guilty of rape? Does anyone know?
> 
> Ive never thought about it before until this thread and its discussion.
> For me, they should carry the same sentence but it probably does not work like that.



I can't speak about the specifics of a sentence of the UK and USA, but im 100% sure that the sentences lenghts are different.
This has a doctrinal explanation though, and that is that the ''juridical good'' that is affected is different. In the case of rape, it is the sexual freedom of the person (which has a huge value in Criminal Law) and his mental and physical integrity. In the case of a false acussation, the juridical good being affected is mainly the honor of the accused person, and his mental integrity

please just ask If I wasn't clear with something, the way Americans and English aproach Law is very different in some aspects to most Continental Europe and Latin American countries



@feraledge; ffs, that was painful to see and read


----------



## chopeth (Sep 16, 2017)

phew... ugly thing, I hope everything eventually clears for good and I want to believe these guys aren't a bunch of fvcktards.


----------



## JohnIce (Sep 16, 2017)

iamaom said:


> So is that graphic assuming every rape case that goes to court the defendant is guilty of rape?



Do you ask that question when you see a statistic on any other crime? Like assault, mugging, knife threats?

If that graph shows anything it's that rape cases even when reported are clearly hard to solve, and that people clearly don't get convicted for it lightly. It should put any dude at ease who's worried about being falsely convicted of rape, so that we can finally get back to some semblance of compassion for the millions of women who get raped all the damn time instead.


----------



## iamaom (Sep 16, 2017)

JohnIce said:


> Do you ask that question when you see a statistic on any other crime? Like assault, mugging, knife threats?


I've never seen crime statistics other than rape that include non-convictions as part of the crime count.


----------



## JohnIce (Sep 16, 2017)

iamaom said:


> I've never seen crime statistics other than rape that include non-convictions as part of the crime count.



The police will keep records of unsolved reports for all crimes, they're easily available if you're interested enough.


----------



## marcwormjim (Sep 16, 2017)

I don't want to read through all eleven pages - Did they decapitate her or not?


----------



## wankerness (Sep 16, 2017)

iamaom said:


> So is that graphic assuming every rape case that goes to court the defendant is guilty of rape?



I'm guessing (hoping) it threw out the innocent cases from the numbers, but who knows. I would think you could look up the methodology somewhere, but I know when it's kind of an advertising material like that that it might be vague. As mentioned earlier in this thread, that's a great organization regardless of what their advertising materials say, as their function is to help victims and support them, not present statistics to the rest of the world. And I love the story about Mankind and Tori Amos and RAINN.

On a lighter side (for this thread) seeing that graphic immediately reminded me of the Hannibal Buress story about the woman in Scotland. It has a lot of musing about the "unreported" statistic. Yes, of course it ignores where the stat actually comes from, and is conceptually offensive, but it's funny!


----------



## iamaom (Sep 16, 2017)

JohnIce said:


> The police will keep records of unsolved reports for all crimes, they're easily available if you're interested enough.


Yes, but I meant are they included in graphics like the one you posted? Purposefully inflating numbers to make your statistics look scarier is pretty low. It's not helping the cause of getting people to believe women being raped if you have to fudge the numbers to make it seem like a bigger issue, which I think gets to part of the issue in this thread. There seems to be very over sensitive people who over compensate for (alleged) rape victims. When early in the thread "innocent until proven guilty" posts were made some went on the immediate defensive, as if stating the obvious somehow meant disrespect towards rape victims. As if remaining neutral and sceptical of all claims when not all the information is had is some how a bad thing or victim blaming. I know it can be a very emotional and personal subject, but that is why neutrality and objectivity are needed the most, so we can find out the truth and not be swayed by reactionary sympathy or hate. There are those who do try to somehow justify or ignore rape with a facade of neutrality, but that doesn't make the claims (women can and do lie or are mistaken about rape) any less valid and we shouldn't halt or go easy on evidence to tip the scales in the alleged victim's favor. Some crimes are hard to prove they happen, but it's just a tragedy of reality.

I don't believe (or disbelieve) this woman's claims about the band raping her because I don't know what happened. I want the band to be innocent, as that would mean rape didn't happen (although that would mean that the woman lied), but that's not to mean I want to ignore reality and let them walk free if they did rape (or do anything else illegal) to her.


----------



## jwade (Sep 16, 2017)

I guess this guarantees that a Vogg signature Iceman 7 won't be happening.


----------



## Señor Voorhees (Sep 16, 2017)

If it's anything like that ic507 they released, then that'd be a favor anyway. You're better off getting one of those perle bodies from ebay and having someone finish it for you.

Out of curiosity, how popular even WAS decapitated? Were they playing larger venues or just crummy little dive clubs? Would Ibanez even consider giving them a signature? I'm well out of the loop with this genre since it's incredibly boring to me.


----------



## JohnIce (Sep 16, 2017)

iamaom said:


> Yes, but I meant are they included in graphics like the one you posted? Purposefully inflating numbers to make your statistics look scarier is pretty low. It's not helping the cause of getting people to believe women being raped if you have to fudge the numbers to make it seem like a bigger issue, which I think gets to part of the issue in this thread. There seems to be very over sensitive people who over compensate for (alleged) rape victims. When early in the thread "innocent until proven guilty" posts were made some went on the immediate defensive, as if stating the obvious somehow meant disrespect towards rape victims. As if remaining neutral and sceptical of all claims when not all the information is had is some how a bad thing or victim blaming. I know it can be a very emotional and personal subject, but that is why neutrality and objectivity are needed the most, so we can find out the truth and not be swayed by reactionary sympathy or hate. There are those who do try to somehow justify or ignore rape with a facade of neutrality, but that doesn't make the claims (women can and do lie or are mistaken about rape) any less valid and we shouldn't halt or go easy on evidence to tip the scales in the alleged victim's favor. Some crimes are hard to prove they happen, but it's just a tragedy of reality.
> 
> I don't believe (or disbelieve) this woman's claims about the band raping her because I don't know what happened. I want the band to be innocent, as that would mean rape didn't happen (although that would mean that the woman lied), but that's not to mean I want to ignore reality and let them walk free if they did rape (or do anything else illegal) to her.



1. Crime statistics can be included in any graph you want to make, whatever reason you have.
2. Fudging numbers to make your statistics look scarier is low, yes, but what makes you think would RAINN do that? What reason do you have to not trust RAINN? I'm not familiar with the organization as I'm Swedish, but I do know that most women are more likely to contact an organization like that anonymously to get helpful advice, than going straight to the police. Seeking justice is great if you've got it in you but seeking help for the trauma and how to get on with your life may be way more important for someone who's been raped, and the police can't help you with that. Organizations like these would therefore speak to tons of non-reported rape victims, especially women in close relationships with their rapists, and zero people who make false accusations.
3. Skepticism is a problem when it's disproportionate, yes. That disproportionate skepticism towards women is a huge reason why women don't report rape (according to those women). It's enough of a trauma to deal with the actual rape, having to also deal with guys all over the internet pointing out matter-of-factly that you could well be a lying attention seeker, may not be worth the hassle.


----------



## oracles (Sep 16, 2017)

Señor Voorhees said:


> Out of curiosity, how popular even WAS decapitated? Were they playing larger venues or just crummy little dive clubs? Would Ibanez even consider giving them a signature? I'm well out of the loop with this genre since it's incredibly boring to me.



Pretty popular, the band has been around for just on or over 21 years now, and been relatively successful for the majority of that time. They've had some heavy set backs (Vitek & Covan) but Anticult was actually doing really well after the mixed reception that Blood Mantra got. As far as death metal goes, Decapitated might not be held in the same esteem as some of the early South Florida guys that kicked it off, but they're well regarded as being one of the better death metal bands. Vogg is a stellar guitar player.


----------



## fps (Sep 16, 2017)

oracles said:


> Pretty popular, the band has been around for just on or over 21 years now, and been relatively successful for the majority of that time. They've had some heavy set backs (Vitek & Covan) but Anticult was actually doing really well after the mixed reception that Blood Mantra got. As far as death metal goes, Decapitated might not be held in the same esteem as some of the early South Florida guys that kicked it off, but they're well regarded as being one of the better death metal bands. Vogg is a stellar guitar player.



In Europe, Decapitated are held as one of the pinnacles of death metal mainly for OH and before, though Carnival is also very highly rated and the new one has been warmly received even if it isn't groundbreaking.


----------



## chipchappy (Sep 16, 2017)

marcwormjim said:


> I don't want to read through all eleven pages - Did they decapitate her or not?



Jesus dude, give it a rest


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Sep 16, 2017)

marcwormjim said:


> I don't want to read through all eleven pages - Did they decapitate her or not?


----------



## Ataraxia2320 (Sep 16, 2017)

Decapitated are the premiere technical death metal band in terms of popularity throughout Europe in my experience.

I have no doubt if it were not for all the setbacks (RIP Vitek) they would be even bigger by now. 

On a pretty much unrelated note, does anyone know Covan's condition right now? And is Martin still ducking military service in america? Last thing I seen from him was a finger style cover of bleed, it was insane.


----------



## lewis (Sep 17, 2017)

any actual updates on this?
Or still backwards and forward's on debating?


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Sep 17, 2017)

There won't be an update for a while I think. They might be sitting in Cali for the better part of a month until they're extridited, and even then they'll probably be on ice for a bit. 

Ideally the process will be quick, but unfortunately it'll take more time than anyone wants.


----------



## exo (Sep 17, 2017)

A "like" is probably not EXACTLY the right response to the previous post, but options are limited.

This is likely to come down to who was how inebriated, were any of the parties involved honestly legally capable of consent, and under those circumstances, WHERE is the legal line drawn......

Sucks for EVERYONE involved. Absolutely tragic when the BEST case scenario involves someone making shit up.......

"Ugly" is not the right word.


----------



## bostjan (Oct 8, 2017)

I know this is a really touchy subject, but there have been some updates recently, along the lines of this http://www.metalinjection.net/metal...usations-lawyer-offers-additional-information

I don't know why they extradited two band members, but not the others, since it's getting close to the deadline, but perhaps more importantly, these venue security guards are saying things that are making it look pretty bad for these two girls. Now that there are some more details on the nature of the injuries, it's making the police look like idiots, too, and also, the band's own conflicting statements are making them look bad. It's just terrible all around, but it's looking more and more like the kidnapping charge is garbage.


