Businessman in jail

Guilty if I say you are

Somewhere in North Carolina, a couple of college students had a shitty relationship that ended badly.  I know, I know.  Shock!  Let’s call them Jennifer and Brad.  Brad has a long history of mental instability, including a suicide attempt and eventually Jennifer got sick of his shit and dumped him.

Brad didn’t handle that very well.  He decided that Jennifer had, in fact, been abusive, and the abuse had only ever been HER being a total fucking jackass to HIM. Lacking any evidence of any kind, or any support from any of their mutual friends, Brad had no legs to stand on in terms of pressing criminal charges, so he took his complaints about what a bitch Jennifer is to the school Honor Court, which promptly threw Brad and his sorry little ass out, along with his complaints.

Oh gosh, well now Brad is super pissed!  He is not letting this one go.  Nope.  He’s been following Jennifer around campus, interfering with her classes and talking openly about their sexually, emotionally and verbally abusive relationship, which was all Jennifer’s fault.

It’s kind of obvious WHY Jennifer dumped this fucking moron in the first place, isn’t it?  Jennifer had way more tolerance than I ever would, but eventually, she too got sick of this shit and went to the Honor Court.  The Honor Court was not amused by Brad’s antics and is now threatening him with expulsion.

Basically, the Honor Court said “no, Brad, you do not get to follow your former girlfriend around talking about what an abusive psychopath she is without A SHRED OF EVIDENCE FOR THAT.  Did she beat the crap out of you?  Get yourself an assault conviction and then we’ll talk. Until then, shut the fuck up or get the fuck out”.

Brad is outraged!  He is attempting to raise awareness of domestic violence against men, and this is how the Honor Court reacts?  He is drawing attention to a very real problem and the big mean assholes on the court are telling him he needs EVIDENCE before he can carry out a smear campaign against Jennifer?

Well, clearly, that’s bullshit.  Jennifer is guilty because BRAD SAYS SHE IS.  What other evidence is required?

Oh now wait a second.  Oops.  I got that backwards.

It’s not Brad who is mentally unstable with a diagnosed illness, it’s Jennifer.  And it’s not Brad who has been following his ex-romantic partner around acting like an asshole.  It’s Jennifer.  She has openly been talking about the fact that Brad RAPED HER and she has a criminal conviction to prove that, the support of her friends, the backing of the school’s Honor Court, NO EVIDENCE OF ANY KIND TO PROVE THAT EXCEPT HER OWN OPINION.

Did Brad rape Jennifer?  Who the fuck knows?  Maybe.  But here’s the thing: justice rests on one assumption and one assumption only:


Jennifer has the support of Jezebel (surprise!), who truly believe that Jennifer absolutely has the right to follow Brad around campus harassing him and accusing him of a crime despite not having any evidence of any kind other than HOW SHE FEELS.

I wonder how Jezebel would feel if it were Brad following Jennifer around and informing all her potential new partners that she is, in fact, diagnosably mentally ill, a claim for which he has ACTUAL EVIDENCE?

This little story is exactly why men should have their anonymity preserved when they are charged with rape.  Accusers have long had anonymity, on the assumption that they have a right to privacy and that to be a known victim of sexual assault can have life altering implications.–human-right-High-Court-judge-Maura-McGowan-correct-says-Peter-Lloyd.html

As if being ACCUSED of sexual assault does not?

The Rape Culture™ crowd likes to claim that false accusations of rape are incredibly rare and therefore it is reasonable to assume that every woman that charges any man with rape is telling the truth.  The opposite of justice:  guilty until proven innocent.

False rape allegations are rare? Oh really?  Elizabeth Jones, who is only 22 years old, begs to differ.  She finally got jail time after ELEVEN FALSE ACCUSATIONS.


There are some lacrosse players at Duke who may have something to say about false allegations, too.


That lying little bitch is now up on murder charges, after her boyfriend was mysteriously stabbed.  This is AFTER she set her house on fire with her three young children inside.  Despite the fact that she is a lying bag of crazy, she still gets the assumption of innocence.

Women like Jennifer honestly believe they can drop the rape bomb on any man, anywhere, at any time and get a victim pass.  He will be assumed guilty and the mere threat of having the grenade of accusation go off is enough to keep most men silent in the face of a clear violation of justice.

I’m proud of the Honor Court at the University of North Carolina.  Let the bitches scream, your honors.  And let justice reign.

It’s really very simple:  if you are going to accuse someone of a crime, ANY CRIME, you’re gonna need some evidence to support that claim.

