Due Process

A White Woman Falsely Accused a Black 9-Year-Old Boy of Groping Her

Surveillance footage disproves her allegations-and reminds everyone not to automatically believe victims.



A cell phone video of a white woman calling the cops on a nine-year-old black boy outside a Brooklyn convenience store went viral on social media last week. In the video, the woman—nicknamed "Cornerstore Caroline" on Twitter—claims that kid grabbed her butt while she was in line at the store.

Now surveillance footage from inside the store has been released, and it proves that the boy did no such thing. The accusation was, without question, 100 percent false.

The woman offered an apology after viewing the surveillance footage, though some have questioned her sincerity.

The original video—in which the woman can be seen on the phone with a 911 dispatcher as the boy cries and his mother argues with her—was viewed more than 5 million times. Many sympathized with the young boy, wondering what kind of person would immediately involve law enforcement in a matter involving a child.

The surveillance footage explicitly disproved the woman's account. It clearly showed the boy walking past the woman without touching her. His backpack grazed her body, prompting her freakout.

If we're being maximally charitable to the woman, she didn't outright lie—she was just deeply mistaken about what happened, and eager to weaponize her error against a kid's future.

I couldn't help but notice a perceptive first comment on the writeup of this incident at The Root, a progressive news site that covers race issues. It reads: "Serious question. How do we square the idea that women don't make false accusations and should be believed, with the fact that white women have used false accusations as weapons against black men, and black people generally throughout this country's history?"

This is a good question that should vex more people on the left. Many fourth-wave feminists contend that women who make allegations of sexual misconduct must always and automatically be believed. The #MeToo movement, in their view, is an opportunity not just to hold powerful abusers accountable but to re-balance the scales of justice to reflect the idea that false accusations are virtually nonexistent.

This deeply illiberal approach rests on the assumption that false accusations are so uncommon as to be practically ignorable. But in truth, we can't definitively say that false allegations are as low as 2–8 percent, the statistic often cited by activists. The available data are flawed and unreliable. (Some allegations are technically false but impossible for the police to explicitly disprove; the infamous Rolling Stone/University of Virginia gang rape hoax, for instance, would not be counted as false in any police database.) It also turns Western notions of justice on their head. Even if most accused men are guilty of sexual assault, that doesn't mean we should rush to judgment in each individual case.

"Even as we must treat accusers with seriousness and dignity, we must hear out the accused fairly and respectfully, and recognize the potential lifetime consequences that such an allegation can bring," writes Emily Yoffe in an Atlantic article about the fallout from the Brett Kavanaugh hearings. "If believing the woman is the beginning and the end of a search for the truth, then we have left the realm of justice for religion."

We should expect the formal arbiters of justice—police, prosecutors, judges, juries, etc.—to take an even-handed approach to such cases. And we should want the informal arbiters of justice—media, activists, the broader public—to exercise some degree of caution. An activist culture at war with the principles of due process and the broader presumption of innocence is a bigger threat to black convenience-store kids as it is to rich and powerful men. Justice for victims must not come at the expense of fairness for the accused.

NEXT: Brickbat: Tough Job

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. "Serious question. How do we square the idea that women don't make false accusations and should be believed, with the fact that white women have used false accusations as weapons against black men, and black people generally throughout this country's history?"

    With our fingers squarely in our ears and our tongues squarely making the 'lalalalala' noise. People brought up Emmett Till as the #MeToo movement was rising to hysteria, to no avail.

    1. It's pretty easy to square up. We don't blatantly believe accusers sans evidence. It sucks if they are right, but we used to believe the adage we would rather see one hundred guilty men go free than one innocent man locked up. We also recognize that some bitches are crazy and will make shit up for revenge, see the "mean girls" story making the rounds.

      1. Would be funny to see prog heads explode if the boy she is accusing turns out to be transgender

      2. Some bitches?

      3. Yes. In this case, it looks like it was revenge against the boy's mother; it is after the mother comes back and makes some comment to her that the woman makes the call to the police. I'm wondering just what was said there.