----------



## Señor Voorhees (Oct 8, 2017)

The fact that they went on the bus was never the "point of kidnap." Nobody denies they went on the bus of their own choice, they said it themselves. It's when they weren't allowed to leave that it became kidnapping. On top of that, the one girl was still scraped and bruised, so some guy seeing them having a good time before shit hit the fans ultimately means nothing. The girl said herself that it started off as a good time. I think it's interesting though that it looks like they took the two less likely offenders first. (unless I'm remembering names wrong, wasn't it Wiecek and Piotrowski that seemed more likely to be the actual offenders?) Kind of curious why that's the case.

Glad to see new info, but it means very little at this point.


----------



## bostjan (Oct 9, 2017)

Señor Voorhees said:


> The fact that they went on the bus was never the "point of kidnap." Nobody denies they went on the bus of their own choice, they said it themselves. It's when they weren't allowed to leave that it became kidnapping. On top of that, the one girl was still scraped and bruised, so some guy seeing them having a good time before shit hit the fans ultimately means nothing. The girl said herself that it started off as a good time. I think it's interesting though that it looks like they took the two less likely offenders first. (unless I'm remembering names wrong, wasn't it Wiecek and Piotrowski that seemed more likely to be the actual offenders?) Kind of curious why that's the case.
> 
> Glad to see new info, but it means very little at this point.



I was referring to witnesses saying that they hung around outside of the bus smoking cigarettes together without the band after they exited the bus, but before they left entirely. I'm sure the defense will use that to say that if they were kidnapped, why would they be hanging around nonchalant? This would be a challenge to the victim's statement to police that she kicked one of the band members in the groin during a struggle with him, then ran away. The defense is also going to point out the girl's histories of providing false information to police back in 2014, and that witnesses reported seeing the girls drinking hard liquor and groping the band members. The defense will point out that the woman accused the band while she was actually in jail for a DUI, and that the woman failed to identify the men for a considerable amount of time, which would be inconsistent with the witness testimonies of these two going back stage and groping the band members to the point where security was consulted about removing them.

Who knows what happened?


----------



## Señor Voorhees (Oct 9, 2017)

Still fairly irrelevant. The only things said was that they were seen drinking, and later smoking cigarettes. He said he saw the friend (angrily) leaving the area on her phone. 

So? They drank and smoked? So what? Perhaps after the smoke is when things went poorly? Seeing them smoking and drinking doesn't play into any narrative other than "at one point they were having a good time." Also, what does "looking more angry than anything" mean? It's all just minor ultimately meaningless information.

The defense will point out a lot of stuff, and rightfully so. They better be fucking thorough. At the moment it's mostly still a bunch of he said she said, so it's still very much all speculation and choosing who you want to believe over the other based on biases. *shrug*


----------



## bostjan (Oct 9, 2017)

Señor Voorhees said:


> Still fairly irrelevant. The only things said was that they were seen drinking, and later smoking cigarettes. He said he saw the friend (angrily) leaving the area on her phone.
> 
> So? They drank and smoked? So what? Perhaps after the smoke is when things went poorly? Seeing them smoking and drinking doesn't play into any narrative other than "at one point they were having a good time." Also, what does "looking more angry than anything" mean? It's all just minor ultimately meaningless information.
> 
> The defense will point out a lot of stuff, and rightfully so. They better be fucking thorough. At the moment it's mostly still a bunch of he said she said, so it's still very much all speculation and choosing who you want to believe over the other based on biases. *shrug*



Sorry, but in any criminal defense, all the defense has to do is provide reasonable doubt. And that's the way it should be, or else we would just end up locking up everyone. So, in the case where witnesses are testifying information contrary to the accusers' testimonies, it is quite relevant.

And how does the incident happen after the girls left? That doesn't make sense. If they hung around smoking cigarettes and then left without re-entering the bus, then your idea of [they hung around smoking cigarettes and walked away talking on their phones] = [at one point they were having a good time].

Again, who knows what happened, but the witness testimony is not consistent with there being a struggle in which one band member was kicked in the groin, then the friend of the primary accuser ran away in terror. And when it comes to witness testimonies, credibility is everything. If both of the prosecution's witnesses have history of providing false information to police and that is documented, then it comes down to whether the band themselves and the venue security have any credibility.

It's easy to get all emotional in this one way or the other, or to jump to conclusions one way or the other, but saying that witness testimonies are irrelevant, IMO, is misguided, especially in a case where there is a high probability that witness testimony is the only thing that makes a case.


----------



## Louis Cypher (Oct 9, 2017)

It's so easy to take emotional sides in cases like this specially when there is bias or prejudice (consciously or subconsciously) involved, ie Its a Metal band they are pigs and bound to be guilty/She knew what she was getting in to when she got on the bus etc etc. Fact is as Bostjan says taking emotion out of this (which is incredibly difficult) It's unfortunately not about the truth its about what both the prosecution and the defense can prove for and against the Band and the girl(s) making the accusation. Whether this is enough to provide the correct "justice" in this case, I only hope it does, whether that's for the girl or the band


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Oct 9, 2017)

I have a feeling the case may get thrown out. Just my $0.02, and thanks to inflation, that is worth jack shit, and Jack left town.


----------



## bostjan (Oct 10, 2017)

So...it's been 30 days, and no word of the other two being extradited. I imagine their lawyer is going to apply for writ of habeas corpus at this point, which will probably speed up the extradition process. Also, there should only be 72 hours to file charges once they are in Oregon, which means that Vogg should be brought up on charges today, or else the same goes for filing for release. I highly doubt this would just fall through the cracks.


----------



## bostjan (Oct 11, 2017)

Spokane County District Court Case #F01700015
Incident # 1720173269 (Spokane Police Corporal Teresa Fuller) - looks like it was filed about a week after the show in Spokane.
Judge: Donna Wilson

The case names several charges of 1st degree kidnapping, and names Vogg as the only defendant. Others are named in passing in the complaint. What I don't understand is how they are being held without charges for this long, as that is unusual. Since it does not appear that their attorney has filed for habeas corpus yet, I assume there is already some sort of arrangement. I think that if they were really going to assert doing nothing wrong, they would have had their lawyer file to have them released by now. I also see no records of extradition taking place as of yesterday, which is beyond the 30-day window for them to begin transportation. Again, I assume something was agreed in advance to allow this to happen, as it's not within written law. Or else their lawyer is on vacation or something.

I'm guessing the other band members will be tried separately or something, I couldn't find anything naming any of them in Spokane court documents.
Vogg was the only one who submitted to DNA testing...I don't see any mention of results, although I don't have a clue how long that could take, sometimes it only takes a few weeks, sometimes it can take several months.

But now that there is at least one set of charges, the ball is rolling.


----------



## Ataraxia2320 (Oct 11, 2017)

bostjan said:


> Spokane County District Court Case #F01700015
> Incident # 1720173269 (Spokane Police Corporal Teresa Fuller) - looks like it was filed about a week after the show in Spokane.
> Judge: Donna Wilson
> 
> ...




Strange that Vogg is the only one being tried here. Based on the statements up until now he seemed like the most likely to be innocent. 

I guess this is more proof that none of us knew shit when the story broke and we shouldn't be making assumptions either way.


----------



## downburst82 (Oct 11, 2017)

It may have to do with the fact Vogg submitted to a dna test? Its possible that has somewhat cleared him of the rape suspisions/allegations which is why his charges would only be for kidnapping? 

Maybe they are trying to build/gather more evidence against the rest of the band before laying kidnapping and the more serious charges against them?


----------



## bostjan (Oct 12, 2017)

Therein lies part of the problem in the legal system these days. When a person is accused, the police are supposed to investigate and gather enough evidence to justify the arrest, which is supposed to be presented to a judge in order to obtain an arrest warrant. Upon arrest, more evidence is gathered from the person, and that evidence along with the warranting evidence is supposed to be presented to a grand jury for pressing charges. The intent of the law is that, if at that point in time, if there is not enough evidence to go to arraignment, the police should be scrambling to find something....and if that doesn't happen, the suspect should be released. There is intended to be a very small window of time between arrest and formal charges being pressed, like a couple days. If extradition is necessary, there is additional time to transport the prisoner and evidence and paperwork, etc., but it's not supposed to be an inordinate amount of time for that to happen, either, and specifically, in Washington, it's 30 days. It's been a couple days past 30 days and it looks like two of them are still awaiting extradition, and one still awaiting charges. I could guess that this delay is agreed upon and has something to do with a "deal" wherein the band members don't have to give DNA samples, otherwise, if I were their lawyer, I'd be cranking up the pressure to get them released without charges, just based on the enforcement of the laws on police proceedings.

I do think that the fact that Vogg is first has nothing to do with the specific charges. He will be awaiting trial now for a while. During that time, I would expect Spokane to add more charges, but now that they've justified in court holding him, they'll have plenty of time to arraign him again and again.


----------



## KailM (Oct 12, 2017)

Here's to hoping Vogg is innocent of all charges and can go home and recruit some new members for Decapitated...


----------



## exo (Oct 12, 2017)

KailM said:


> Here's to hoping Vogg is innocent of all charges and can go home and recruit some new members for Decapitated...



Only "kind of, sort of?".

If the only "crime" Vogg is guilty of is "looking the other way....", the FUCK Vogg and everyone involved. That's bullshit of the highest order.


I REALLY hope things are past that.........and that in itself is a fucked up statement:


----------



## ArtDecade (Oct 12, 2017)

I hope there is a guitar in front of his cell and just far enough out of reach.


----------



## bostjan (Oct 12, 2017)

At this point, even with some things moving along, I do not think it is possible to write off any possibility. Honestly, there's a chance that this could go through trial and punishment and what actually happened that night might still be a complete unknown.

The next crucial piece of evidence is Vogg's DNA exclusion test.

Either:
A) The test comes back exclusionary, in which case, it basically proves Vogg did not leave any DNA with the accuser.
B) The test comes back non-exclusionary, in which case, it basically proves that Vogg is lying.
C) No one brings up the test, in which case, it basically proves that Vogg is being railroaded.

If A, I would think the prosecution would have a really difficult time getting a conviction. They might simply argue that he either took precautions or got lucky, but it'd make the case difficult for them. In case B, the defense is completely sunk, I think. In case C, which I have a feeling might be likely with the way this has been going so far, then neither side gains or loses position, but I think that the prosecution is generally in a weaker position right off the bat, so, who knows.