And no, cupcake, your FEELINGS are not evidence.

For anything other than your total lack of self-reflection or understanding of how justice actually works.  Back your shit up, bitch.

Or get the hell out.

Lots of love,


About Janet Bloomfield (aka JudgyBitch)

Janet Bloomfield is Social Media Director for AVfM. She has an undergraduate degree in Film Theory, a Master’s degree in Business Administration and is pursuing a PhD in Entrepreneurship and Innovation. She is a full time mother to her three children and a full time wife to Mr. JudgyBitch. Her children have never seen the inside of a daycare center and her husband has never made his own sandwich. That makes her very happy.

Main Website
View All Posts
  • Edward Jessup

    I smell Borderline Personality Disorder.

    • Dr. Tara J. Palmatier

      Yup, and let me guess, the suicide attempt was an attempt to blackmail him into staying in the relationship.

  • August Løvenskiolds

    We’ve had some scrapes in our past, to be sure, but damn it, Janet, you rock.

    Thanks for this.

  • Heisenberg

    “And no, cupcake, your FEELINGS are not evidence.”

    Brilliant prose …. I’m still laughing. True and hilarious all at the same time!

  • greg

    My goodness you are such a JudgyBitch.

    Thank you for a Great article.

    Elizabeth Jones has definitely earned a spot on the registry.

    If the genders were reversed at UNC, he would have been expelled for Harassment/Stalking. Nice double standard there.

  • Paul Elam

    My my, it appears her name is not Jennifer, but Landen Gambill. Check out the coverage on this story, actually calling whoever this poor schmo is a rapist.

    Someone, please contact me with whatever information, images, etc, can be gathered on Landen Gambill.

    • John A

      I suggest that “thinkprogress” increase their vocabulary by one word – ‘alleged’. That would involve real progress for them and also help with their thinking.

    • Turbo

      Just sent an email to Annie-Rose Strasser who wrote the article, via her contact on the webpage. I thought I had copied it before I hit send, but alas I had not. But it went something like this.

      ” I refer to your recent article on ThinkProgress titled ‘University Of North Carolina Rape Victim May Be Expelled For Speaking About Her Case’. You have used the terms “rape” and “rapist” throughout the article without using the word alleged in front of them, even though there has been no arrest, no trial and no conviction, just an allegation from one person. In the interests of journalistic integrity and in fairness to both parties, when all you have is an accusation then surely the word alleged must be used when referring to it, would you agree?”

      I await a response.

    • Grumpy Old Man

      I found a few interesting things and emailed them to the Forum Admin account. Allot of the stuff out there are repeats.

  • Paul Elam

    Well, that part was easy.

    Anyone interested in helping I could use sources for her mental health history and any other details of this case.

    What is happening now is that the university, which tried to to the right thing by shutting this false accusing asshole up, is not being put under pressure to institutionalize her conduct.

    We need to be on top of this one.

    • greg

      Just looking at her eyes, you can tell she is very medicated. Probably a Very High dose of Seroquel, amongst others.

      How the MSM is covering this is Appalling.

    • Dr. Tara J. Palmatier

      Those are the koo koo Mc Nutty eyes of Crazy if I’ve ever seen them. Jeebus.

      • Kimski

        Well, she fits the profile in more than one way, Dr.T.


    • Keith

      Her you tube story

  • Typhonblue (Asha James)

    As I pointed out on reddit, how could her story be so craptastic that it couldn’t muster past the preponderance of the evidence standard that universities use? That’s just 50.01% of the evidence. That’s equivalent to one woman saying “he raped me” and one rape advocate saying “women never lie!”

    How the hell did her story fail that?

    It sort of boggles the mind.

  • acatisfinetoo

    Because committing a crime (libel/defamation) in the process of obtaining evidence for another charge is totally morally acceptable? So in the end the ends justifies the means?

    Well then let’s do away with all due process and bring back confessions obtained through torture. I mean, they’re probably all criminals anyway, who cares if a few innocents get caught in the crossfire?

    Oh wait…

  • thefeministmra

    The comments on some of those articles really tell the narrative in a pretty profound way.

    “Intimidating her *rapist*…”

    Based on her word alone, the articles rhetoric was provided in a way which assumes the accuracy of the claim; so every comment basis itself on the authority of the article. Those who want more information or to confirm the legitimacy of the claim are vilified.

    A healthy does of rationalism is the best defense against emotional reaction.

  • Howard Gordan

    I wish so many men weren’t white knights. What should happen is college men should all boycott our universities until they remove the Dear Colleague Letter and return presumption of innocence and due process.

