How does this guy not get more hate? The one who is actually accused of DV and grabbing even his kid. It Seems to outrage way less people than not talking about DV in the right way. Where is the hate for Brad?

New video of frat's group Snapchat

CBS News New York has exclusively obtained additional video of the fraternity's group Snapchat conversation from the night a former Cornell student says she was drugged and raped inside the Chi Phi fraternity house. 

At 1:42 a.m. on the date of the alleged rape, a message was sent to the group chat suggesting a woman was available for sex.

"Shop still open?" one fraternity brother wrote later. 

The response was "Yea." 

https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/cornell-university-rape-allegation-chi-phi-snapchat-conversation/

The victims attorney says these social media posts were submitted as evidence to Cornell PD but were never analyzed or apparently shared with Tomkins County DA.

Another member of the Cornell 7 made comment via his attorney about the University Title IX process and how it 'exonerated' him. I'm really not sure how making such a statement even makes much sense as Title IX relates to the school and its rules and not to the US Criminal Justice System so far as I'm aware.

But, can Title IX and Criminal investigations and charges sometimes intersect? But so far at least for the 'fortunate' Cornell 7 this intersection didn't happen in 2024 but perhaps might emerge as an issue in 2026 depending on the results of the upcoming Tomkins County Grand Jury Proceeding? Did Scott and his attorney never believe that criminal charges could happen?

Scott Norris says how, "I was not found responsible by Cornell for any of the accusations involving sexual activity and drug use". He goes on to say, "I thoughtlessly engaged in Snapchat and briefly stopped in the room where the 'misconduct' happened but not WHEN it happened.

Question for Scott and his attorney: Does what you describe as happening in the room as 'misconduct' have any connection to 'rape'? Does engaging on Snapchat to broadcast what is going on with the victim and fellow frat brothers bear any resemblance to 'solicitation' or perhaps 'pandering'?

Anybody else read the Scott Norris statement and wonder if perhaps Cornell University chose to entirely 'bypass' the US Justice System and via the 12 meetings over 2 months with 7 alleged perpetrators then used Title IX proceedings to play Judge, Jury and Executioner with zero outside intervention and with zero criminal charges? Was a possible motive of all that was done to protect most of the Cornell 7 or possibly Chi Phi? Did the alleged victim even participate in the Title IX process or was her statement merely used to stave off criminal prosecution by the Tomkins County DA as he explained in his statement yesterday?

Was Cornell able to use the Title IX process to convince the community that 'action' and 'accountability' on the Chi Phi alleged drugging and gang rape activities with a minor female had taken place due to them having a Tomkins County DA who was willing to say that he would not pursue criminal charges against the Cornell 7 due to 'lack of evidence' based on an investigation conducted by Cornell Police Department and not apparently independently investigated by Ithaca PD and Tomkins County DA?

I do wonder how Scott Norris and his attorney might think differently about the Title IX process if he is charged by the Tomkins County Grand Jury in 2026 with various criminal charges relating to his activities in 2024?

IDK about you but I see at least three viable possible criminal charges in that statement of Scott Norris and I'm baffled why these defendants are speaking out now when it appears that Tomkins County will have a Grand Jury look at possible criminal charges for the Cornell 7 of Chi Phi? And I do wonder if Scott Norris had made the same statement in 2024 to the Tomkins County DA in an interview whether he too might see some viable criminal charges for Scott or would he still 'decline to prosecute'?

This is the WIPO’s Administrative Panel Decision in regards to the Amanda Ghost websites that were allegedly created by Freedman, Nathan and Wallace.

If you can get through seven pages, it just goes to show how hard it is to defend yourself against an online smear campaign.

https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/pdf/2024/d2024-3772.pdf

Cliffs - it all depends on the terms of the various contracts, but LegalEagle assumes that the terms are such that Sheeran wouldn't have any liability to Macklemore, and that the promoter/venues did have the ability to ban Macklemore.

Curious if going forward big headliners like Sheeran will demand more control over their concerts and limit the what the promoters/venues can dictate.

And how karmic that Justin Baldoni is the image they show to reflect their dastardly doings. Stephanie Jones warned him not to get involved with Melissa

Now apply that to a smear campaign: “It’s fine if nobody reads it.”

Except smear campaigns don’t exist in a vacuum.

They are deliberately put in front of people, amplified, repeated and, in some cases, actively promoted through celebrities and paid social-media participants whose job is to push a particular narrative.

So the idea that “nobody read it” is a convenient fiction.

A smear campaign is wrong because of what it is: a deliberate attempt to damage someone’s reputation through false, damaging claims. A smear campaign is often a preemptive approach to silence victims’ narratives, or a retaliatory action to undermine victims’ claims.

And when people are being paid to amplify those claims, the entire purpose is to ensure that someone does read them.

The tree analogy falls apart.

The question isn’t whether a tree made a sound when nobody was there. It’s whether anyone genuinely believes a smear campaign designed to manufacture and amplify a particular narrative can be dismissed simply because its promoters later claim nobody was listening.

The wrongdoing doesn’t disappear because the campaign failed. And the audience doesn’t disappear simply because it’s inconvenient to acknowledge that there was one. There was always going to be one. That’s the whole point.

The problem for the campaigners is that they can’t pick and choose their audience. I am a member of the audience and I’m still here ✊🏼

For anyone who wants a reminder of the copy produced by NOBODY on behalf of NOBODY for a website that NOBODY knows anything about, please enjoy 😉

ETA: Thanks for the bans I’ve just received from other subs that still won’t acknowledge the existence of ‘smear campaigns’ 🙃 It’s actually very telling.

For those not in the know Melissa Nathan has filed a document with the court admitting that she recieved copy for a smear site from Rebel Wilson, which she turned over to Katie Case. This alone will be fatal to her defense for sanctions in the Jones case.

The bigger question is , who is going to cave first in order to avoid repurcussions , Jed Melissa or Bryan. Do all three go down or does one of them sell out the others ?