------------------

People out there on the web insisting that these guys are innocent, and people in this thread insisting that they are guilty - one side is going to be vindicated after all, but frankly, no one outside the band and the accusers know anything at this point in time, so please reserve judgement either way. Saying stuff like


ArtDecade said:


> I hope their is a guitar in front of his cell and just far enough out of reach.


is really premature, and it'll probably be months or maybe years before this is settled from a legal perspective.


----------



## KailM (Oct 12, 2017)

exo said:


> Only "kind of, sort of?".
> 
> If the only "crime" Vogg is guilty of is "looking the other way....", the FUCK Vogg and everyone involved. That's bullshit of the highest order.
> 
> ...



What I should have said is that I hope Vogg ACTUALLY IS innocent of ALL charges -- including "looking the other way" which I agree is extremely punishable.

I have to admit, I've had trouble listening to any of their material since this surfaced. I can't really enjoy it knowing that one of my favorite bands might have (and probably did) engaged in this BS. I just can't excuse rape. I can forgive murder before that, oddly enough.

I guess my comment earlier was just to voice my small glimmer of hope that at least Vogg might not have been involved.


----------



## KailM (Oct 12, 2017)

exo said:


> Only "kind of, sort of?".
> 
> If the only "crime" Vogg is guilty of is "looking the other way....", the FUCK Vogg and everyone involved. That's bullshit of the highest order.
> 
> ...



What I should have said is that I hope Vogg ACTUALLY IS innocent of ALL charges -- including "looking the other way" which I agree is extremely punishable.

I have to admit, I've had trouble listening to any of their material since this surfaced. I can't really enjoy it knowing that one of my favorite bands might have (and probably did) engaged in this BS. I just can't excuse rape. I can forgive murder before that, oddly enough.

I guess my comment earlier was just to voice my small glimmer of hope that at least Vogg might not have been involved.

This whole situation just sucks.


----------



## TedEH (Oct 12, 2017)

KailM said:


> I can forgive murder before that, oddly enough.


Maybe I should go off to the unpopular opinion thread, but I still think murder is worse. Not that it's a competition on any level.


----------



## KailM (Oct 12, 2017)

TedEH said:


> Maybe I should go off to the unpopular opinion thread, but I still think murder is worse. Not that it's a competition on any level.



Murder is probably worse, if you want to put it on a scale. But I find that I can _understand_ how someone could be driven to it in certain cases (in most cases _not_ though). But I can't fathom how anyone could find themselves compelled to commit such a savage atrocity as rape on another individual. Especially when sex can be obtained con-sensually so easily. You'd think that these guys could get some as often as they'd like, consensually, on tour. Even if they are a death metal band.


----------



## chopeth (Oct 13, 2017)

I don't have problems listening to Emperor (my black fav), Mayhem or Burzum just to name a few... Decapitated music is great regardless of what they have or haven't done.


----------



## Blytheryn (Oct 13, 2017)

chopeth said:


> I don't have problems listening to Emperor (my black fav), Mayhem or Burzum just to name a few... Decapitated music is great regardless of what they have or haven't done.



Lostprophets on the other hand...


----------



## lewis (Oct 13, 2017)

THEY HAVE ALL BEEN CHARGED WITH RAPE......

http://teamrock.com/news/2017-10-13/all-4-decapitated-members-formally-charged-with-rape


----------



## Imalwayscold (Oct 13, 2017)

Charged doesn't mean convicted though. Their time in court is still yet to happen.


----------



## bostjan (Oct 13, 2017)

Hmm, so the kidnapping case (#F01700015) is completely separate from the rape case (#F01700017). It looks like Vogg is the only one formally accused of kidnapping, and it looks like all four are formally accused of rape. 

The source of all of the court documents I found is going to go dark now, too, because there are motions that the district courts do not have proper jurisdiction to hear these cases, but the documents don't say who does. The Case #F01700017 documents have even been removed from the system as of this morning. The arraignment is supposed to be today. I still had seen nothing indicating that the other two had been transported to Spokane County, but maybe everyone was moved to another facility.


----------



## TedEH (Oct 13, 2017)

KailM said:


> But I can't fathom how anyone could find themselves compelled to commit such a savage atrocity as rape on another individual.


I suspect that this is much of why people come to the defense of the accused so easily. It's hard to imagine being compelled to actually assault someone, but it's much easier to imagine scenarios where grey-area situations are turned into rape accusations, or consent being taken away after-the-fact for petty/drama/revenge reasons, etc. I get the impression that dudes worry about how easily an otherwise innocent interaction can be turned against them- because it does come across as a legit risk, as far as I can tell. Anyone can just throw an accusation at you and ruin you super easily. Edit: Not saying that's what happening here, or anywhere, just thinking out loud about the potential thought process that leads to supporting the accused by default.



KailM said:


> Especially when sex can be obtained con-sensually so easily.


Speak for yourself 

Legit though, for tons of people, it's not very easy at all.


----------



## bostjan (Oct 13, 2017)

TedEH said:


> I suspect that this is much of why people come to the defense of the accused so easily. It's hard to imagine being compelled to actually assault someone, but it's much easier to imagine scenarios where grey-area situations are turned into rape accusations, or consent being taken away after-the-fact for petty/drama/revenge reasons, etc. I get the impression that dudes worry about how easily an otherwise innocent interaction can be turned against them- because it does come across as a legit risk, as far as I can tell. Anyone can just throw an accusation at you and ruin you super easily. Edit: Not saying that's what happening here, or anywhere, just thinking out loud about the potential thought process that leads to supporting the accused by default.



There's a ton of harsh words flying around out there every direction in these cases.

I think you and I are on the same page, and I think this has all been said, but maybe I should say it again:

1. It takes a tremendous amount of courage to come forward with these sorts of allegations.
2. Courage is a positive trait, but it does not imply other positive traits, nor does it imply negative traits.
3. These guys are alleged rapists. That's super serious. Allegations do not mean guilt, but they certainly do not mean innocence, either. The courts will try to determine that. The alternative press might take a crack at "solving" the case as well, and it might do so with some sort of bias, informed or otherwise.
4. These guys' careers are ruined, no matter the outcome of this.
5. The two women involved in the allegations should do everything they can to remain anonymous. No matter the outcome of this, they could be in serious danger from all sorts of crazy people if their names are released to the public.
6. No one should have to apologize for making any "if ... then" statements. Because these are open cases, there are a lot of very serious if's and a lot of very serious then's. That's the nature of open investigations and open court cases, and the band is well-known, so there's simply no way around thinking about "if ... then." I would urge everybody to try to think of this from both sides under multiple possible scenarios though, if everybody is wanting to comment on this.


----------



## Tech Wrath (Oct 13, 2017)

Either way, Nihility is one of my favorite albums ever.
Can't take a side with so little information right now as others have already stated.

This whole situation is a shit show. /:


----------



## KailM (Oct 13, 2017)

chopeth said:


> I don't have problems listening to Emperor (my black fav), Mayhem or Burzum just to name a few... Decapitated music is great regardless of what they have or haven't done.



Oh, me too. But for some reason, this is affecting my ability to listen to Decapitated. I agree, the art should be separated from the artist, but this crime is more serious to me. Maybe it's because I have a daughter. When I think about what Varg did, it really sounds like he was provoked and was truly concerned about his life. I can understand why he did what he did even if I don't support it. I don't support most of his views either, but still enjoy his music.


----------



## TedEH (Oct 13, 2017)

bostjan said:


> 1. It takes a tremendous amount of courage to come forward with these sorts of allegations.
> [...]
> 4. These guys' careers are ruined, no matter the outcome of this.


Agreed with everything you said- but as a side-note, I think lots of people do have the level of courage it would take to level a false accusation, and that the ability to ruin someone so easily can be a motivating factor. I don't think we've seen anything here that suggests any of that is relevant to this case, I mention it only as an "it's a scary thought that people have so much power over other peoples lives" kind of thing- and I mean that from both sides, since regardless of the motivations or who is actually guilty of something, someone's life is made worse one way or another. Very likely that the lives of all people involved are going to be worse going forward. (Which in itself is likely a good deterrent for false accusations - sounds like an easy way to ruin your own life at the same time.)

I guess the tl;dr version: Regardless of who is found to be "innocent", there are no winners here. Either the accused are terrible people, or the accusers are terrible people, or maybe they're all terrible people, or there was a big misunderstanding (not likely), but in all cases, everyone's lives are worse for it.


----------



## Randy (Oct 13, 2017)

bostjan said:


> 4. These guys' careers are ruined, no matter the outcome of this.



Eh, maybe. There are scenarios where they bounce back whether it's true or especially if it's false. My odds on that happening will be in direct correlation with how many units the new Tim Labesis album sells.


----------



## lewis (Oct 13, 2017)

Imalwayscold said:


> Charged doesn't mean convicted though. Their time in court is still yet to happen.


surely you would rather be released and charges dropped, than be charged?
clearly the police have too much on them. Which likely means court could also be a forgone conclusion


----------



## bostjan (Oct 13, 2017)

Court is a little beyond that now, there was already a kidnapping arraignment and the first appearance is scheduled for 1:30 PM Pacific Time today.

Now that the court is preparing to open, some documents are back online.

All four of them are being held in Spokane: http://www.khq.com/story/36586909/j...tal-band-back-to-spokane-to-face-rape-charges

It appears there is a new judge and an interpreter this time around.


----------



## Ataraxia2320 (Oct 13, 2017)

bostjan said:


> Court is a little beyond that now, there was already a kidnapping arraignment and the first appearance is scheduled for 1:30 PM Pacific Time today.
> 
> Now that the court is preparing to open, some documents are back online.
> 
> ...



Dude thank you so much for keeping us all up to date.


----------



## BusinessMan (Oct 13, 2017)

I'm confused with that link you posted. In that article, it read that the woman herself reported being raped. I have read several other articles that state her friend phoned in the rape from the back of a police cruiser after being arrested for DUI. So which is it?


----------



## bostjan (Oct 13, 2017)

The link I posted?