  • Lovekraft

    I clicked the link to the article Paul provided and, looking at the comments, can conclude that the moonbats are on high alert there. Feminists and manginas dismissing calls for judicial review, instead relying on the old ‘public lynching.’

    Their zeal is an indication that the gravy train is coming to an end.

  • MateNeo

    “Let the bitches scream, your honors. And let justice reign.”

    Great article indeed. Thank you Janet!

  • Steve_85

    The girl who cried rape… again.

    Someone should write a book.

    • Kimski

      Now I could say something in reference to a wolf that wouldn’t be very nice, so I’ll refrain from doing that.

      But Karma has a way of knocking on the door, when you least expect it…

  • Grumpy Old Man

    How the hell can they keep the narrative of a survivor going?

  • donzaloog

    This article is so on point it hurts.

  • NCFathers

    As I am in NC, I just wrote a blog on this, though in hind sight I should have submitted this for review here

    • OneHundredPercentCotton

      Great article, thanks for posting!

  • Anti Idiocy

    This seems far enough into a discussion to throw in an OT without being too rude. Y’all might want to check out the article on Marissa Mayer, CEO of Yahoo, dissing feminism. Also, of course, check out the comments.

  • nomoreshame

    I saw a report of this on yahoo news yesterday (which is a site I think leans on the side of the feminist in my opinion). As soon as I jumped on line it was on of the first stories to pop up and I thought to myself ‘I got to read this’. The journalist who wrote the article cited directly and a few other sources that had something to say about the case. Im glad you wrote on this JudgyBitch I think your article was right on.

  • NCFathers

    Paul, go to and search “landen gambill”

  • NCFathers

    What I don’t get in looking at is all those women and men calling him a rapist who have sons in their lives. My God, half the population of women on this planet have male children they are throwing under the bus.

  • Limeywestlake (Neil Westlake)

    Not entirely OT: Yet another young woman calling foul on all this nonsense.

    Check out her other vids.

  • Coldfire

    If the Jezebel and ThinkProgress articles are to be believed (always a big IF) then Gambil only named her alleged rapist to the “honor court” and did not publicly smear him. These articles only say that she publicly talked about having been raped, which one can certainly do without accusing any specific person.

    There are at least two very important questions that are left unanswered by these articles:

    1. Given that rape is a serious criminal offense, why didn’t Gambil report this to the police instead of one of these ridiculous student courts?

    2. What, exactly, was the outcome of this “honor court” trial? Was her alleged rapist found innocent? Was she found guilty of filing a false accusation?

    Going by this very limited information coming from sources with abysmal credibility (Jezebel and ThinkProgress), what seems most likely to me is that Gambil is actually being punished because the “honor court” found her guilty of making a false accusation. It’s also possible that, having found her accusation to be false, the court ordered her to stop talking about her alleged rape even in the passive voice and warned her that there would be punishments for violating that order. This is all pure speculation on my part, however. The source articles are atrocious pieces of “journalism” devoid of any research beyond Gambil’s own words and there isn’t enough information to draw any informed conclusions.

  • Malestrom

    I’ll echo what some others have said, the comments on that Jezebel article are the most troubling thing. Those people are 100% sure he is guilty, they even refer to him as the ‘rapist’, not even ‘alleged rapist’ as though there were no possibility of his innocence. I mean the only thing we know for sure is that a woman of questionable mental stability made an accusation of rape against a man, an accusation she was not even confident enough to take to the police, and a university Honour Court did not believe her. From these facts they have decided his guilt 100% and convicted him in their minds. Meanwhile, the most outlandish excuses are offered for why there is so little evidence that even the relaxed evidentiary standards of the Honours Court could not be met.

    Once again, I cannot imagine myself being lucid enough to operate a computer, read a website article, and then comment on it, while simultaneously being so divorced from reality to write something like this:

    ”I cannot believe how poorly women are treated in America. I mean, shit, isn’t this supposed to the greatest country in the world? I just don’t get it.”

    American women are the most pampered, priviliged, and indulged large group of humans in the history of our species.

  • Kimski

    Is it just me, or do the comments written in the Jezebel thread appear as having been written by the same individual?

    The language and choice of words are stereotypically identical. And someone posing as a guy, with the nick name “Chocolatine”, doesn’t strike me as being neither trustworthy nor a real person.

