This is some bullshyt
well they released a video of her after the sex took place.
she isn't falling down drunk tbh. she's berating the driver for not participating one of the lawyers claims & apologizing for offending him. she told the 17 year old to get out she's taking an uber (on video), so i don't think they just dumped her on the side of the road either.
i think they will be found guilty anyway due to her blood alcohol level
Lol, you're an idiot who ran out of arguments like twenty pages ago. Now you're embarrassing yourself repeating the same nonsense, pulling bullshyt out of your ass and moving the goalposts because you're too p*ssy to admit you were wrong
nikka why are you still talking to ME? I didn't run out of arguments... In fact, I've the same statements the entire time. These nikkas should have NEVER fukked a drunk broad.. And they'll be locked up for doing so. Y'all doing all these backflips because you can't get over, that even if she says yes, that if she's drunk, it's rape...what a fukking bunch of nonsense
This
See what I mean.. Information is in the OP and nikkas still think you can fukk drunk womenIts not against the law to have sex with a drunk person so no they won't be found guilty of anything.
Its not against the law to let a drunk person willingly get out of a vehicle an catch an uber
What exactly would they be guilty of I'm confused
The prosecution is trying to say she was too drunk to consent and thus the sex wasn’t consensual.Its not against the law to have sex with a drunk person so no they won't be found guilty of anything.
Its not against the law to let a drunk person willingly get out of a vehicle an catch an uber
What exactly would they be guilty of I'm confused
As a matter of fact, thank you for bringing me back to this thread.. I completely forgot dude admitted to this shyt already. You in here arguing for a bunch of nikkas that's already told on themselves and going to do it again in court.Lol, you're an idiot who ran out of arguments like twenty pages ago. Now you're embarrassing yourself repeating the same nonsense, pulling bullshyt out of your ass and moving the goalposts because you're too p*ssy to admit you were wrong
how soThis is some bullshyt
As a matter of fact, thank you for bringing me back to this thread.. I completely forgot dude admitted to this shyt already. You in here arguing for a bunch of nikkas that's already told on themselves and going to do it again in court.
That's really amazing
We saw the videos breh and so did you. You're in here both deliberately misrepresenting what happened and what people are arguing, because you were wrong and can't admit itnikka why are you still talking to ME? I didn't run out of arguments... In fact, I've the same statements the entire time. These nikkas should have NEVER fukked a drunk broad.. And they'll be locked up for doing so. Y'all doing all these backflips because you can't get over, that even if she says yes, that if she's drunk, it's rape...
Die on that hill
See what I mean.. Information is in the OP and nikkas still think you can fukk drunk women
"Under Louisiana law's third-degree rape charge generally involves a victim who is 'incapable of resisting or of understanding the nature of the act by reason of a stupor or abnormal condition of mind."
"Madison had a blood alcohol level of .319 percent at the time of her death, meaning she was highly intoxicated at nearly four times the legal limit. Carver admitted that Madison was 'very unstable on her feet, was not able to keep her balance, and was unable to speak clearly.'
Carver says Madison agreed to have sex but says he thinks she was too drunk to know what she agreed to."
What’s going on?This is some bullshyt
You wildin we are in MeToo now america basically said drunk women can’t give consentIts not against the law to have sex with a drunk person so no they won't be found guilty of anything.
Its not against the law to let a drunk person willingly get out of a vehicle an catch an uber
What exactly would they be guilty of I'm confused
it is against the law to have sex with a drunk person that's basically what this case is boiling down to, they didn't drag her and force her to do anything, now the question becomes is consent from a drunk person validIts not against the law to have sex with a drunk person so no they won't be found guilty of anything.
Its not against the law to let a drunk person willingly get out of a vehicle an catch an uber
What exactly would they be guilty of I'm confused
That’s why I would never go to a white woman's funeral.A dead White girl near Black men is never a good thing.
short videos cut up from the defense coroner's report of sexual wounds, 4 times bac level, your motherfukking uncle in the car saying they did itWe saw the videos breh and so did you. You're in here both deliberately misrepresenting what happened and what people are arguing, because you were wrong and can't admit it
Only question.....did they test the boys BAC to see if they were drunk?You still don’t get it and it’s fukking amazing
There is NO consent when you’re drunk. The fact y’all keep missing this is why you’re looking for more facts and acting emotional. No matter how many times the law says you can’t give it when drunk, y’all sit here doing backflips trying to explain why it’s ok. Did I say forcible rape? Do you know the law? Did they have sex with a woman 4 times past the limit or nah? fukk is the discussion here?
Yes only in bumblefukk is this a case. And viola. They are in bumblefukk and it’s a case. What am I missing here?
Once again distorting what is being argued so you won't have to admit you were wrongshort videos cut up from the defense coroner's report of sexual wounds, 4 times bac level, your motherfukking uncle in the car saying they did it
This gonna be worse than Tory Lanez... Black men... If they drunk... Leave them the fukk alone... How many cases you need.. Matter of fact, Meagan was drunk too. Leave them right where you find them