The Spokesman Review said:


> Later that night, the woman who said she escaped was stopped for a DUI just after midnight. The Washington State Patrol trooper who made the stop said the woman didn’t mention a sexual assault when he pulled her over, or when he took her into custody. It was when he was parked outside of the Spokane County Jail and writing a search warrant for her blood that she asked to use her phone, according to court documents.
> 
> “She spoke to someone on the phone and then said to him that her friend was raped by five men downtown,” police wrote in court documents. The trooper said the woman was unable to provide a specific location, so he advised her friend to call 911.



The police report says the call to police about the rape was received just before 0200 hours (2 AM) on Sept 1. The police incident report (#1720173269) has some pretty minor inconsistencies in the testimonies of the two victims. The follow up on the report has other testimonies that contradict some of the non-major details of both of the two women's testimonies - nothing universally conclusive. We may find out more after 1:30 PM Pacific Time, but I don't think it'd be wise to expect much for at least a couple weeks. A lot of the wording of these police and court documents is confusing for me, and there is really scant information in them. Once some time has passed, the court tapes might be made available, hopefully with specific names redacted, but that could take weeks.


----------



## tedtan (Oct 13, 2017)

KailM said:


> But I can't fathom how anyone could find themselves compelled to commit such a savage atrocity as rape on another individual. Especially when sex can be obtained con-sensually so easily.



Rape isn't about sex. Rapists are generally people who are controlled by others in their day to day lives and use rape as a means to be in control and have power over someone else for a change. I would think you'd have to have some kind of mental issues for rape to seem like a legitimate option.


----------



## TedEH (Oct 13, 2017)

tedtan said:


> Rape isn't about sex.


I hear this pretty often, but I don't know that it can be considered true as a blanket statement. I think it's true in some contexts, but not in others.


----------



## tedtan (Oct 13, 2017)

TedEH said:


> I hear this pretty often, but I don't know that it can be considered true as a blanket statement. I think it's true in some contexts, but not in others.



Yeah, I think that is more applicable to premeditated rape. A situation such as a woman changing her mind during sex and the guy shes with not stopping is a different situation, so I'm sure its not universally true. But there is a lot of psychological research that backs it up in many situations.


----------



## bostjan (Oct 13, 2017)

TedEH said:


> I hear this pretty often, but I don't know that it can be considered true as a blanket statement. I think it's true in some contexts, but not in others.



I would not rule out any explanation as to why it happens. Separating the act from the act of sex itself seems a bit odd a concept to me, but I agree that the act can be just as much about violence and persecution.

------------------------------

This is a bit weird. The statutes for first degree rape are clear that any rape that occurs during first degree kidnapping is first degree rape. That means that this would be first degree rape, given the kidnapping allegations and the charge being first degree kidnapping.

Two defendants are charged with second degree rape, which is rape by a health care provider, when the victim is fully incapacitated, or during transport.

The other two are charged with third degree rape, which is when there is simply lack of clearly expressed consent or when sex is coerced through threats to the victim's personal property.

These charges are not consistent with the testimonies given by the accusers here.

--------------------------------

Lysejko also has his own attorney now, but her batting average as a criminal defense lawyer doesn't look so hot, based on the court records I quickly scanned. She has had a significant portion of cases where charges were dismissed in court before the formal trial proceeded, though, so maybe that's the angle that's at play.


----------



## bostjan (Oct 13, 2017)

Spokane Police Cpl. Teresa Fuller said:


> I do not have probable cause that a rape occurred



Some details here: http://www.nme.com/news/music/decapitated-rape-charge-statement-2149931#YS6Yj44h0jFZY6HP.99

This is looking more and more like a complete shit show. Other than the DNA evidence, I'm not sure what evidence needs to be processed, though. It's still a wait-and-see game, but statements like the above are real head-scratchers. If there is not probable cause (I would imagine in any world, two witness testimonies would be probable cause), then why would there be charges?! Maybe Spokane police are just making a bunch of missteps.


----------



## bostjan (Oct 13, 2017)

Formal arraignment for the rape charges (2nd degree) are now scheduled for 10:30 AM, 24 Oct 2017 (Pacific Time) with Judge Annette Plese presiding.


----------



## TedEH (Oct 13, 2017)

I had no idea there were "degrees" of rape charges.


----------



## lewis (Oct 14, 2017)

TedEH said:


> I had no idea there were "degrees" of rape charges.


yeah me either.
Why does the world over complicate things?.

You either raped someone ( maximum sentence for rape should apply)
or you attempted rape and failed, or you havent done either and are free?

humans trying to create grey area, is what created interpretation. The second we created/allowed interpretation, was the second the whole system became a clusterfuck. Especially coupled with "Human rights for criminals" now too. Its the reason how 1 judge can be incredibly harsh and serve huge sentences, then in comparable cases another judge can be lenient and the sentences dont match up? Thats honestly ridiculous.

the whole thing is a mess. Only in this modern world, does the criminal get to act like a victim and it actually work with sympathisers. (this is mostly a rant about things in general, not really aimed at the Decapitated situation)


----------



## bostjan (Oct 14, 2017)

So you guys believe that forceable rape is equivalent to coerced rape is equivalent to lack of clear consent? I guess I don't really see it that way, even if they are all quite bad.

So court documents are quite contrary to what news outlets have been reporting. I'm starting to get frustrated with how poor quality the information is that's out there. Even the court documents themselves seem to have lots of little minor things that sure seem to be contradictory and not really that confusing.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Oct 14, 2017)

bostjan said:


> So you guys believe that forceable rape is equivalent to coerced rape is equivalent to lack of clear consent? I guess I don't really see it that way, even if they are all quite bad.


"forced rape" = some guy running out on a jogging trail, grabs a girl, and Last House on the Left's her.
"coerced rape" = Harvey Weinstein-ing that one.
"lack of clear consent" = She didn't really say no, she may've been flirting with the guy, sitting in his lap, etc. and they ended up having sex, but she didn't exactly give consent.

Is that what you mean? Just want to make sure, because if so, I see each as being quite different.


----------



## TedEH (Oct 14, 2017)

lewis said:


> humans trying to create grey area


Not what I meant to say. I just meant I wasn't aware that there was a legal distinction.



bostjan said:


> So you guys believe that forceable rape is equivalent to coerced rape is equivalent to lack of clear consent?


DEFINITELY not what I meant to say.


----------



## Dredg (Oct 14, 2017)

I completely understand that victims both male and female will not immediately come forward to press charges. My girlfriend was abused by a former boyfriend years ago and only came forward after she learned he was extradited back to her hometown to face multiple counts of rape charges, including multiple charges of forcible against a minor. After she testified, she definitely wishes she pressed charges sooner, but the good news is that the sack of shit got 3 life sentences withoutr parole - he's never seeing outside ever again.


----------



## lewis (Oct 15, 2017)

TedEH said:


> Not what I meant to say. I just meant I wasn't aware that there was a legal distinction.
> 
> 
> DEFINITELY not what I meant to say.


lol it was humans that created the legal distinction.


----------



## bostjan (Oct 16, 2017)

Decapitated said:


> Once again, we ask that everyone wait for each party’s case to be presented and await the court’s decision. With that said, whilst cases are being prepared on both sides, some facts are indisputable at this point – that the original officer who took the complaint from the accuser stated, "I do not have probable cause that a rape occurred."
> 
> It’s taken a full 30 days to file charges, which is right up against the point at which the defendants would legally have had to be released.
> 
> ...



By my count, it actually took a little longer than 30 days, but w/e.

Also, looking at court documents, the news is mincing a lot of details. Technically, the arraignment Friday was postponed until the 24th (next Tuesday), so none of the band members have been formally arraigned on any charges. This is not highly unusual, but somewhat unusual, given the seriousness of the crime and how long it took for the first court appearance to occur. Technically, this puts pretty much everything that's happening just after the time limit for it to happen. I'm not sure why the defense is allowing this, as I pointed out earlier, especially, now, after making the above public statement, which leads me to believe that they are ready to fight the charges and use the fact that things are taking longer than allowed by statutes. I had previously assumed that there was some sort of understanding, but the statement above strongly suggests otherwise.


----------



## wankerness (Oct 16, 2017)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> "forced rape" = some guy running out on a jogging trail, grabs a girl, and Last House on the Left's her.
> "coerced rape" = Harvey Weinstein-ing that one.
> "lack of clear consent" = She didn't really say no, she may've been flirting with the guy, sitting in his lap, etc. and they ended up having sex, but she didn't exactly give consent.
> 
> Is that what you mean? Just want to make sure, because if so, I see each as being quite different.



God yes, they're incredible different. I HATE this new trend of "WOKE-STERS" that have to use the exact same language to refer to everything and purposely try to obfuscate any difference. Ex, the Casey Affleck thing - everyone was like HE COMMITTED SEXUAL ASSAULT, as if he was equivalent to Roman fuckin Polanski, because now "sexual assault" is used by them to refer to exposing themselves to a woman against their will, and is ALSO used by them to refer to actual full-blown rape. Morons. It trivializes actual rape victims in a gigantic way, that's for damn sure. Yes, it should be a crime, but don't change the terms to be uniform to pretend it's all equal, cause it isn't. It's like trying to equate attempted murder and punching some guy for making a lewd remark at your girlfriend. Oh right, unwanted lewd remarks don't exist anymore, I mean, sexually assaulting your girlfriend.


----------



## bostjan (Oct 16, 2017)

Allegations against Affleck were still pretty serious, but no criminal charges were pressed.

Since someone else brought up Weinstein, I find it amazing how many folks are still defending him on message boards and comment postings, when he's facing rape allegations from two women and other degrees of sexual assault and harassment from so many others, and I have a very difficult time believing that all of these women colluded to take him down without just cause. So, in my mind, I have reason to believe that he's done some awful things. But, and I feel kind of gross even asking this, but, purely from a legal standpoint, how does this work in cases where he paid some of these women off to keep them quiet? On one hand, it seems to suggest guilt, but on the other hand, does he get the money back? I would think not... Like, if someone murdered someone else, and then a third person witnessed the murderer disposing of the body and other evidence, and was paid off to keep quiet, it'd make that third person accomplice to the crime, no? On the other hand, if someone punched you in the face (physical assault) and paid you off to keep quiet about it, and you pressed criminal charges, I would think that you'd have to give back the hush money. With Weinstein, is it somewhere in between? I guess, legally, you'd have to pay back the money, but that seems really icky, to me, at least.