    Edit: Oh, I see you had a problem with ‘Chocolatine’ too, Malestrom.
    Suppose noone even reads that tabloid anymore, and they have to come up with the comment themselves?
    Wouldn’t be the first time I’ve seen that.

  • Phil in Utah

    I’ve quoted her on every posting of this story I’ve come across, but I think I’ll let Camille Paglia speak for me yet again: “Universities are not a branch of the judiciary. They do not have the time, training, or resources necessary to conduct a proper legal investigation. In the event that a real rape happens, report it to the police.” That begs the question…why hasn’t she? Probably because she knows her evidence is so shoddy, the case would get thrown out before it even reaches a Grand Jury.

  • Mortarmouth

    Posted the same on Jezebel – most likely a completely futile act:

    A person can be convicted of sexual assault (or rape – whatever the Criminal Code calls it in your jurisdiction) solely on the evidence of the complainant. That being said, the ability of the complainant’s evidence to convince a judge or jury beyond a reasonable doubt of the guilt of the accused, absent any corroborating circumstantial/direct evidence can be a problem. Where the credibility or reliability of the complainant is shown to be questionable – for example, where one or more mental illnesses are present that can be shown to have possibly affected the truthfulness or accuracy of the complainant, the weight given to the complainant’s evidence is reduced.

    Needless to say, if you’re an unsympathetic accused (being male already lowers your sympathy factor substantially) and your complainant is either sympathetic or neutral and there is no evidence but yours and the complainant’s, you stand a very good chance of being convicted, whether you’re factually innocent or not – particularly if it’s a jury trial where improper factors such as sympathy factor heavily. There’s often some circumstantial evidence that can tip the scales – post-offence conduct or communications by the complainant, forensic evidence (rape kits), etc.

    In this case, the fact that the alleged rapist apparently hasn’t been criminally charged suggests that the police and/or the prosecutor does not believe there is sufficient evidence to warrant an arrest, laying of charges, or prosecution, likely because the credibility of the complainant is questionable and there is a lack of corroborating circumstantial evidence (like her mentioning abuse to friends or family, physical injuries, etc.). Or the complainant hasn’t reported the incident to the police – neither possibility helps the strength of her case. It’s difficult to explain why a complainant would approach a school administrative tribunal without having approached the police. Also keep in mind that she’s claiming she was stalked, threatened, etc. None of the non-rape claims appear to have been substantiated sufficiently to allow any action by the police or Honor Court – they didn’t even proceed to an Honor Court trial, the threshold for which is apparently quite low. We only have one side of the story here – we don’t have his side. For all we know, there could be a mountain of evidence against her claims but, due to the biased knee-jerkery by the student paper and Jezebel, we wouldn’t know because no one but the Honor Court appears to have bothered asking.

    The article quoted is ridiculously biased – it assumes that the accused was verbally and sexually abused, apparently solely on the basis of her claiming it. This AFTER the accused was acquitted at trial by the Honor Court. There’s a reason newspapers are supposed to say “allegedly” before allegations of criminal conduct – the presumption of innocence isn’t just a fancy term (nor is “libel”). You’re also supposed to mention if someone is acquitted of the charges alleged. Great journalism, ladies – real bush-league stuff.

    The sense of entitlement present in much of the student quotes is amazing – they seem to feel as though they shouldn’t have to provide anything more than a bald assertion and that the accused should be punted from the school solely on that basis. Furthermore, the “Honor Court” is an administrative tribunal, not a criminal court. The HC is not restricted from making inquiries or asking uncomfortable questions that would be excluded by the criminal rules of evidence or rape shield laws, nor should they be. Asking why a complainant undertook a course of action at odds with what would be expected of a reasonable person subjected to the kind of treatment she claimed is not “re-victimizing” – it’s asking the complainant to explain a piece of circumstantial evidence that militates against her claim. Regardless of how strongly she feels and all the gender-political baggage that gets latched onto every publicized rape case, the claim is a legal claim that the prosecution (or at the HC, complainant) is required to PROVE.

    The “allegation = guilt” reasoning that is being tossed around by the paper, Jezebel, and commentators is sickening. People are presumed innocent until proven guilty and should be treated as such as much as practicable. A complainant is not, *legally*, a “rape victim” until the alleged rapist is convicted. Obviously, then, an accused is not legally a “rapist” until he is convicted of the offence of rape. When someone has been ACQUITTED of rape, continuing to level the accusation against them – publicly – is harassment. The complainant’s lame claim of “I haven’t named him” doesn’t count for much when SHE is named and anyone that knows her will know who she’s talking about (and inform others of the same).

