[Jetset]

(11-15-2017 01:22 PM)PapayaTapper Wrote:  

Keep a framed copy of this in view of the camera. Most girls wont even ask in the heat of the moment but the ones that do think it is a joke or novelty.



If the tape is truly exculpatory most DA's arent going to want to prosecute charges hoping to get the tape excluded at trial...In any event Id take a "tortious intrusion" charge over sexual assault or rape charge any day.

I can't find it right now, but I'm pretty sure there was a case out there recently where a man was convicted in spite of considerable evidence that she "should have known" she was being filmed and gave implied consent.

With that said, you're right. Most DAs wouldn't. However, if your case is very public and they're under pressure to make an example of you, remember that they are elected officials and are in the business of convicting people, not exonerating them. Excluding an illegal sex tape may look like a slam dunk from their perspective.

So now you conceivably have evidence that you have committed a separate crime, but also can't use it at your defense or to prosecute your accuser. You may instead be painted as a monster who not only raped some poor innocent girl, but secretly records all your sexual encounters. (Queue a state police witness who is ready to testify that they suspect you tampered with the timestamp on the video and that you're misrepresenting a recording of a separate, earlier encounter; followed by a jailhouse informant who claims he heard you confess to selling all your videos on the black market.)

Also, when they seized your laptop, they found your RVF account.



I'm not saying "don't make a video". I can't tell anyone what to do. I'm just putting the warning out there that, in many jurisdictions, surreptitiously taping the encounter may be a felony that could land you on the sex offender registry. Have a front-line strategy that you can rely on loudly and openly, without admitting to anything sketchy.

[PapayaTapper]

(11-15-2017 01:41 PM)Jetset Wrote:  

(11-15-2017 01:22 PM)PapayaTapper Wrote:  

Keep a framed copy of this in view of the camera. Most girls wont even ask in the heat of the moment but the ones that do think it is a joke or novelty.



If the tape is truly exculpatory most DA's arent going to want to prosecute charges hoping to get the tape excluded at trial...In any event Id take a "tortious intrusion" charge over sexual assault or rape charge any day.

I can't find it right now, but I'm pretty sure there was a case out there recently where a man was convicted in spite of considerable evidence that she "should have known" she was being filmed and gave implied consent.

With that said, you're right. Most DAs wouldn't. However, if your case is very public and they're under pressure to make an example of you, remember that they are elected officials and are in the business of convicting people, not exonerating them. Excluding an illegal sex tape may look like a slam dunk from their perspective.

So now you conceivably have evidence that you have committed a separate crime, but also can't use it at your defense or to prosecute your accuser. You may instead be painted as a monster who not only raped some poor innocent girl, but secretly records all your sexual encounters. (Queue a state police witness who is ready to testify that they suspect you tampered with the timestamp on the video and that you're misrepresenting a recording of a separate, earlier encounter; followed by a jailhouse informant who claims he heard you confess to selling all your videos on the black market.)

Also, when they seized your laptop, they found your RVF account.



I'm not saying "don't make a video". I can't tell anyone what to do. I'm just putting the warning out there that, in many jurisdictions, surreptitiously taping the encounter may be a felony that could land you on the sex offender registry. Have a front-line strategy that you can rely on loudly and openly, without admitting to anything sketchy.

Lets look at two scenarios:

Scenario 1. You meet a random girl at your local bar. You guys hit it off so much she accepts your invitation for a nightcap at your place around the corner. Things go well and though youre both tipsy you both engage in consensual and enthusiastic foreplay whereby she's pulling your shirt off and yanks down your pants becasue she cant wait to suck your cock...

You:"You want to suck that cock?"
Her "Oh yes!"

and then you guys continue through the full retinue of sexual gymnastics

You "You like me fucking your pussy dont you?"
Her "Oh yeah!"
You "You want me to stop or you want me to fuck you harder?"
Her "Harder!...fuck me harder!"

(insert additional assorted primal vocalizations)


...before falling off to sleep. A few days later cops show up at your dor and arrest you for rape. You vehemently deny it was rape and its your word against hers.