If Decapitated really has the investigating officer stating in court that she didn't find probable cause to make the arrest, I really don't think it means much at this point, since someone else must've thought that there *was* probable cause to issue a warrant. But now that the judge and prosecutor have been bobbled around, I think the Spokane court is not really seeing this case as a high-profile thing, and if this washes out to any sort of not-guilty outcome, which is looking like a fair possibility at this point, the court is going to have a lot of egg on its face to deal with. If there is a guilty verdict at the end of all of this, then it'll make the news media appear biased, IMO, since they are really focusing reporting on stuff that supports the band's side of the story much moreso than the victim's side.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Oct 16, 2017)

bostjan said:


> Allegations against Affleck were still pretty serious, but no criminal charges were pressed.
> 
> Since someone else brought up Weinstein, I find it amazing how many folks are still defending him on message boards and comment postings, when he's facing rape allegations from two women and other degrees of sexual assault and harassment from so many others, and I have a very difficult time believing that all of these women colluded to take him down without just cause. So, in my mind, I have reason to believe that he's done some awful things. But, and I feel kind of gross even asking this, but, purely from a legal standpoint, how does this work in cases where he paid some of these women off to keep them quiet? On one hand, it seems to suggest guilt, but on the other hand, does he get the money back? I would think not... Like, if someone murdered someone else, and then a third person witnessed the murderer disposing of the body and other evidence, and was paid off to keep quiet, it'd make that third person accomplice to the crime, no? On the other hand, if someone punched you in the face (physical assault) and paid you off to keep quiet about it, and you pressed criminal charges, I would think that you'd have to give back the hush money. With Weinstein, is it somewhere in between? I guess, legally, you'd have to pay back the money, but that seems really icky, to me, at least.
> 
> If Decapitated really has the investigating officer stating in court that she didn't find probable cause to make the arrest, I really don't think it means much at this point, since someone else must've thought that there *was* probable cause to issue a warrant. But now that the judge and prosecutor have been bobbled around, I think the Spokane court is not really seeing this case as a high-profile thing, and if this washes out to any sort of not-guilty outcome, which is looking like a fair possibility at this point, the court is going to have a lot of egg on its face to deal with. If there is a guilty verdict at the end of all of this, then it'll make the news media appear biased, IMO, since they are really focusing reporting on stuff that supports the band's side of the story much moreso than the victim's side.


I would post a meme I made of Mr. Weinstein, but it may be against the TOS of this fine establishment, and may, perhaps, be in poor taste. It's of Weinstein's head photoshopped -- poorly, I might add, for comedic value -- onto Tony the Tiger's body, and the caption is, "Tony the Tiger says... It'ssssss..." And I'll let you fill in the rest.


----------



## ArtDecade (Oct 16, 2017)

What is up with those Affleck brothers?


----------



## Nicki (Oct 17, 2017)

bostjan said:


> how does this work in cases where he paid some of these women off to keep them quiet? On one hand, it seems to suggest guilt, but on the other hand, does he get the money back?



One party would get charged with bribery, the other with accepting a bribe. Since both are criminal offenses, it traps the person who accepts the bribe into staying quiet.

Reference


----------



## bostjan (Oct 17, 2017)

Nicki said:


> One party would get charged with bribery, the other with accepting a bribe. Since both are criminal offenses, it traps the person who accepts the bribe into staying quiet.
> 
> Reference



I guess this is a whole inappropriate can of worms under the circumstances, but why not go deeper into it, since the can is open?

So, would the actresses paid off by Weinstein to keep quiet be facing potential charges for accepting a bribe now? I would hope not, but accepting a bribe is bad (not as bad as offering a bribe, though). It could set a new precedent if they aren't in danger of such charges, which might be bad or maybe not-so-bad, ultimately. Under the potentially new precedent, though, it could be possible to accept a bribe, not honour the terms of the bribe, keep the money, and face no consequences. It'd essentially render bribery useless. Which would be, well, not so bad an outcome.


----------



## Nicki (Oct 17, 2017)

bostjan said:


> So, would the actresses paid off by Weinstein to keep quiet be facing potential charges for accepting a bribe now?



Potentially, yes, if the state attorney decided to press charges.

The other potential impact is that if the person who accepted the bribe, then came forward, can be called by the defense as a witness and flat out ask them under oath if they accepted a bribe. If the witness doesn't purger themselves and admits that yes, they accepted the bribe, the defense can use that to discredit the witness and their individual allegation against the accused. If the witness knowingly denies the accusation and purgers themselves, and it if the defense can prove that the person accepted the bribe, then the witness now potentially faces 2 charges, purgery and accepting a bribe.

In either scenario, the state attorney would almost be forced to press charges against the witness because it would look bad if the state chose not to pursue criminal charges against that person.

Like I said, it's a trap.


----------



## wankerness (Oct 17, 2017)

*perjure, you probably don't want to use that word for someone who pukes


----------



## wankerness (Oct 17, 2017)

EDIT: Whoops, didn't read the whole last two pages and now this site won't let you delete


----------



## Nicki (Oct 17, 2017)

wankerness said:


> *perjure, you probably don't want to use that word for someone who pukes


Mah bad.


----------



## bostjan (Oct 24, 2017)

Pretrial is now scheduled for the first of December, and the criminal trial is to start 18 Dec 2017. Annette Plese is set to preside over the trial. Each person is on a separate case number, but the trials are scheduled to be simultaneous.

The court documents all seem to have been pulled from public access at this time, not sure why, but it seems to be an intentional act by the court, so I have no idea what happened at arraignment. Usually not much happens anyway, but I find it kind of weird either way.


----------



## bostjan (Oct 24, 2017)

Also, the judge has stated that the trial will almost certainly be delayed. Discussions of innocence or guilt aside, note that the Sixth Amendment of the US Constitution guarantees a right to a speedy trial, which is defined by law for accused felons as 60 days. The band, legally, should be petitioning for release at this point in time. While that doesn't mean that the charges are dismissed, but just that the legal system no longer can retain custody once the petition is reviewed. Keep in mind that every step of the way so far, the courts have already been behind schedule with the charges, the extradition, and the arraignment - and now trial is scheduled at the very end of the allowed window with the judge blatantly stating that it will certainly be postponed, and the court admitting that they are trying to bend the rules so that they can keep the accused in custody much longer than allowed. With the court cases being closed and reopened and the public records being expunged of these cases' existence (which may be in violation of the Freedom of Information Act, if the court continues to keep the records of charges and dates hidden from public view), this whole thing certainly looks very bad on the courts. And now with the police department stating that there was too little evidence to make the arrest and the nebulous statements about lack of any evidence at all and the prosecution's two main witnesses having documented history of providing false information to the police long before this incident, the whole think looks like a belligerent fuckup by the court system.

Whether these guys are guilty or innocent, they should be allowed a fair trial under US law.


----------



## Nicki (Oct 25, 2017)

It's obvious the case has been mishandled from the get-go and I would argue that the band should pursue release. Don't get me wrong, the accusations shouldn't be dismissed because of it, but this case has gone from "There's no way it's true" to "Wow, it's looking like they're guilty" to "These circumstances seem questionable". I'm curious to know how thoroughly these accusations were investigated by the Spokane police department. 

Also (if I'm not mistaken) in rape cases, information surrounding the case is usually put under a publication ban in order to protect the identity of the victim.


----------



## bostjan (Oct 25, 2017)

Obviously they are required not to release the name of the victim, but things like "how did the defendant plea?" "When is the next hearing scheduled?" or "What was the date of extradition?" is all public domain. If they made a blunder and accidentally released the name of one of the witnesses, the appropriate corrective action is to remove the offending document, not to bomb out the entire case. If they do make another mistake and bomb out the entire case file, creating a new case and keeping everything confidential is also another mistake, and so on and on the chain of mistakes goes, until the entire system is exposed.

The law has 15 days to go from arrest to arraignment (+30 days for extradition) and 60 days from arraignment to trial, but the US Supreme Court has set precedents that any delays without reason are in breach of the 6th Amendment. These guys were arrested Sep 2, right? What mathematics could be used to get 15+30 <= 63 days?! And now with the trial scheduled to start 55 days after arraignment with a wink and a nod from the judge, flat out saying it'll be delayed and these men, accused but not convicted of any crime, will rot in jail in solitary confinement (and yes, that it a human rights issue) indefinitely.

I guess the court is betting that no one cares about accused rapists, whether anything is proven or not, so it's perfectly fine to willfully trample all over their basic rights.

So...what if it turns out that one or more of them are innocent? Well, by then, the courts bank on the fact that those let go will be relieved enough to not pursue it. But, sadly, this kind of treatment of jailed prisoners happens all of the time - it's a regular practice, and people *do* turn out to be innocent, quite regularly (as we already covered earlier in this thread), so:

1. Change the laws to make it legal to lock people up without a trial.
or
2. Hold the people within the system accountable for obeying the law.


----------



## couverdure (Oct 29, 2017)

Just here to let you guys know that Vogg is no longer listed in the artist roster on Ibanez's website.









I kinda find it funny that there are still people on the list who no longer play their guitars for now (like Angel Vivaldi, the dudes from Archspire, Jari Maenpaa, Justin from Saosin who's now in The Used, Ben Bruce and the other guy from Asking Alexandria who even got production sig models), but he got removed once the allegations happened.

This is to be Ian Watkins levels of bad if things keep going on like this.


----------



## marcwormjim (Oct 29, 2017)

Is Watkins the new Hitler folks compare folks to?


----------



## Nicki (Oct 29, 2017)

Are you kidding me? "Ian Watkins levels of bad"? That dude got off easy in the media for what he did. Compared to the level of media coverage Decapitated has received over this, Watkins was barely a fart in the wind.


----------



## iamaom (Oct 29, 2017)

Nicki said:


> Compared to the level of media coverage Decapitated has received over this, Watkins was barely a fart in the wind.


Well social media coverage seems to be increasing every year, and given the fact that death metal is a very click-baity topic I guess you could say that Watkins got lucky and Decapitated are just victims of circumstance.


----------



## marcwormjim (Oct 30, 2017)

They each got lucky, in their own way.