  • Falcor

    My FEELING is that calling someone a rapist before they are convicted of same ought to be considered slander, especially if anyone but the accuser uses the term. Fortunately, my feelings are not law, because if they were there would be a lot of taxi drivers in New York never allowed to drive again.

  • Me

    I forgot the exact year but one of Theodore Roosevelt’s State of the Union addresses touched on the epidemic of false rape accusations. He predicted and warned that they would eventual cross over and not just be used for racist means as they were at the time.

    There is nothing to make a public lynching easier than a false rape accusation. No matter how insane or obviously made up it is, there will still be a large number of people who will mindlessly and rabidly believe it without question and god help the poor soul who is falsely accused. If he isn’t savagely attacked or unjustly jailed , his name will always be destroyed for many.

    • OneHundredPercentCotton

      Fifteen years ago I began writing about my son’s false rape accusation on various blogs, trying to sound the warning about how corrupt the courts are in these cases.

      I was met with hostility, disbelief, and even attracted a stalker who tried to expose my son publicly just to shut me up.

      When my son was 16 his 11 year old cousin accused him of raping her. Two years before. She had been grounded and not allowed to attend a sleep over – so during a tantrum she claimed rape in order to attend. She and her mother both had a history of prior false accusations.

      “Shut up, you’re upsetting REAL victims” “Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the crime” “Children never lie”.

      OK, when it comes to a child accuser, EVERYone wants to side with the child and that’s understandable.

      Bad luck, suck it up and move on.

      The thing is – the message I’ve tried to convey is those laws making it easier to convict innocent people in child accuser cases are now creeping into adult accusation cases.

      It was only a matter of time.

      Every word of this article posted below is true, and every one of those things happened to my son and then some – the only thing they’ve left out is rape shield laws prevented prior accusations from being admissible.

      I wasn’t listened to then, maybe someone will listen now. Compare how many of these eliminated rights are NOW regularly accepted in college kangaroo courts.


      The Elimination of Constitutional Rights

      Prosecutors and the child saving industry have convinced the legislature that merely creating hysteria is not enough to insure conviction for those accused. In addition, rights originally created in our constitution to protect the criminal defendants must be eliminated.

      The Rules Have Changed to Secure Convictions

      All across our nation, state legislatures have supported advocacy /special interest groups. The following illustrates how constitutional rights have been taken away in sexual assault trials:

      No Right to Confront Your Accuser

      Criminal law codes have been rewritten to where in many cases, the accuser does not have to appear in court and face the accused.

      “Hearsay Evidence”

      Hearsay is defined as “a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” (Tex. Rules. Evid. 803 (2)). In Layman’s terms, “Hearsay” evidence is when a witness testifies about something they do not personally know, but were told by someone else. Hearsay is considered unreliable and is normally inadmissible as evidence against an accused. In child abuse cases however, hearsay evidence is admitted as evidence of guilt. A so called “outcry” witness can testify as to what a child supposedly said to them regarding the alleged abuse.

      “Syndrome Evidence” Is Admissible Against the Accused

      In most states, the prosecution can have an expert witness testify that the child is suffering from “Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome”(CSAAS). This psychological “mumble jumble” is an unscientific theory of supposed traits of abused children. The psychologist who came up with this syndrome many years ago has since indicated that this theory is not reliable evidence in a court of law. Prosecutors do not care! This junk science makes its appearance in courtrooms across the country daily.

      With Syndrome Evidence, the State Replaces Its Lack of Real Proof with Speculation

      CSAAS theorizes that because an alleged victim is supposedly demonstrating certain behavioral patterns that he/she must have actually been abused. Unfortunately, a big problem with this and other syndromes is that the character traits offered to show abuse are also common for non-abused children.

      Convictions without Physical Evidence

      Our prisons are full of persons who have been convicted of child molestation without any physical evidence ever introduced against them at trial. In other words, the typical evidence in which the state offers to convict a defendant, such as body fluids, blood, semen, hair, DNA, are not introduced at trial to link the accused to a crime.

      Medical nurses and employees whose livelihoods depend upon their contracts with child advocacy centers will give opinions that a child was abused. Failure to give the right opinion will mean the contract is not renewed. These opinions from medical “experts” will say the findings are “consistent with” sexual abuse. Of course, “consistent with” is not a true medical diagnosis.
      -Paul Stuckle – Elimination of Constitutional Rights

      • sevencck

        Great post. I’m sorry to hear you and your son went through such a horror show. I hope he’s doing OK now.

