He did a good job pretending to be happy on the radio last week lol
You know its tearing him up on the inside.
He wanted to be a "good" guy so bad
He did a good job pretending to be happy on the radio last week lol
He’s been telling his half assed side for years, so now she’s telling hers. If people wanna ask why she’s talking, they need to also ask why Charlamagne has been talking.
I love how people run in here to say they’re all about the evidence while adding their own twist of events. “Her mom probably found out where she was”. FOH.
Where does it say DNA cleared him? Since we’re adding twists, it’s very possible the DA never processed the DNA once the witness stopped participating (her mom didn’t want her to go through that). Which, again, could be why they decided not to take it to trial. And it will never go to trial since, as they specifically said, they are bound to honor the plea agreement. Never saw any mention of DNA exonerating him
At the end of the day, his story is shaky to a normal thinking person. He says the next day he ran to the PD because of a “prank” his cousins pulled on him, which is how the police ended up with his name . That doesn’t even match the narrative some of you are trying to push....that the next day SHE went to the police department and dropped his name because her mom found out where she was
He admitted it himself and you still have people saying he's innocent.
It's like cacs who say Hulk Hogan isn't racist when he said on the tape verbatim "I am racist"
This is where I am with it. The whole story about a party for a cousin/family friend in HS is questionable based off the fact that he was a grown ass man. Ain't no fukkin way I'd be throwing a party for high school kids with liquor. No way
It doesn’t make sense to y’all because y’all are looking at this from your high horse I’m a perfect person internet persona. Y’all say the case was dropped because her mom didn’t want her to go through it and y’all 200% believed that because? Y’all hate him? Or because he made light of a situation that YOU deem questionable? If you ain’t already think he was a rapist when he said these things years ago you are full of shyt. Times changed people change society has changed on what we consider rape and just because the incident with the Spanish fly seems rapey that doesn’t mean the situation in question makes him guilty. And it doesn’t mean he would now even put himself in either of those situations again. That has to matter.
You can’t compare the two. White people knew what they were doing and they still aren’t really remorsefulYou said a whole lot of nothing
“Situations change!” Ok, so slavery was cool way back cuz white ppl ain’t know no better. Jim Crow too. Even tho Black ppl knew...this shyt ain’t right. Much like women.
I’m not a perfect person at all...I’m a piece of shyt. I’m just not a rapist and I never tried to fukk someone who wasn’t legal as an adult.
It ain’t that hard not to do certain shyt. And if you do do it, you gotta live with it and face judgement from other ppl.
Also you are making a bunch of assumptionsYou said a whole lot of nothing
“Situations change!” Ok, so slavery was cool way back cuz white ppl ain’t know no better. Jim Crow too. Even tho Black ppl knew...this shyt ain’t right. Much like women.
I’m not a perfect person at all...I’m a piece of shyt. I’m just not a rapist and I never tried to fukk someone who wasn’t legal as an adult.
It ain’t that hard not to do certain shyt. And if you do do it, you gotta live with it and face judgement from other ppl.
You believe that this is enough evidence to convict someone of rape?
It doesn’t make sense to y’all because y’all are looking at this from your high horse I’m a perfect person internet persona. Y’all say the case was dropped because her mom didn’t want her to go through it and y’all 200% believed that because? Y’all hate him? Or because he made light of a situation that YOU deem questionable? If you ain’t already think he was a rapist when he said these things years ago you are full of shyt. Times changed people change society has changed on what we consider rape and just because the incident with the Spanish fly seems rapey that doesn’t mean the situation in question makes him guilty. And it doesn’t mean he would now even put himself in either of those situations again. That has to matter.
Where did I say I 200% believed that? I specifically said it was a POSSIBILITY. Everyone else was going down their list of possibilities (that she was lying, that her mom found out where she was, etc.), so I added another perspective. Are you going to ask the ones who say she’s lying if they 200% believe that? Of course you won’t.
And actually, it didnt make sense to me once I found out he was 23 and not 20 as he claimed. He claims the police questioned how he was able to purchase alcohol while underaged. How exactly would that line of questioning have occurred when he was really 23 at the time? So yes, his story does give me pause. It makes me wonder what else he’s lying about.
Sorry that you think I’m on a high horse for using my brain but my opinion remains my opinion.
So lying or MIS remembering his age somehow means he raped her. I’m just trying to understand why that’s what raises your red flag. I can use my brain and think objectively what he said makes sense and her new claims doesn’t change that. Sounds like to me she don’t know what happeny’all s and is just pointing the finger at the biggest target.Where did I say I 200% believed that? I specifically said it was a POSSIBILITY. Everyone else was going down their list of possibilities (that she was lying, that her mom found out where she was, etc.), so I added another perspective. Are you going to ask the ones who say she’s lying if they 200% believe that? Of course you won’t.
And actually, it didnt make sense to me once I found out he was 23 and not 20 as he claimed. He claims the police questioned how he was able to purchase alcohol while underaged. How exactly would that line of questioning have occurred when he was really 23 at the time? So yes, his story does give me pause. It makes me wonder what else he’s lying about.
Sorry that you think I’m on a high horse for using my brain but my opinion remains my opinion.
So lying or MIS remembering his age somehow means he raped her. I’m just trying to understand why that’s what raises your red flag. I can use my brain and think objectively what he said makes sense and her new claims doesn’t change that. Sounds like to me she don’t know what happeny’all s and is just pointing the finger at the biggest target.
You obviously don't know the facts of the story, which explains your response.
DNA evidence acquitted Charlemagne. There's nothing to talk about. He didn't rape her. Doesn't matter what she says. DNA test suggests otherwise.
Why bring this back up? He's not going to be convicted of anything. What it is an attempt to make him lose his job and career, because we live in a society where accusations are acted on first before an investigation gets underway.
And what is her story? Did she see Charlemagne have sex with her? If so, how come there's no DNA linked to him?