As I understand it, the truth is that they had sexwhen she was 16 in the UK where 16 is the age of consent
but she's from Missouri where the age of consent is 17. If he'd actually done anything illegal there'd be a court case, instead of a series of accusations on tumblr. But why let facts get in the way of a good old-fashioned internet nonce hunt?
( ,
Thu 20 Mar 2014, 14:49,
archived)
Bit more to it than that, but you carry on defending an abusive rapist, dreadlocks.
After all, if anyone knows about exploiting vulnerable women, it's you.
( ,
Thu 20 Mar 2014, 14:55,
archived)
being the age of consent doesn't mean the sex was consensual
that aside, I agree innocent until proven guilty, but all the comments coming from the record company and his youtube associates are quite damning
( ,
Thu 20 Mar 2014, 14:55,
archived)
The record label owner has pretty much said "I knew they were fucking but I thought she was older and wanted it" hasn't he?
( ,
Thu 20 Mar 2014, 14:58,
archived)
Either damning or pants-shitting panicking that they're ALL gonna get Yewtreed.
( ,
Thu 20 Mar 2014, 14:58,
archived)
I'm not going to defend their relationship as I don't think it was particularly healthy
I just think that throwing around terms like "paedophile rapist" isn't helpful, especially when coming from a likely nonce like Dr. Shambolic
( ,
Thu 20 Mar 2014, 14:59,
archived)
Let's face it, given the killerkitti thing, combined with the fact that he started dating this girl when she was 15 and he was 21,
if he's not a nonce he's pushing the boundaries with all his might, at least.
( ,
Thu 20 Mar 2014, 15:13,
archived)
So the 'accusation' is that he had sex with someone of legal age?
And this was, seemingly, through 'coercion', and not, by any account, 'force'?
And for this, people are happy to make definitive, recorded, broadcast statements involving the words 'rapist' and 'paedophile'?
I won't try to defend sleazy behaviour, but I certainly won't defend out-and-out ignorant libel. Nor the sort of witch-hunt the internet can put on that would make a Daily Mail reader wince.
( ,
Thu 20 Mar 2014, 16:36,
archived)
And for this, people are happy to make definitive, recorded, broadcast statements involving the words 'rapist' and 'paedophile'?
I won't try to defend sleazy behaviour, but I certainly won't defend out-and-out ignorant libel. Nor the sort of witch-hunt the internet can put on that would make a Daily Mail reader wince.