----------



## bostjan (Oct 30, 2017)

There is a hearing scheduled in a few weeks to discuss the status of the case. I think that's unusual, but maybe it's an Oregon thing. Other than that, they swapped judges, so now Julie McKay is presiding over the trial, which is now scheduled over the holidays. Maybe I'm reading into this wrong, but it seems there is a chance that the defense is fighting this exactly how I mentioned. Speedy Trial laws are imposed at the federal level, so I don't see how Oregon can schedule a trial 55 days after arraignment and then public say that it'll be delayed a week a conspicuous wink and a nod without taking some serious flack.

Looking at other Oregon felony cases, this time frame seems highly unusual to me as well. I can't imagine what angle the court is going for.


----------



## cwhitey2 (Oct 30, 2017)

bostjan said:


> There is a hearing scheduled in a few weeks to discuss the status of the case. I think that's unusual, but maybe it's an Oregon thing. Other than that, they swapped judges, so now Julie McKay is presiding over the trial, which is now scheduled over the holidays. Maybe I'm reading into this wrong, but it seems there is a chance that the defense is fighting this exactly how I mentioned. Speedy Trial laws are imposed at the federal level, so I don't see how Oregon can schedule a trial 55 days after arraignment and then public say that it'll be delayed a week a conspicuous wink and a nod without taking some serious flack.
> 
> Looking at other Oregon felony cases, this time frame seems highly unusual to me as well. I can't imagine what angle the court is going for.


Yeah that does seem odd.

It's almost like they don't have a case and are looking for something to pin on them by holding them as long as they can (I'm not saying they are guilty or innocent).

This whole case has me scratching my head...I would not be surprised if everything eventually got thrown out of court.


----------



## Genome (Oct 30, 2017)

Nicki said:


> Are you kidding me? "Ian Watkins levels of bad"? That dude got off easy in the media for what he did. Compared to the level of media coverage Decapitated has received over this, Watkins was barely a fart in the wind.



Are you talking about just the US? As the Watkins story was front-page news in the UK.


----------



## bostjan (Dec 4, 2017)

Thought it was time for an update. Nothing earth-shattering.

1. Peter Tägtgren has publicly defended Decapitated, but says also that he has no idea what actually happened. (http://www.blabbermouth.net/news/pe...-against-rape-allegation-i-think-its-a-setup/)

Pretty silly, IMO, to defend the group when you admit you have no idea what they did or did not do. I mean, he's not saying to withold judgement until we know something, he's flat out saying they didn't do it. He also says he doesn't know any of the guys other than Vogg...pretty weird.

2. The band's legal team, Friday, filed for a motion to compel. Basically, the trial is taking too long and the courts aren't coming up with anything, so they're doing this to get the ball rolling. The trial is now pushed back to start the 18th (the last day legally allowed for delays, according to the modern interpretations of the sixth amendment), but then after the first day of trial, there is an extended holiday recess scheduled, so that the trial will actually start 9 Jan, almost a month after the time limit to begin trial is expired. This is very obvious bullshit. If they are guilty or not, they deserve a fair trial on a timely basis. Getting the judge into a room to bang a gavel and say that the trial has begun, then immediately say the trial is on a very long recess is an obvious half-assed workaround, and it's deplorable. Everything to do with the band aside, this is proof that the legal system in the USA doesn't take justice seriously in any way.

3. The prosecution is calling 15 witnesses to testify against the band. Fifteen. A dozen and three. That's not a ton, but that's certainly a lot more than I expected, based on what the defense has been stating publicly.

4. Not counting the one-month delay, the trial is expected to take over a month. We will likely not hear anything about a verdict until February or March.


----------



## Uncreative123 (Dec 7, 2017)

bostjan said:


> Thought it was time for an update. Nothing earth-shattering.



Appreciate you keeping an eye on this and updating us. I was just thinking today how I hadn't heard anything regarding this in awhile.

Are you currently in law school?


----------



## cwhitey2 (Dec 7, 2017)

Uncreative123 said:


> Appreciate you keeping an eye on this and updating us. I was just thinking today how I hadn't heard anything regarding this in awhile.
> 
> Are you currently in law school?


No, he's just really smart


----------



## tedtan (Dec 8, 2017)

Uncreative123 said:


> Are you currently in law school?



He's a physicist, if I'm not mistaken.


----------



## bostjan (Dec 8, 2017)

Uncreative123 said:


> Appreciate you keeping an eye on this and updating us. I was just thinking today how I hadn't heard anything regarding this in awhile.
> 
> Are you currently in law school?



Ha ha, no. I used to follow this band, and I had a couple of bandmates go through something eerily similar to this eons ago. I don't really think it's appropriate to go into details in public, but I was friends with both guys, they were accused of two separate crimes, locked up, went through all of the legal stuff you'd expect to go through having been accused of a very serious violent crime, each based off of only the accusers' statements. One of them later admitted the encounter was consensual, but she was married and lied to police to try to get out of trouble with her husband. The other went to trial, where it was proven over and over again that a) my friend was never even alone with the woman at the time she said it happened, b) the woman left by herself hours before he did, and he didn't know where she lived, and c) she had significantly changed her statements 3-4 times. Then, a witness came forward that saw her harming herself in such a way that she would later claim was from him, and the case fell apart. Now, I'm not suggesting in any way that anything like this is going on with Decapitated. For all I know, they could be guilty, or they could be innocent. I don't know. I only know that people, in general, can be monsters, so, either they are the monsters and they did what these women are saying or the women are the monsters. Honestly, from the evidence presented so far, nothing quite adds up from either side, so it's just one big mess trying to figure out who to believe. What bothers me, is that rather than hold the trial and get this over with, so that the band can begin legitimately rotting away in prison, or so that the band members can be exonerated and go free, the courts have proven that they don't give two shits about justice in this case.



cwhitey2 said:


> No, he's just really smart



Thanks! I at least try to look that way when other people are watching. 



tedtan said:


> He's a physicist, if I'm not mistaken.



That's correct. I have a pretty cool job blowing stuff up with vast amounts of energy, then writing reports about why it happened. It sounds exciting, but it's actually probably a lot less exciting than determining the fate of people accused of heinous crimes. At least if one of the things I'm working with gives me too much trouble, I can strap it in between two electrodes and pass a high voltage through it until it's irreparable...oh wait...

---------------------------

Another update: It looks like the December 18th date has been flat out canceled, in spite of the motion to compel. The defense has now filed a motion for release. If the court denies the motion to release at this point, they will be in direct violation of the sixth amendment. So, technically, the band should be released. They will still have to stand trial, but they'd be sleeping in a hotel, instead of a jail cell. The motion will be debated in court on the 11th, which is this coming Monday.


----------



## lewis (Dec 9, 2017)

This whole thing just flat out stinks now.

Seems to me (being cynical) that the Police there know they have seriously screwed up and would rather try and get anything to stick now to the band and have them sentenced, rather than acknowledge this was a clusterfuck, have them publically humiliated and then be likely sued by the band for compensation.

Got the whole "Making a murderer" vibe to it tbh.


----------



## KailM (Dec 9, 2017)

^^^Agreed. This whole thing screams "prosecutor doesn't have shit."


----------



## fps (Dec 10, 2017)

bostjan said:


> For all I know, they could be guilty, or they could be innocent. I don't know.



This is the only bit here that's relevant.


----------



## Hogie34 (Dec 10, 2017)

Forgive me if I’m wrong, but isn’t it usually a speculation to grant a continuance in a case if the defense asks for it, would be that the right to a speedy trial be waived? Might be the reason why the case isn’t moving along as quick as one might think it would. Could be the defense asked for a continuance For one reason or another.

Not here to speculate innocence or guilt, just following the bs legal process .


----------



## prlgmnr (Dec 11, 2017)

fps said:


> This is the only bit here that's relevant.


Ah come on, he was only explaining why he'd taken an interest in the case.


----------



## bostjan (Dec 11, 2017)

Hogie34 said:


> Forgive me if I’m wrong, but isn’t it usually a speculation to grant a continuance in a case if the defense asks for it, would be that the right to a speedy trial be waived? Might be the reason why the case isn’t moving along as quick as one might think it would. Could be the defense asked for a continuance For one reason or another.
> 
> Not here to speculate innocence or guilt, just following the bs legal process .



The only continuance motion I see in the court records is from the prosecution, while the defense has been filing motions to try to speed things along. If I missed something, I'd be a little surprised, not because there are not a billion little things to keep track of, but because the defense has zero reason why a continuance would do them any good at any point.



fps said:


> This is the only bit here that's relevant.



What's your point, mate?


----------



## Hogie34 (Dec 11, 2017)

bostjan said:


> The only continuance motion I see in the court records is from the prosecution, while the defense has been filing motions to try to speed things along. If I missed something, I'd be a little surprised, not because there are not a billion little things to keep track of, but because the defense has zero reason why a continuance would do them any good at any point.
> 
> 
> 
> What's your point, mate?


 right on bostjan, appreciate you taking the time to look at the court records. That was the only reason I could see this poking along at the pace it is.


----------



## drmosh (Dec 12, 2017)

yeah dude, thanks for the updates!


----------



## thraxil (Dec 13, 2017)

They've been released from jail pending trial: http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2017/dec/12/polish-death-metal-bandmembers-released-from-jail-/


----------



## exo (Dec 13, 2017)

Just comin here to post the same thing.

Don't know if they're guilty or innocent.....but it's supposed to be "innocent until proven guilty", and the "right to a speedy trial" is paramount to that concept.

If the evidence at trial indicates guilt.....lock them all up and throw away the key. Nothing less is deserved. But if there is no integrity in the process, there can be no integrity in the final verdict at trial......


----------



## neurosis (Dec 13, 2017)

thraxil said:


> They've been released from jail pending trial: http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2017/dec/12/polish-death-metal-bandmembers-released-from-jail-/



Is there a reason Vogg was released later? (or am I reading that paragraph wrong?)


----------



## manu80 (Jan 5, 2018)

all charges are dropped
http://www.blabbermouth.net/news/all-rape-and-kidnapping-charges-against-decapitated-dropped/


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jan 5, 2018)

Either they had no case or they were sent a tooon of threats (as the article says). Either way, not good. De-legitimizes other real victims, or their well-being was REALLY threatened.


----------



## BusinessMan (Jan 5, 2018)

Finally. I had my reasons to believe that the charges would be dropped, mainly because the case was bassackwards from the beginning. I mean what band releases and album, goes on tour, and then suddenly decides to go all rapey? Happy for the band and I do retain my legitimate hope that they didn't do this.