    2. Science!

    3. That's easy to square. The statement that "women don't make false accusations" is false.

      Women make false accusations. So do men. Women make false protestations of innocence. So do men. Deal with it. Anyone claiming that the victim must always be believed is living in a fantasy land and probably needs their medication adjusted.

      1. There are some scholars who define all sex as rape. Ergo, anyone who has ever initiated sex is a rapist.

        1. Damn squirrels!

      2. There are some scholars who define all sex as rape. Ergo, anyone who has ever initiated sex is a rapist.

      3. There are some scholars who define all sex as rape. Ergo, anyone who has ever initiated sex is a rapist.

        1. "There are some scholars who define all sex as rape."

          No, only heterosexual sex is defined as rape. Therefore all straight men are rapists.

  2. As ive said here, believing women led to lynchings.

    You shouldnt just believe any accusation of any crime.

    1. There are now 501 groups on the left whose sole purpose is to accuse political opponents of crimes. Often using vague laws.

      1. Just 10 more and it will equal the number of non-indian ancestors in Warren's family tree.

        1. 501c groups... But agree with your comment =)

      2. It's just about time to cleanse this country of progressives.

    2. Ya, and supposing there wasn't video proof of events, the scales of justice accord not by some high falutin' ideas of due process and burden of proof, but the relative social standing of the claimants. That's an aristocracy in all but name.

      The lessons from the lynch mob wasn't about the prevalence of racism, but the incorruptibility of women. Why would they possibly lie (or at least be mistaken) about a 9 year old boy? The proof is self-evident and people hung as of consequence. No trial needed.

      And now, with all the constrictions to a rigorous defense of those accused of sexual assault, they legacy of the #MeToo movement won't be to bring down powerful men like Weinstein, but to assume a position as incorrigible as him.

      And should a 9 year old be hung from the trees, so be it.

  3. The only way to accurately determine what happened is to bring both the woman and the child before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and we can all observe their demeanor through our own pre-conceived political filter and establish the truth.

    1. Don't forget an FBI investigation.

      1. At least when the media interviews the kids classmates it will be contemporary.

        1. I expect the media will interview his teachers and daycare providers!

          1. "I was always trying to get him to clean up his desk -- he always had stuff mashed up in there. He was a strange dude. I remember he would take a bottle of glue and he would pour the glue on his arm, let it dry, peel it off and then eat it."

            There goes his chance of a political career in the executive. Who knows what recovered memories his accuser might bring up in the judicial hearing. That leaves the legislative -- or does it?

            1. Ah, I see I'm not alone! I did this all the time! Well, except for the eating part -- but then, there's reasons the glue is made non-toxic....

    2. It would be delightful to have Dick Durbin (good porn name) badger the nine year old boy: "Would you please turn to the white counsel and ask for an FBI investigation? Can you do that?"

      All the while, Spartacus looms on the side lines considering his next grand standing speech.

    3. Do they have a body language expert?

  4. Emmitt Till could not be reached for comment.

    1. Neither are the Scottsboro boys.

      1. Or the Duke Lacrosse team.

  5. Well, a white woman (Elizabeth Warren) found out that she is a Native American 6-10 generations back.

    Tribes dont typically recognize you unless you are 1/64 or less.

    1. 1/64 or more.

      1. Yeah....more hahaha. too early

    2. And the person who decided that isn't, actually, a geneologist. A statistician, but not a geneologist.

      1. They used findings of markers instead of the general tests used by ancestry and others. Her percentage must have been fucking low, like the

        1. Les than one percent... Stupid html tag.

          1. What they reported was already less than 1%, in fact .097%, so less than one tenth of a percent (of possibly Mexican, Peruvian and Colombian), yet she thought it proved her case.

        2. I was laughing too hard to actually check out their source material.

          If she had any tribal blood she would have been shouting that years ago. I figured it was complete BS.

          These Lefties cannot help themselves anymore to not lie.

        3. They also had a lack of real native info, so they just used random Central American nationalities as a fill in.

          1. She claimed Cherokee.... Yet the markers were found in Peruvian, Mexicans, and Columbians. How did she think this test was good for her. I can't stop laughing.