Or

Scenario 1. You meet a random girl at your local bar. You guys hit it off so much she accepts your invitation for a nightcap at your place around the corner. Things go well and though youre both tipsy you both engage in consensual and enthusiastic foreplay whereby she's pulling your shirt off and yanks down your pants becasue she cant wait to suck your cock...

You:"You want to suck that cock?"
Her "Oh yes!"

and then you guys continue through the full retinue of sexual gymnastics

You "You like me fucking your pussy dont you?"
Her "Oh yeah!"
You "You want me to stop or you want me to fuck you harder?"
Her "Harder!...fuck me harder!"

(insert additional assorted primal vocalizations)

...before falling off to sleep. A few days later cops show up at your door and arrest you for rape. You vehemently deny it was rape and its your word against hers. plus you have the entire sexual encounter with her enthusiastic participation with full audio on video.

Both scenarios suck once the cops show up but I dont know about you: all things being equal I'd rather take my chances with Scenario B

All Im sayin

[HankMoody]

I'll put on my lawyer hat for a second...

Do not fucking tape yourself having sex with women if it's not consensual.

Is it against the law?

Who fucking knows. Often the law is whatever a judge says the law is.

You know what's better than shelling out $150k in lawyer fees only to be found "not guilty?" Not having to deal with the stress, aggravation, and financial burden of being charged with a crime. Only to be told "my bad" at the end, wearing a suit you can now barely afford from J.C. Penneys. (Oh, and ... P.S. - no matter what happens when it's over, I'll be spending your hard earned cash on a beach in the Mediterranean, whether or not you go to jail. That's why I demanded cash up front. I get to go home at the end of the trial. So does the judge. You might not.)

Stuff like this is highly politicized. No judge wants to be in the news for "allowing" "some pervert" to make non-consensual sex videos. (read: follow the law). They'd rather be the judge who was "courageous" enough to disregard the "antiquated" law and "protect women's rights." (read: they want to look good in the press, because that's helpful if they decide to do something else, run for office, or go work at a big law firm). There is practically zero accountability for the judiciary.

What happens if the judge is wrong? Nothing. What happens if the judge declines to follow the law? Nothing. What happens if you're convicted? Welcome to a world of shit. What happens if you're found not guilty? Nothing, except you're broke, you've wasted years of your life (which has sucked for a number of years because you've spent each and every day wondering if you're going to spend time in prison over a 45 second video), and your reputation is now demolished on Google.

But hey, congrats, you won...

[PapayaTapper]

(11-21-2017 11:35 PM)HankMoody Wrote:  

I'll put on my lawyer hat for a second...

Do not fucking tape yourself having sex with women if it's not consensual.

Is it against the law?

Who fucking knows. Often the law is whatever a judge says the law is.

You know what's better than shelling out $150k in lawyer fees only to be found "not guilty?" Not having to deal with the stress, aggravation, and financial burden of being charged with a crime. Only to be told "my bad" at the end, wearing a suit you can now barely afford from J.C. Penneys. (P.S. - And no matter what happens, I'll be spending your hard earned cash on a beach in the Mediterranean when it's all over, whether or not you go to jail. That's why I demanded cash up front. I get to go home at the end of the trial. So does the judge. You might not.)

Stuff like this is highly politicized. No judge wants to be in the news for "allowing" "some pervert" to make non-consensual sex videos. (read: follow the law). They'd rather be the judge who was "courageous" enough to disregard the "antiquated" law and "protect women's rights." (read: they want to look good in the press, because that's helpful if they decide to do something else, run for office, or go work at a big law firm). There is practically zero accountability for the judiciary.

What happens if the judge is wrong? Nothing. What happens if the judge declines to follow the law? Nothing. What happens if you're convicted? Welcome to a world of shit. What happens if you're found not guilty? Nothing, except you're broke, you've wasted years of your life (which has sucked for a number of years because you've spent each and every day wondering if you're going to spend time in prison over a 45 second video), and your reputation is now demolished on Google.

But hey, congrats, you won...

Im not suggesting recording your encounters and showing them to your buddies, post them on FB or even sitting at home jerking to them by yourself.