----------



## bostjan (Jan 5, 2018)

wankerness said:


> Deniers here - what do you think this girl would make this story up for? It's not like rape accusers ever get anything positive out of doing it, unless they do it to someone like Michael Jackson. Most likely they'll barely see a dime and instead just be harassed by diehard fans of the band for the next year or two and probably receive tons of death threats.



I guess my statements earlier and all of the silly heated arguing over this are basically settled now, and, no, we'll never know the answer to @wankerness 's question, but bear in mind that this demonstrably does happen and it really looks like that's exactly what happened in this case. The allegations were at least a large enough portion of nonsense for this not to go to trial.

But, much more important than that, look at how these guys were treated. Based off of the testimony that was full of inconsistencies and coming from a witness with a documented history of providing false testimony, and no other evidence, four men were locked up for several months, had their careers ruined, and had to go through the social humiliation of being called rapists by the media for that entire time.

I'm sorry if I feel too strongly about this, but ruining four lives over a testimony that never even passed the basic "sniff-test" from the beginning is simply unacceptable. I don't blame the allegor, nor the band, but the US legal system.


----------



## feraledge (Jan 5, 2018)

BusinessMan said:


> Finally. I had my reasons to believe that the charges would be dropped, mainly because the case was bassackwards from the beginning. I mean what band releases and album, goes on tour, and then suddenly decides to go all rapey? .


This is idiotic. Rapists don’t “decide to get all rapey,” they just sometimes get caught. And there are plenty of cases of famous people (and Decapitated are far from famous) to prove that point.
I’m not saying Decapitated are cleared of this, but threats to well-being aren’t the same as exonerated by evidence. 
It’s probable that this didn’t happen as originally reported, but a statement from a cop means nothing to me. However, the idea that they didn’t do it because it might sully their career path is insane.


----------



## cip 123 (Jan 5, 2018)

I'm guessing given the accusers past history of lying to police about assault, the testimony from Thy Art is Murder saying how her injuries could have been made during the show and the cop saying he had "no probable cause" stacks it against the accuser, thus if it comes out that she was lying she would receive backlash. Hence release on threat to well-being.


----------



## primitiverebelworld (Jan 5, 2018)

I wish that the next time I read this thread my favorite death metal band has proven themselves(and indeed are) innocent of this crime. Or else...


----------



## bostjan (Jan 5, 2018)

To be clear, the motion to drop charges, which was accepted today, cited both the pursuits in the interests of justice and the mental well-being of the victim, not explicitly because of threats against her, but because she had broken down (understandably) due to the stress of having to testify, then having to change her testimony after multiple witnesses came forward and contradicted her original testimony. This same woman changed her testimony before in an assault with a deadly weapon case, trying to protect her boyfriend who had attacked her and several other men, stating he stabbed the other men in self defense, until other witnesses gave testimony that contradicted her and she changed her testimony in that case. Now that the prosecution has a direct contradiction to her original testimony, they can bring up her past in court, and she doesn't want that assault against her character, so she agreed to drop the charges. That's all that means. It doesn't mean that she isn't receiving threats, but it just means that this has nothing to do with her receiving threats at all and everything to do with her no longer being willing to testify.

The media has reported all kinds of false stuff about the motion. I suggest you search Spokane's superior court documents and see for yourself (it's free to request these in Washington, whereas most other states require a filing fee), rather than read what the Star Tribune says the document says.

To me, this is cut and dried. The charges are dismissed. There was never any strong enough grounds to have held these men after arraignment, and the prosecution's evidence fell apart. Sure they can always be charged later on, but that's how the law always works - you could theoretically be charged with any charge at any time, unless you already stood trial for that exact thing.

Also, for the record, charges never ever ever get dropped against an alleged violent criminal because of threats directed toward the alleged victim. The entire idea of that logic, even if it's what the newspapers are saying, is preposterous. Seriously, if all any criminal had to do to get out of criminal charges, was to threaten the victim, then how many criminals would be getting out of jail for that reason? It makes ZERO FUCKING SENSE! And that is not at all what is happening here.


----------



## Jonathan20022 (Jan 5, 2018)

This infuriates me, not only because a case cannot continue due to people's dedication to people that may or may not have committed a crime. But also the complacency of the system towards people that could also very well be lying about the crime.

I don't even listen to this band, my inclination in this situation is that she could very well be lying based on her past. And if she is, why are there not concrete consequences for people that do this? No sane person can argue that rape isn't a horrendous crime, but I'd wager ruining a person's potential and future is just as bad. If the evidence was clear cut, even with her dishonest past this should have been an easy case on her and her prosecutor's part. It's his job to prove that the event occurred and to indict the accused of their crime, if it doesn't hold up then that's that in my eyes. Nuance exists, and things slip through the cracks all the time and it's tragic. But to have a bias towards victims in a world where it's possible to literally bin a person's future is extremely short sighted.


----------



## philkilla (Jan 5, 2018)

Literal kangaroo court.

I'm sure decapitated is just dying to play shows in Washington state again...FFS


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Jan 5, 2018)

http://www.metalsucks.net/2018/01/05/decapitated-all-rape-and-kidnapping-charges-dropped/

“[O]n Friday [January 5] – 11 days before the [band’s] Jan. 16 trial date – Spokane County prosecutor Kelly Fitzgerald filed a motion dismissing all rape and kidnapping charges. The motion cites ‘the well being of the victim’ as a reason for dropping the charges without prejudice, meaning the four men could be prosecuted in the future.”

The article goes on to state that the defense planned to call into question the legitimacy of the testimony from the two alleged victims, one of whom apparently lied to police about the circumstances under which a boyfriend assaulted her in 2014. We can assume that Fitzgerald felt her case wasn’t strong enough to see all the way through to trial.

What’s not currently clear is how quickly the band’s members — Wacław “Vogg” Kiełtyka (guitars, age 35), Rafał “Rasta” Piotrowski (vocals, 31), Michał Łysejko (drums, 27), and Hubert Więcek (bass, 30) — will be allowed to return to Poland, and whether or not they can be summoned back to the U.S. should the prosecutor indeed choose to pursue the charges at a later date.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Jan 5, 2018)

Some other info from Johnathan Glover at the Spokesman-Review: 

According to the report, the bruises on the victim's arms were being explained as mosh pit injuries:

“We subpoenaed the list of concert attendees and found numerous people who say that she was in the front row of the mosh pit and was climbing up on stage, and getting jostled about as much as anyone else there,” attorney Steve Graham said. “There’s no question from our perspective that the case against these four guys was falling apart.”


----------



## feraledge (Jan 5, 2018)

bostjan said:


> Also, for the record, charges never ever ever get dropped against an alleged violent criminal because of threats directed toward the alleged victim.


Unless the victim drops them. In which case, the circumstances that led to a rapist getting away with their shit from the start are just reinforced.
Not hypothetically speaking, say you were raped when you were 13 by a narcissitic psychopath, pressed charges and were headed to trial when the vindictively insane violent perpetrator becomes president elect and you start getting death threats. Credible threat and the violence of having a traumatic event torn apart and rehashed by professional mindfuckers is pretty good reason to drop charges despite any veneer of justice.


----------



## feraledge (Jan 5, 2018)

Jonathan20022 said:


> No sane person can argue that rape isn't a horrendous crime, but I'd wager ruining a person's potential and future is just as bad.


Yeah. Not a realistic comparison at all. Neither is good in any way, but while a false accusation would be mentally horrific, it’s not a physical violation. Seriously, not even the same realm of fucked up and not fair to pretend they are.


----------



## Jonathan20022 (Jan 5, 2018)

There's no real easy way to word what I said to sound more empathetic towards victims of rape. But these guys are probably not going to be allowed to have their visas renewed, they went through 7 months of jail time for (at this moment) absolutely no reason. Their names were dragged through the dirt, and a number of people will still associate their individual names and the band as criminals and not only that, rapists.

To me, this is absolutely as bad as that. Probably an unpopular opinion, but their musical careers are over and they'll probably still have a hard time coping with a job hunt and supporting themselves from now on. Unless they plan to sue her for defamation of character and false accusations, they're out of a future and sustainable income.

Both crimes are done with malicious intent, and they both ruin the victim's life. Just because one is physical doesn't mean that destroying a person's reputation and future is a walk in the park in comparison.


----------



## feraledge (Jan 5, 2018)

Jonathan20022 said:


> Both crimes are done with malicious intent, and they both ruin the victim's life. Just because one is physical doesn't mean that destroying a person's reputation and future is a walk in the park in comparison.


No one is saying that a false accusation is a walk in the park, but they can walk through a park without constantly looking over their shoulder.
Why the need to think the two things need to be compared at all? I don’t get that. I wish neither on anyone nor dismiss the implications, but false accusations are not rape. Pretty cut and dry.


----------



## sakeido (Jan 5, 2018)

feraledge said:


> No one is saying that a false accusation is a walk in the park, but they can walk through a park without constantly looking over their shoulder.
> Why the need to think the two things need to be compared at all? I don’t get that. I wish neither on anyone nor dismiss the implications, but false accusations are not rape. Pretty cut and dry.



they both destroy lives. the guys in Decapitated might end up living in a park after something like this. I hope they bounce back but there is a very good chance their careers - everything those guys have worked for since they put the band together back when they were 15 years old - will be destroyed by lies


----------



## oracles (Jan 5, 2018)

Decapitated might be free and clear at the moment, but the implications of this are FAR from over, if they ever do stop following the band. The damage done is borderline irreparable at this point, both personally and professionally. It could very well kill the band, and whatever future prospects each member has outside of music as well. Any google search a prospective employer does is going to show an international rape trial against him/them, and you can't tell me most employers are going to simply look past that. IF the victims claims are false, she's ruined these men's lives and their families lives, and that's absolutely not okay.


----------



## InHiding (Jan 6, 2018)

Poland is not North America and it's not Western European either, it's a different culture altogether, so your logic might fail when you make estimations about the future of these guys.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jan 6, 2018)

philkilla said:


> Literal kangaroo court.
> 
> I'm sure decapitated is just dying to play shows in Washington state again...FFS


Washington state is a shithole. I should know, I live there.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jan 6, 2018)

feraledge said:


> Yeah. Not a realistic comparison at all. Neither is good in any way, but while a false accusation would be mentally horrific, it’s not a physical violation. Seriously, not even the same realm of fucked up and not fair to pretend they are.