            1. Because the press won't mention it. That was her thought process.

    3. There was a time when most of the tribes were offering legal membership for low percentages, but those times have passed and most of the tribes have tightened the standard for tribal membership to at least 25% and a few to 50%

      1. And that's strictly genealogy. 100% "Native-American" genetics doesn't make you legally an Indian.

        1. no kidding, I have a relative that is 100% Native American but since she is from two different tribes making her 50% she gets nothing since the tribal leadership decided you had to be 5/8 of one tribe to get anything. that said teh U.S. government will pay your medical down to 1/8

          1. They'll pay your medical, but only if you get sick in the first half of the year. They don't have the budget for the second half.

            I learned that from my mother-in-law, who lives in a non-reservation town in the middle of a reservation, and thus has opportunities to discuss such things with her neighbors....

      2. When the fuck was this? Whites falsely claimed native ancestry to get land from the government via the Dawes Rolls

        1. Mid to late 20th Century. And I was talking about tribal membership which is an internal matter of the tribe, determined by the tribal government. The Dawes roles were a US government list that was at best tangenitally related to actual tribal membership.

          My mother has cousins that were supposedly offered tribal membership at around 1/16th blood around the 1960s .

  6. I probably won't know what the truth is until this woman recovers her memories 36 years from now. Preferably during the kid's biggest job interview.

    The important thing isn't whether or not this kid grabbed her ass. The important thing is that he could have, and for a woman, that is reality enough.

    1. Has anyone asked this nine-year-old if he had ever been blackout drunk? Because if he has, then his denials of responsibility are automatically not believable.

      1. The kid fell asleep once. That's the same as blacked our right?

        1. or it could have been a sugar high you know how kids get after eating their Fruit looks

      2. He was crying and loudly denying that he did it, which is exactly what an entitled rich Yale frat boy would do if he was caught red-handed.

        What more proof do you need?

        In any case, the kid clearly does not have the temperament to advance to junior high. His angry tears show he is not even fit for 5th grade.

  7. Wouldn't

  8. This shit happens all the time across America with people of all races. The media only jumps on stories when they can make it a white racism against black narrative. This doesn't apply just to this issue, but to every type of story.

    When's the last time you saw race added in a headline that wasn't about a white person doing something to a non-white person?

    Twice as many unarmed white people are killed by cops than unarmed black people every year. Have you ever seen a headline "Cops shoot unarmed white man"? No. It doesn't fit the narrative. All of the 100% focus on race distracts from the actual problem and the actual solutions.

    1. Just like the lemonade stand stories. Anybody at Reason knows cops have been shutting down lemonade stands across America for years, usually in nice suburbs. A lot of the stories are about white kids. But the media finds two instances of it happening to black kids, makes it national news and entirely about racism, to fit the "white people calling cops on black people" narrative, despite there being dozens of cases where cops shut down white kids' lemonade stands and it didn't even make the news.

      1. I hear you, but I'll take what I can get. If racism is the thing that finally puts the nail in the coffin of police misconduct, then fine.

        1. I agree. My only caveat is that, when people believe the entire police misconduct problem stems from racism, they will never address the concept of qualified immunity or the out-of-control Police Unions that are even bigger contributors to the problem.

          If they could magically make sure no racist is ever again hired to be a cop, you'd still get a bunch of violent bullies doing whatever they feel like and getting away with it by claiming "furtive movements" or "I smelled pot" or something.

        2. Yeah because police misconduct is such a big problem relative to criminal misconduct.

    2. All of the 100% focus on race distracts from the actual problem and the actual solutions.

      "First responders" have been deified since 9/11. To criticize cops as a whole is blasphemy. It's OK to criticize a few bad apples as racist, but to criticize the entire bunch would warrant being stoned to death.

      1. As a former First Responder, I hate the term "First Responder".

        1. In Houston, first responders usually make there after the tow trucks, neighbors, the news and the insurance people so it's not even an accurate name.