Dont show them to anyone
Dont share them
Fuck...dont even acknowledge that they even exist to anyone

Im saying the videos are as an insurance policy only in the event some chick falsely accuses you of rape after a consensual encounter. In that scenario didnt ask for the rape charge so I could pull out my tape and win

In that scenario how is not having the video proof of your innocence going to help you or even save you money?

I have a fire extinguisher in my kitchen. If fire extinguishers were illegal Id still have one in my kitchen because if a fire breaks out Id want a way to put out that fire. Ill deal with fire-marshal later but Ill do it with a house that isn't burned down

[HankMoody]

(11-22-2017 12:04 AM)PapayaTapper Wrote:  

(11-21-2017 11:35 PM)HankMoody Wrote:  

I'll put on my lawyer hat for a second...

Do not fucking tape yourself having sex with women if it's not consensual.

Is it against the law?

Who fucking knows. Often the law is whatever a judge says the law is.

You know what's better than shelling out $150k in lawyer fees only to be found "not guilty?" Not having to deal with the stress, aggravation, and financial burden of being charged with a crime. Only to be told "my bad" at the end, wearing a suit you can now barely afford from J.C. Penneys. (P.S. - And no matter what happens, I'll be spending your hard earned cash on a beach in the Mediterranean when it's all over, whether or not you go to jail. That's why I demanded cash up front. I get to go home at the end of the trial. So does the judge. You might not.)

Stuff like this is highly politicized. No judge wants to be in the news for "allowing" "some pervert" to make non-consensual sex videos. (read: follow the law). They'd rather be the judge who was "courageous" enough to disregard the "antiquated" law and "protect women's rights." (read: they want to look good in the press, because that's helpful if they decide to do something else, run for office, or go work at a big law firm). There is practically zero accountability for the judiciary.

What happens if the judge is wrong? Nothing. What happens if the judge declines to follow the law? Nothing. What happens if you're convicted? Welcome to a world of shit. What happens if you're found not guilty? Nothing, except you're broke, you've wasted years of your life (which has sucked for a number of years because you've spent each and every day wondering if you're going to spend time in prison over a 45 second video), and your reputation is now demolished on Google.

But hey, congrats, you won...

Im not suggesting recording your encounters and showing them to your buddies, post them on FB or even sitting at home jerking to them by yourself.

Dont show them to anyone
Dont share them
Fuck...dont even acknowledge that they even exist to anyone

Im saying the videos are as an insurance policy only in the event some chick falsely accuses you of rape after a consensual encounter. In that scenario didnt ask for the rape charge so I could pull out my tape and win

In that scenario how is not having the video proof of your innocence going to help you or even save you money?

I have a fire extinguisher in my kitchen. If fire extinguishers were illegal Id still have one in my kitchen because if a fire breaks out Id want a way to put out that fire. Ill deal with fire-marshal later but Ill do it with a house that isn't burned down

This is where I'm of two minds...

Rape allegation? Bitch, I have the whole thing on video, with you screaming "daddy" at the top of your lungs, begging me for another bite at my cock, taking it like a champ. I might add that your lingerie looks fantastic on my floor, which I unclasped with my teeth.

On the other hand, law, political climate, "rape culture", Al Franken ("he's such a great human being, though!!!"), etc.

Part of being a lawyer is always knowing what's the worst that can happen.

Personally, it's not something I would risk, and usually mitigated by solid text game. If the purpose is to protect yourself, I get it, but I also think it's risky.

Incriminating evidence tends to unsurface at the most random times. She finds your laptop, accidentally turns on your DVD player, or you go to take a piss and she's creeping your text messages. Again, I work in the business of worst case scenarios, and it's never predictable. "Bro, I literally got up to take a piss, she grabbed my phone, and somehow hit the video button. Now she wants full custody of our children and a ton of money in spousal support. Can I get in trouble for this?"

[Hypno]

Brooklyn District Attorney Ken Thompson said Wednesday a young woman who accused five teenage boys of chasing away her father and gang-raping her in a playground has recanted her story and he's dropping criminal charges against them.

The collapse of the case was no surprise after a series of revelations that challenged the woman's initial story that she'd been attacked by a group of boys who drove off her father with a gun to get her alone.