Oh, it's not? Because someone might just believe that false accusation, and kick their ass for it, not to mention possibly being killed. Or end up in prison for what amounts to someone being vindictive over being slighted. That is a physical violation. And you're right, it's not "the same realm of fucked up"; it's worse.

It's worse to ruin someone's rep
It's worse to cry wolf, and then make REAL victims of an actual rape less likely to be believed
It's worse to imprison someone over a fake accusation, such as but not limited to being broken up with/cheated on and being up, or not wanting the parents to know you were having sex, or even because "whoops, I regretted it. Better call it rape so people don't think I'm some dumb whore."
It's worse to say shit about people that could result in them being permanently injured from an assault because "the system wouldn't do anything" or even killed

It's worse for many reasons, and your head-in-the-sand stance that it's "not the same realm of fucked up," or even that it's "not fair to pretend they are" is silly.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jan 6, 2018)

feraledge said:


> No one is saying that a false accusation is a walk in the park, but they can walk through a park without constantly looking over their shoulder.
> Why the need to think the two things need to be compared at all? I don’t get that. I wish neither on anyone nor dismiss the implications, but false accusations are not rape. Pretty cut and dry.


"without looking over their shoulder" uh, no. That doesn't require Maury to say the lie detector determined that was a lie, or Donald Trump to call that out as fake news.

Why the need to compare the two? Oh, here's an idea: because they are related. Pretty cut and dry. False accusations are rape. A rape of someone's innocence until being proven guilty by a court of peers rather than public opinion, a rape of someone's safety because of some do-gooder asshole trying to assault someone in "the victim's honor," and a rape of the person's reputation over someone with a vendetta and zero scruples against lying about another person. If a person is found to have lied about a rape or sexual assault, they should be given the _*exact same sentence *_as the accused, whether the accused was found guilty or otherwise. Lying underoath is a crime last time I checked.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jan 6, 2018)

sakeido said:


> they both destroy lives. the guys in Decapitated might end up living in a park after something like this. I hope they bounce back but there is a very good chance their careers - everything those guys have worked for since they put the band together back when they were 15 years old - will be destroyed by lies


The problem is we don't know if they were lies, regret, a blurring of the truth, or what really happened, but judging from the fact the charges were dropped seems to indicate that the charges were being weakened by various factors.



oracles said:


> Decapitated might be free and clear at the moment, but the implications of this are FAR from over, if they ever do stop following the band. The damage done is borderline irreparable at this point, both personally and professionally. It could very well kill the band, and whatever future prospects each member has outside of music as well. Any google search a prospective employer does is going to show an international rape trial against him/them, and you can't tell me most employers are going to simply look past that. IF the victims claims are false, she's ruined these men's lives and their families lives, and that's absolutely not okay.


Which is why false accusations are horrendous, yet why the accused should be sentenced if they are guilty. The problem here is we do not know either way what is what.



InHiding said:


> Poland is not North America and it's not Western European either, it's a different culture altogether, so your logic might fail when you make estimations about the future of these guys.


I was not aware that Poland either A. doesn't care about rape accusations, B. is okay with rape, or both.


----------



## lewis (Jan 6, 2018)

Jonathan20022 said:


> There's no real easy way to word what I said to sound more empathetic towards victims of rape. But these guys are probably not going to be allowed to have their visas renewed, they went through 7 months of jail time for (at this moment) absolutely no reason. Their names were dragged through the dirt, and a number of people will still associate their individual names and the band as criminals and not only that, rapists.
> 
> To me, this is absolutely as bad as that. Probably an unpopular opinion, but their musical careers are over and they'll probably still have a hard time coping with a job hunt and supporting themselves from now on. Unless they plan to sue her for defamation of character and false accusations, they're out of a future and sustainable income.
> 
> Both crimes are done with malicious intent, and they both ruin the victim's life. Just because one is physical doesn't mean that destroying a person's reputation and future is a walk in the park in comparison.


fucking this. About time someone just said it how it was. I completely agree dude.

This woman/women, should now be charged and face an comparable rape charge amount of time in jail themselves.


----------



## InHiding (Jan 6, 2018)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> I was not aware that Poland either A. doesn't care about rape accusations, B. is okay with rape, or both.



Obviously none of the two, but you already knew that didn't you.


----------



## JimF (Jan 6, 2018)

lewis said:


> fucking this. About time someone just said it how it was. I completely agree dude.
> 
> This woman/women, should now be charged and face an comparable rape charge amount of time in jail themselves.



Whilst I agree with this if the case was "she was lying", the fact the charges were dropped for the mental wellbeing of the individual doesn't completely clear the band or prove her guilt. 

I want them to be innocent of this as much as anyone else, but this just isn't the admonishment of responsibility we were looking for. This isn't "We're not prosecuting you because you are innocent", this is "we're not prosecuting you for a reason other than your guilt/innocence".

Still not black and white, which is a shame.


----------



## iamaom (Jan 6, 2018)

JimF said:


> This isn't "We're not prosecuting you because you are innocent", this is "we're not prosecuting you for a reason other than your guilt/innocence".


From the prosecution side this seems like a way to save face. Dropping the charges completely or pushing for a conviction and then losing the case would be admitting that she lied or was gravely mistaken, but now they can back out and still claim she was the victim of something. Any sex case in the US is walking on eggshells, where everyone tries to uphold innocent until proven guilty yet still not "blame the victim" by being too skeptical of their claims.


----------



## fps (Jan 6, 2018)

It's amazing how binarily people seem to think, as if they cannot hold multiple concepts in their heads at the same time, and simply must reach some kind of finite conclusion from the limited information we have.

The charges being dropped does not mean they were not true. That is not a way of implying that they ARE true, but simply a statement of fact. We do not know whether or not this truly happened, but can lean towards there simply not being enough evidence and/or the claim being from unreliable people. That's really it. There is no basis for heaping abuse on one party or the other, because no solid conclusions can be reached, so this would be due to a series of groundless assumptions.


----------



## philkilla (Jan 6, 2018)

lewis said:


> This woman/women, should now be charged and face an comparable rape charge amount of time in jail themselves.



Absolutely. She wants to mess around and cry wolf?? Throw her ass in jail.


----------



## KailM (Jan 6, 2018)

fps said:


> It's amazing how binarily people seem to think, as if they cannot hold multiple concepts in their heads at the same time, and simply must reach some kind of finite conclusion from the limited information we have.
> 
> The charges being dropped does not mean they were not true. That is not a way of implying that they ARE true, but simply a statement of fact. We do not know whether or not this truly happened, but can lean towards there simply not being enough evidence and/or the claim being from unreliable people. That's really it. There is no basis for heaping abuse on one party or the other, because no solid conclusions can be reached, so this would be due to a series of groundless assumptions.



 At this point I just hope justice has been served and the right call was made. I hope something will come out later either confirming their innocence or guilt. There's not much else to say, TBH.


----------



## KailM (Jan 6, 2018)

Double post.


----------



## feraledge (Jan 6, 2018)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> False accusations are rape. A rape of someone's innocence until being proven guilty by a court of peers rather than public opinion, a rape of someone's safety because of some do-gooder asshole trying to assault someone in "the victim's honor," and a rape of the person's reputation over someone with a vendetta and zero scruples against lying about another person. If a person is found to have lied about a rape or sexual assault, they should be given the _*exact same sentence *_as the accused, whether the accused was found guilty or otherwise.


Fuck this entitled fucking bullshit.
When this left your dumb fucking brain you should have had a moment of clarity and reevaluated your life. Have you ever talked to a rape victim?
Fuck this.


----------



## wankerness (Jan 6, 2018)

Hey, what do you expect from a forum populated mainly by older metal fans? 

That message is also downright reasonable compared to the previous one where he said false accusations are WORSE than rape and listed the reasons why. Jesus christ.


----------



## will_shred (Jan 6, 2018)

I don't know how old Ace is but that comment is despicable regardless of age. False accusations should obviously be met with some kind of punishment, but we already have a legal structure to address defamation.


----------



## thraxil (Jan 6, 2018)

I have many friends who have been raped. I have one friend who was falsely accused of rape (no jail time, but he was expelled from University over it). False accusations suck for sure, but even my friend who was falsely accused would agree that actually being raped is orders of magnitude worse. I can't even believe that this sort of thing is up for debate.

Rape is hard to prosecute and convict on since it's nearly always a "he said, she said" situation wrt consent and putting the victim through a trial is a painful, traumatic experience. Prosecuting and convicting someone for making a false accusation is usually just as difficult for exactly the same reasons.


----------



## bostjan (Jan 6, 2018)

feraledge said:


> Unless the victim drops them. In which case, the circumstances that led to a rapist getting away with their shit from the start are just reinforced.
> Not hypothetically speaking, say you were raped when you were 13 by a narcissitic psychopath, pressed charges and were headed to trial when the vindictively insane violent perpetrator becomes president elect and you start getting death threats. Credible threat and the violence of having a traumatic event torn apart and rehashed by professional mindfuckers is pretty good reason to drop charges despite any veneer of justice.


Charges were dropped by the prosecutor in Decapitated's case, though.
Even so, after arraignment, the charges are in the prosecutor's hands. It is common that a witness may change his or her mind about giving testimony, but it's not like in the movies, most testimonies are given by deposition nowadays, so these things rarely ever come as a courtroom surprise.


----------



## Spaced Out Ace (Jan 6, 2018)

feraledge said:


> Fuck this entitled fucking bullshit.
> When this left your dumb fucking brain you should have had a moment of clarity and reevaluated your life. Have you ever talked to a rape victim?
> Fuck this.


feraledge, I appreciate your feigned outrage, but I feel bad for both the victims of rape, and the victims of false accusations. False accusations discredit the victims of rape and makes it more difficult for them to speak out, and false accusations also ruin people's lives. You can quit with the insults.


----------



## feraledge (Jan 6, 2018)

Spaced Out Ace said:


> feraledge, I appreciate your feigned outrage, but I feel bad for both the victims of rape, and the victims of false accusations. False accusations discredit the victims of rape and makes it more difficult for them to speak out, and false accusations also ruin people's lives. You can quit with the insults.


Motherfucker, you have no fucking clue. Fuck off.


----------