        • OneHundredPercentCotton

          He had over whelming support, and still does to this day. At the age he was when accused, 16, he was constantly surrounded by too many people who knew him from a very early age. We lived in a different state thousands of miles from where he was accused or this NEVER would have happened.

          If he had been more on his own, like in college or out in the world, things would have been very different.

          He was on a public registry for 13 years, (even though juveniles aren’t supposed to publicly listed they break the law and do it anyway) which is why I regrettably remain anonymous and have to be cautious of what I say publicly even though I want to scream it from the rafters and expose this evil system.

          His biggest fear is opening the front door to a camera crew doing a big scare expose, or having them show up at his job, which happens here all the time.

    • Phil in Utah

      Here it is, from False Rape Society’s website:

      I call your attention and the attention of the Nation to the prevalence of crime among us, and above all to the epidemic of lynching and mob violence that springs up, now in one part of our country, now in another. . . . A great many white men are lynched, but the crime is peculiarly frequent in respect to black men. The greatest existing cause of lynching is the perpetration, especially by black men, of the hideous crime of rape–the most abominable in all the category of crimes, even worse than murder. Mobs frequently avenge the commission of this crime by themselves torturing to death the man committing it; thus avenging in bestial fashion a bestial deed, and reducing themselves to a level with the criminal.

      “Lawlessness grows by what it feeds upon; and when mobs begin to lynch for rape they speedily extend the sphere of their operations and lynch for many other kinds of crimes, so that two-thirds of the lynchings are not for rape at all; while a considerable proportion of the individuals lynched are innocent of all crime. Governor Candler, of Georgia, stated on one occasion some years ago: ‘I can say of a verity that I have, within the last month, saved the lives of half a dozen innocent Negroes who were pursued by the mob, and brought them to trial in a court of law in which they were acquitted.’ As Bishop Galloway, of Mississippi, has finely said: ‘When the rule of a mob obtains, that which distinguishes a high civilization is surrendered. The mob which lynches a negro charged with rape will in a little while lynch a white man suspected of crime. Every Christian patriot in America needs to lift up his voice in loud and eternal protest against the mob spirit that is threatening the integrity of this Republic.’ Governor Jelks, of Alabama, has recently spoken as follows: ‘The lynching of any person for whatever crime is inexcusable anywhere–it is a defiance of orderly government; but the killing of innocent people under any provocation is infinitely more horrible; and yet innocent people are likely to die when a mob’s terrible lust is once aroused. The lesson is this: No good citizen can afford to countenance a defiance of the statutes, no matter what the provocation. The innocent frequently suffer, and, it is my observation, more usually suffer than the guilty. The white people of the South indict the whole colored race on the ground that even the better elements lend no assistance whatever in ferreting out criminals of their own color. The respectable colored people must learn not to harbor their criminals, but to assist the officers in bringing them to justice. This is the larger crime, and it provokes such atrocious offenses as the one at Atlanta. The two races can never get on until there is an understanding on the part of both to make common cause with the law-abiding against criminals of any color.’

      “Moreover, where any crime committed by a member of one race against a member of another race is avenged in such fashion that it seems as if not the individual criminal, but the whole race, is attacked, the result is to exasperate to the highest degree race feeling. There is but one safe rule in dealing with black men as with white men; it is the same rule that must be applied in dealing with rich men and poor men; that is, to treat each man, whatever his color, his creed, or his social position, with even-handed justice on his real worth as a man. White people owe it quite as much to themselves as to the colored race to treat well the colored man who shows by his life that he deserves such treatment; for it is surely the highest wisdom to encourage in the colored race all those individuals who are honest, industrious, law-abiding, and who therefore make good and safe neighbors and citizens. Reward or punish the individual on his merits as an individual. Evil will surely come in the end to both races if we substitute for this just rule the habit of treating all the members of the race, good and bad, alike. There is no question of ‘social equality’ or ‘negro domination’ involved; only the question of relentlessly punishing bad men, and of securing to the good man the right to his life, his liberty, and the pursuit of his happiness as his own qualities of heart, head, and hand enable him to achieve it.