Cellphone video snippets had emerged, showing the woman smiling, with her clothes partially removed, during the Jan. 7 encounter. More disturbingly, the boys told police that when they encountered the woman she was having sex with her father in the Brooklyn park.

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Br...31911.html

[Jetset]

(11-21-2017 09:27 PM)PapayaTapper Wrote:  

A few days later cops show up at your door and arrest you for rape. You vehemently deny it was rape and its your word against hers. plus you have the entire sexual encounter with her enthusiastic participation with full audio on video.

Both scenarios suck once the cops show up but I dont know about you: all things being equal I'd rather take my chances with Scenario B

All Im sayin

(11-21-2017 11:35 PM)HankMoody Wrote:  

Is it against the law?

Who fucking knows. Often the law is whatever a judge says the law is.

What I said, for the record, was that you may be better off recording the audio of her consent than you are trying to create a video of the encounter - not that you don't want a record.

Why? In many states, you cannot authenticate that video without implicating yourself in another crime, and, by extension, turning an extremely shoddy allegation into a slam-dunk felony conviction.

Arizona 13-309: "It is unlawful for any person to knowingly...videotape, film, digitally record or by any other means secretly view, with or without a device, another person without that person's consent...in a...bedroom...where the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and the person is...nude or involved in sexual intercourse or sexual contact....[or i]n a manner that directly or indirectly captures or allows the viewing of the person's genitalia, buttock or female breast, whether clothed or unclothed...A violation of subsection A or B of this section is a class 5 felony."

https://www.azleg.gov/ars/13/03019.htm

New York 250.45: "A person is guilty of unlawful surveillance in the second degree when:...[f]or his or her own...amusement, entertainment, profit, sexual arousal or gratification, or for the purpose of degrading or abusing a person, the actor intentionally uses...an imaging device to surreptitiously...record such person in an identifiable manner...engaging in sexual conduct...Unlawful surveillance in the second degree is a class E felony.

http://law.onecle.com/new-york/penal/PEN...50.45.html

How many years of appeals can you comfortably finance from a cell while you fight out the definition of "reasonable" with a system that won't even blink if you hang yourself with a prison bedsheet? As a non-lawyer, I agree 100% with lawyer Hank. Even if you "win", the process is the punishment. There's no need to assist the process in punishing you by naively gathering illegal, inadmissible evidence. Narrowly tailor your strategy to keep it on the up-and-up and not invite any unpleasant inferences. (After all, now that they know you make illegal sex tapes, they're going to get a search warrant to find all the others, each of which will be a separate criminal act.)

[Hypno]

Slight disagreement to the above. Before it gets to the judge the prosecutor has to choose to prosecute. If there is a false rape victim and evidence to impeach her, the prosecutor could face ethics charges for suborning perjury at the worst and look like a fool for losing the case at best.

In the Long Island gang rape above, I believe what happened was that the defendants provided the exculpating video to their attorney who showed it to the prosecutor. Not bullet proof, but the attorney can claim privilege and not explain how the video came into his possession, so there is no one to prosecute for the surveillance.

But yes surreptitious surveillance is a risky proposition, although a false rape or DV claim may be worse.

[HankMoody]

(11-22-2017 09:07 AM)Hypno Wrote:  

Brooklyn District Attorney Ken Thompson said Wednesday a young woman who accused five teenage boys of chasing away her father and gang-raping her in a playground has recanted her story and he's dropping criminal charges against them.

The collapse of the case was no surprise after a series of revelations that challenged the woman's initial story that she'd been attacked by a group of boys who drove off her father with a gun to get her alone.

Cellphone video snippets had emerged, showing the woman smiling, with her clothes partially removed, during the Jan. 7 encounter. More disturbingly, the boys told police that when they encountered the woman she was having sex with her father in the Brooklyn park.

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Br...31911.html

"Prosecutors will ask a judge next week to formally dismiss the charges against the five boys, who range in age from 14 to 17, a spokesman for Thompson said. Authorities have no plans to charge the woman, who's 18."

That's part of the problem with the justice system. Women can basically file a bunch of false shit without any ramifications whatsoever.

Restraining order? False charges? Allegations of child molestation?

