I have a real problem with how she doesn't answer the questions concisely and vlad doesn't do his due diligence of getting a straight answer, i mean look at this shyt:
Vlad: pac told his story and he laid out a similar scenario in which you guys are together, other guys come in and he leaves the room, and the only thing he's guilty of is not doing anything to stop it, based on his story is there anything you feel is incorrect?
Her: I feel there's a lot of things that are incorrect, I feel that I would have never been there if it wasn't for him, I was never in cahoots or involved with Haitian Jack, that's a conspiracy theory, I was 18/19 years old, I was a little starstruck, I had a connection with him (Pac), even if casual, and I felt like being lured into this situation, it changed me
![martin :martin: :martin:](https://www.thecoli.com/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/martin3.png)
how the fukk does that answer the question clearly/concisely? What are the inconsistencies in his story? point out where Pac is lying, what he did/didn't do, how he supposedly "raped" you, why the forensic evidence is lacking, when he vacated the room, how you were supposedly/reportedly dressed by the time you guys came out the room (according to him) if according to you your clothes had been ripped off of you etc. Why isn't Fuller there to give his account?
like wtf is this shyt, it seems more like an attempt to grab headlines/start something riding on the back of #metoo rather than getting real answers.