Ha. Hilarious.

You realize this was a civil case, right? The photos provided evidence that directly contradicted the plaintiff’s claims about her behavior, for which she was seeking damages. Why should the judge have not allowed the photos?

Lies, insults, condescending tones, and implications about my family don’t exactly make you look good here, you know. When you initiate a conversation about very specific details of the law, you are initiating a legal conversation requiring discussion of statute and jurisdiction. Claiming to have not been talking…

“You accused me of fabricating a definition”

“Yes, that’s clearly what I’m saying. That makes perfect sense as a thing to say. All attorneys are right all the time, even in the same case! Attorney=correct.”

I see you’ve edited your post, rather than simply leaving just a link with nothing else.

Well finally. Now, you claimed that this is (emphasis mine) “the definition” of rape. You realize that this is not the only definition of rape that exists, correct? So I could also cite a definition of rape that does not include deception and call it “the definition of rape”, and I would be correct (according to your…

*Suits against seven defendants were either settled or dismissed.
**...completely lost the suit against all nine.

*two of nine defendants (suits against seven defendants were settled or dismissed)

Oh, I don’t doubt it!

No problem - the author is purposefully misrepresenting the case here. She also doesn’t even bother to mention the fact that the suit(s) against five of the defendants were either settled (for possibly well over half a million dollars in total) or dismissed - there were only two defendants remaining that were…

Ha. I’ve literally never even heard of the guy until this post, but he definitely seems like a bitter asshole.

How about you actually read the comment and linked articles (both in the article and my comment) before responding? I never argued that “THIS WOMAN WENT OUT AND GOT WILD A YEAR AFTER A GANG RAPE SO THAT MEANS IT DIDN’T HAPPEN” - and that wasn’t the argument being made by the defense in presenting the photos in the…

So I guess Noah Galvin has finally come out as an asshole.

Why would he be disbarred for allowing evidence that contradicts the plaintiff’s claims for which she is seeking damages?

Except that it was the plaintiff who was making claims about her behavior (or alleged inability to engage in certain types of behavior) - not the judge.

As a law student, do you know the difference between a criminal case and a civil case?

No, they mean her claim that she was “socially isolated and socially reticent” - which is what she was seeking damages for. Does nobody click links or inform themselves on topics before commenting?

Well, they’re not allowed to collect damages based on claims that they are unable to “party” as a result of the defendants’ act when indeed they are able to “party”.

“my comments are against the defense using photos of this woman living her life as she sees fit, post-assault. (...) The defense use the photos her wearing garters and fishnets to bolster their claim that she brought the assault upon herself...”