      “Every colored man should realize that the worst enemy of his race is the negro criminal, and above all the negro criminal who commits the dreadful crime of rape; and it should be felt as in the highest degree an offense against the whole country, and against the colored race in particular, for a colored man to fail to help the officers of the law in hunting down with all possible earnestness and zeal every such infamous offender. Moreover, in my judgment, the crime of rape should always be punished with death, as is the case with murder; assault with intent to commit rape should be made a capital crime, at least in the discretion of the court; and provision should be made by which the punishment may follow immediately upon the heels of the offense; while the trial should be so conducted that the victim need not be wantonly shamed while giving testimony, and that the least possible publicity shall be given to the details.
      The members of the white race on the other hand should understand that every lynching represents by just so much a loosening of the bands of civilization; that the spirit of lynching inevitably throws into prominence in the community all the foul and evil creatures who dwell therein. No man can take part in the torture of a human being without having his own moral nature permanently lowered. Every lynching means just so much moral deterioration in all the children who have any knowledge of it, and therefore just so much additional trouble for the next generation of Americans.

      “Let justice be both sure and swift; but let it be justice under the law, and not the wild and crooked savagery of a mob.”

  • sevencck

    Great article, I enjoyed reading it.

  • Peter Wright (Tawil)

    This idea of ‘guilty if I say you are’ probably had its inception in 12th century Europe with the ‘Courts of Love’ that were presided over by an all-female panel of judges. The first mention of these courts is by Andreas Capellanus in his manual, ‘The Art of Courtly Love’ [CE – 1184].

    I have that whole article provided in the link above, if anyone wants it just provide your email and I’ll send the Fulltext.

    • OneHundredPercentCotton

      “Because I said so” – Mom.

      • Kimski

        Makes sense..not.

        Another one of those is this one: ‘You’re supposed to do as I say, and not as I do’.

  • http://none universe

    “Guilty if I say you are”
    – That “I” often times expands to a whole lot of “we” who get to decide instantly on a certain legal and social matter involving an assuming of guilt, never mind innocence.

    Let’s see who could individually use the word “I” in the guilt assuming collective:
    – the proven false accuser, obviously. Is there any doubt of this that in her mind she wishes to reign harm and impute guilt. This after severly lying to herself.
    – certain members of the arresting constabulatory. Sworn to uphold the most basic of ‘legal’ foundations some can become a little zealous in protecting the ‘little ladies’. Assuming automatic guilt while apprehending the suspect in the most humiliating of public circumstances possible (at work, etc.), tightening the metal or plastic cuffs a little tighter than usual, physically and brow-beating the suspect before and during detention, etc.
    – then come the armchair prosecutors with in the media. Allowing a man’s name to be broadcast near and wide basis an accusation without proving much else is downright a bellycrawl worse than the false accuser herself. Here, the reporter and editor get to lie or at least support a lie and broadcast this to the entire nation. Being upswept in an unproven zeitgeist is provably unconscionable.
    – Crown Attornies/District Attornies / ? Queens Barristers who may overlook evidentiary principles and procede to trial to support public and personal perceptions of the crime’s nature to ensure the political will to hang. Vigilence please, people. You’re there to protect people from harm, not lead the falsely accused into it.
    – if the falsely accused is unfortunate enough to land behind bars the inmate population would seem hardly much different from other demographic. Of all people who should be aware of railroad justice it would be many among the prison population. There’s no real penitentiary justice upon the falsely accused. But that doesn’t stop many from administering some inside scapegoating.
    – Certain members of the public including employers current and potential even friends, relatives, may affix a guilt stamp without fully knowing the full story.
    This is the big “I” of the we among many who may decide guilt upon the falsely accused.

    But, wait. Not done. Let us not leave out one of the biggest contemporary contributors to automatic rape guilt assumption – theorizers and supporters of ‘rape culture’ and paid advocates for rape reform policies over the years which has led to the assault of hair trigger rape accusations. And showing leniency toward those who do falsely accuse.
    – these people are mostly known by the title of feminist, regardless of stripe or bent. “They” are numbered in the thousands. Thousands who apparently have little regard for proven centuries old fair procedural social conduct – burden of proof to administer law. Thousands who apparently wish to equate each individual modern day female self with that of an ancient monarch – who once employed a decree of guilt by asserted word ( “without reliable witnesses produced for this purpose” S.39 Magna Carta). Thousands who do not mind at all whether one man’s life is disrupted by unjustifiable hostile forces, whose entire reputation is trashed for decades. Thousands who do not come forth individually or in group form to oppose false rape accusations injustice – and NOW, right now. Your silence toward false rape accusations shall be more your undoing.

    Great contribution JB (squared).
    I guess if now some women are calling attention to false rape claimants things must then truly be way out of hand.