I've seen it all, but I've never seen a woman admonished for her conduct in the legal system. No matter how outrageous.

Someday I'm going to write a book about how if you're embroiled in litigation, you can basically just out crazy the other side. This is one of the secrets lawyers and judges don't ever put in writing, but you can absolutely out crazy the other side. No one ever gets in trouble for anything.

If mommy and daddy are paying your legal bills or you're independently wealthy, file restraining orders, make false allegations, call the police, accuse the other side of violence, take marital property, cancel the health insurance, take the kids for days at a time with no explanation, etc. You can pull the most outrageous shit and the other side (a) doesn't want to spend money fighting it; and (b) nothing happens no matter what you did. You'll literally spend the entire case, and other side's money, arguing about ancillary issues. By the time you get to the important shit, you've spent a year (and a ton of cash) arguing about the restraining order, or whether Wife was allowed to take the thermostats off the wall.

I have a case right now where provably false allegations of child molestation went on for two years, and the father was estranged from his daughter as a result. Two independent agencies found that these allegations were not just unfounded, but fabricated, and filed in order to get leverage in the custody dispute.

The court was like "maybe she believed the allegations." The court was also hesitant to reunite the father and daughter because sudden integration might be "stressful" on the child.

Meaning dad got to spend $50k in legal fees and now gets to see his daughter twice a month in a visitation center. Even though we proved that the allegations were outright fabricated.

The judge (a female) was basically like "That might be the case, but we have to move on..."

Moral of the story: just out-crazy the other side.

[PapayaTapper]

If Phillip K Dick were alive today Id bet he'd write a story where everyone is wearing a body-cam at all times. Maybe even as implants. With the current accusation climate Id almost be willing to wager that it will be standard issue.

The new normal when leaving the house will be:

"Got my keys?- check"
"Got my wallet?-check"
"Got my phone?- check"
"Got my body-cam?-check"
"Is it on?-check"
"Is it fully charged?-check"

And the new pre sex conversation will be:

Her "Do you have a condom?"

Him "Do you have a consent form?"

[gework]

You can get hidden camera glasses like these.

You also have them disguised as innocuous items like pens.

[cosworth]

Maybe just install cameras in your lounge , hall , passage , outside your home etc.
If shes kissing you good bye on the drive , or tossing you off on the couch then it would go some way to disprove the allegations.

[realologist]

(11-22-2017 12:51 PM)PapayaTapper Wrote:  

If Phillip K Dick were alive today Id bet he'd write a story where everyone is wearing a body-cam at all times. Maybe even as implants. With the current accusation climate Id almost be willing to wager that it will be standard issue.

The new normal when leaving the house will be:

"Got my keys?- check"
"Got my wallet?-check"
"Got my phone?- check"
"Got my body-cam?-check"
"Is it on?-check"
"Is it fully charged?-check"

And the new pre sex conversation will be:

Her "Do you have a condom?"

Him "Do you have a consent form?"

Good one. Haven't heard that one in forever. Plus it will probably be covered on the consent forum. Check for all approved activities.

Raw dog ___
Anal ____
Oral ____
Facials _____
Swallowing_____
Other:
Specify:_______ - ________

[Swell]

(11-23-2017 03:01 PM)realologist Wrote:  

(11-22-2017 12:51 PM)PapayaTapper Wrote:  

If Phillip K Dick were alive today Id bet he'd write a story where everyone is wearing a body-cam at all times. Maybe even as implants. With the current accusation climate Id almost be willing to wager that it will be standard issue.

The new normal when leaving the house will be:

"Got my keys?- check"
"Got my wallet?-check"
"Got my phone?- check"
"Got my body-cam?-check"
"Is it on?-check"
"Is it fully charged?-check"

And the new pre sex conversation will be:

Her "Do you have a condom?"

Him "Do you have a consent form?"

Good one. Haven't heard that one in forever. Plus it will probably be covered on the consent forum. Check for all approved activities.

Raw dog ___
Anal ____
Oral ____
Facials _____
Swallowing_____
Other:
Specify:_______ - ________

[PapayaTapper]

(11-24-2017 04:30 AM)Swell Wrote:  

As ridiculous as this seems its likely not far from where we're going