          1. The people who respond first are the people at the scene.

            "First Responder" is just branding.

            1. The people who respond first are the people at the scene.

              They don't count because they're not government.

        2. Weel, it beats second or third responder.

    3. If twice as many unarmed white people as black people are killed by police, it's STILL disproportionate.

      1. Cops better start killing a lot more white people to get the numbers proportional. Then it will be OK.

        1. It's not even a lot more. 66%, given the generic statistics, is not far from 78%ish.

        2. Not only that, but whites have to start murdering more other people, especially blacks, if we want killing parity.

      2. If you normalize by race instead of incidents of crime, sure. You may be interested in a paper by a black UW professor in regards to shootings.

    4. Well, to be frank, it is attention grabbing, and attention grabbing to the right people. It's just preposterous enough to make everyone agree just how absurd the situation is. However, the race angle reminds people of some events that were no less false but much more tragic.

      If we can get the extremists to accept that false accusations happen and that we cannot just automatically believe any accusation, we might be able to bring people into the realm of reason again. Bringing race into it is just a rhetorical technique.

      1. Well, to be frank, it is attention grabbing, and attention grabbing to the right people.

        I thought it was butt grabbing. Butt grabbing of the whyte wymins who don't lie.

  9. The hierarchy of victimhood is an ever-changing stack - kind of like crabs trying to climb out of a cooking pot. #MeToo has temporarily displaced #XeTwoOrMore at the top and pushed #POC waaaay down the pile.

    1. Really. White male, called a "faggot" in public? They won't even take the call. And lesbian feminists who don't back trans rights as "women"*?? They were pushed out of the stack while it was still moving!!

      1. *-Trans Exlusionary Radical Feminists, or TERFs. Also, my "quotes" around 'women' are a tasty mix of misogynistic and transphobic, I think.

      2. Gay white men aren't even in the stack anymore. They're just oppressors like all the other white men.

  10. reminds everyone not to automatically believe victims accusers

    1. A point I kept needing to make during the Ford testimony. The victim is the accused if the accuser's account is inaccurate. Just because someone says something bad happened to them doesn't make then a victim.

      1. The word I keep seeing is "survivor". Like they managed to crawl out of Ted Bundy's trunk.

        1. Her 2 question polygraph almost killed her sir.

          1. Polygraph....hahaha.

            Means: Many graphs.

            1. ...Not truth telling machine.

              1. I feel nervous machine.

  11. Hand any group a weapon like Metoo they can use with impunity and it will be misused.

  12. How does Robby square away his title 9 and other sexual allegations with how he covered the Kavanaugh bs? It's a completely different tone where politics is the only factor I can see to make him flip.

    1. This article will get zero pushback from the leftist mob Reason would rather write to than to people seeking moral consistency

    2. How does Robby square away his title 9 and other sexual allegations with how he covered the Kavanaugh bs?

      He doesn't. "To be sure. Polly wants a cracker!"

    3. I think he was clear on that. And so was the Volokh articles. They believe that due process should not be applied to people in a job interview. If I recall, Robby also didn't like Kav's behavior on the stand, which is certainly legit. I don't know if it's legit enough to warrant a "no" vote, but it was troubling anyway.

  13. I thought after the confirmation the Kavanaugh stories would be over. Now I find out that he's dressing up as a 9 year old black child in Brooklyn?

    1. i literally lol'd

      1. #MeToo.

        Outstanding comment, Leo.

    2. The guy is everywhere!

  14. Peter Suderman

    where. is. e. n. b?

    1. Webmaster: please move to AM Roundup thread

  15. Boston Dynamics now has a robot that can run a parkour course.

    does it also park on a runour course?

    1. Webmaster: please move to AM Roundup thread

      1. No. Leave it here for all to see.

        1. Send it to Glib website, so they can see how bad Reason has become.

          1. And still be jealous because of how shitty they always were.

    2. No, it's par for the course .

  16. The woman offered an apology after viewing the surveillance footage, though some have questioned her sincerity.

    "Believe Women Apologizers!"