  • All Contraire

    When I look at the YouTube video of the ABC News Report available above from ‘Keith in reply to Paul Elam’, I see an appealing –– if shallow and unconscionable –– very clever, composed and well-rehearsed young privileged white-girl feminazi prosecuting the UNC Campus Womyn’s Movement agenda. In this case the insurgents are using their tried-and-true stratagem of ramped-up public pressure and sexual extortion to force the University Administration and Student Honor Court to deform their current system even further into the feminist-demanded ‘she accuses/he’s always guilty’ kangaroo court with lots of male bodies.

    Remember the UNC system must already be operating under the pro-accuser, pro-conviction rules unilaterally decreed by former Dept. of Education Asst. Secretary for Civil Rights and Marxist-Feminist Ideologue Russlyn Ali. And still the man-hating Feminists are not satisfied. Obviously the ‘Ali System’ that is broadly prejudiced for the female accuser and against the male defendant is still not sufficiently feeding their insatiable appetite for condemned men and consequential greater power and funding for their ‘Cause’.

    As other commenters have noted:

    (1) Why does Mz. Gambill carefully avoid naming her alleged rapist? Isn’t it because her handlers in the Womyn’s Movement have coached her that the young man can then sue her in court for false accusation, defamation and slander? In any case, no doubt everyone who might be interested now knows who the poor sap is. What we MHRAs know is he is the real ‘victim’ of Mz. Gambill’s injustice whose life and reputation will forever be tainted by her lies.

    (2) And foremost as so many have common sensibly asked: If Mz. Gambill was raped, why the @#&^%$!! didn’t she, and doesn’t she go to the police?!! Of course, isn’t it because she and her handlers know that if she couldn’t even get past the pro-accuser preponderance-of-evidence Student Court she certainly has no judicial standing based on evidence and facts in a fair police investigation, and thus could be legally liable herself for filing a false report?

    Obviously, their strategy then is to outrageously propagandize the case in the ‘court’ of public opinion before a fem-friendly media, for example, ABC reporter Tamara Gibbs’ noticeably misandrous and one-sided account. Public accusations without evidence, innuendo, defamation, and outright lies can be safely parroted by sympathetic reporters to certify that the Feminist-created ‘Rape Culture’ hysteria is, in fact, absolutely true and undeniable. The assertion is that colleges like UNC when they fail to produce high numbers of convictions for sexual harassment, assault, and rape must perforce be cesspools of despicable bestial male sexual depravity where countless numbers of poor helpless innocent ‘Little Bo Peep’ girls like sweet Mz. Gambill are being relentlessly harassed, stalked, denied support, assaulted and raped. Actually *double* raped: first by the privileged brutal, violent, misogynous campus men, and then also by the college’s own callous cover-up.

    Surely as the Feminists demand this terrible historic injustice requires further dismantling constitutional rule of law and rights (see OneHundredPercentCotton above) to always convict men as by nature evil and necessarily guilty of this feminist-acclaimed most heinous and unspeakable, i.e. ‘must not be questioned’, of crimes. A crime, which Feminists keep deliberately vague and ill-defined except as looming monstrous, menacing, inhuman and unthinkable in the willingly misled public’s fevered imaginations.

    MHRAs should not suppose this incident will necessarily have a fair conclusion. The Feminists have likely learned from their past mistakes in the Duke, Hofstra, etc. cases and can be expected to be smarter this time. Certainly our ever distracted, willfully uninformed and forgetful citizenry have not learned from these past travesties of justice because, damn it! here we go again.

    Charges of rape and cover-up, however unfounded, are the Fascist-Feminists’ All-Powerful Hell Weapon, the mere threat of which, like a nuclear bomb, they can ruthlessly use at will to achieve their misandrous tyrannical goals.

  • TheSandreGuy

    Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

    Domestic Violence / Rape / Sexual Abuse = Extraordinary claims.

    Therefor, you need evidence for those claims.

    I really don’t see what feminists find so offensive about this. It’s just logic… Oh wait… Logic is what’s offensive.

  • Steersman

    A rather sad state of affairs – which you, and others, do well to describe in fulsome detail. Although one can’t help but get the impression that this is going to end in some precipitous drops in the birth rate. Or the development of cell-phone applications to ensure that the sexes don’t say boo to each other without certifications as to who can do what to whom and how often, as well as providing evidence of those developments.

  • Daniel Kulkarni

    The problem with rape allegations is that they’re near impossible to prove. Evidence can be faked, the story can be revised, etc. Unless it was actually recorded on video, and even then, the video could be consensual roleplaying of a “rape fantasy” and used as evidence of actual rape. In the end, it always amounts to a he said/she said sorta deal.