    1. We must believe her apology.

      1. To be frank, I believe her. There are very few people who are outright evil.

        She probably did legitimately think that she had been groped and I have little doubt that she was mortified when she saw what actually happened on video.

        That's why I am so worried about this "believe all women" thing. People can be wrong. If you read any report about the Innocence Project, you will never believe eyewitness testimony at face value again. Almost every case they've cleared that wasn't an outright setup was decided on witnesses IDing the wrong person.

        1. Did you actually watch the video? She just kind of glance around at first, and it's only after the angry mom starts ripping into her that the survivor realizes she's been assaulted.

          Not to mention,what was that little twerk/grinding thing the survivor did at the beginning of the confrontation?

          This was never about 'assault," and the survivor never thought she'd been raped. This was about two women screeching at each other and dragging the cops into a mild bodega dispute.

  17. I could have sworn I saw Robby use the 2-7% metric in his kavanaugh is a rapist articles. Only now he denies the statistics?

    1. 7% seems like a lot. And it's supposed to be evidence that false accusations are so rare that we shouldn't even worry about it?

  18. Women would like about sexual assault? No, really?


  19. Is skin color really the primary factor here, Robby?
    You know what's racist?
    Defining people as primarily their ethnicity.
    Fuck off

    1. Is skin color really the primary factor here, Robby?

      How do you know it's not? Would she have made the same assumption if it was a white kid? Would she have been equally outraged if a white mother got in her face about the accusation (this was what prompted her to call 911 -- not the boy's alleged "grope" itself)? Based on a lot of compelling evidence that black people are more frequently wrongfully accused than white people (such as this), I think those are fair questions to ask.

      What do we know? We know that this woman is not a reasonable person. We also know she's vindictive (who calls the cops on a 9 year old for this anyway??). Having those things be racially motivated fits the profile.

      1. We can't know that she would not have called the cops on a 9 year old white boy who had brushed his backpack against her. Since we can't know, we can't just make assumptions and frame the issue that way. That's how we avoid taking steps forward.

        1. We can't know that MeToo influenced her thinking here either, but we're making that assumption too. We're assuming that the current political and social environment is giving rise to this crazy shit. White women's documented fear of black males counts as part of the current political and social environment.

  20. We need better laws to discourage these false allegations.

    Something like "reciprocal punishment" where the false accuser is given the same punishment that a conviction of the false allegation would have resulted in.

    Then these Meetoo bitches with an ounce of self preservation would think twice before going to jail.

    1. Dailywire had a run down of some hoaxes. A lot of multi year sentences for the falsley accused with no time once discovered to be false for the accuser. Was sad.

    2. I don't think becoming even MORE of a litigious or punitive state is the answer. Government isn't the solution to this problem. I think the answer is the good ol' fashioned libertarian solution: public shaming by private actors. And it's working exceedingly well with this case right now. She is being universally called out for this, and it's influencing how people think about the whole thing.

  21. The low percentage of false accusations in a system where accusers are required to provide evidence and the accused are presumed innocent until proven guilty can not be adduced to support the claim that the false accusation rate will remain equally low in a system without adequate due process and where accusers are presumptively believed.

  22. The low percentage of false accusations in a system where accusers are required to provide evidence and the accused are presumed innocent until proven guilty can not be adduced to support the claim that the false accusation rate will remain equally low in a system without adequate due process and where accusers are presumptively believed.

    1. Good point. That rate is indeed likely to change in response to consequences, social approval, etc., as witness the number of "regret accusations" that have been publicized at universities, where any accusation of 'unwanted sexual contact' is not only sympathetically believed, but actively encouraged and redefined down as much as necessary.

      This sets precedent for the public accusations of many behaviors that obviously fall well short of prosecutable offense, but are still weaponized to have serious consequences for the offending male.All towards the dubious goal of becoming a member of the victimized class.

    2. That's not even an issue. The issue is that the statistics used to make the false assumptions claim are inherently bogus and should not be used. It's a lie.

      When those are quoted, the terms "false" and "accusation" are both variables. Whoever is making a claim can just slide the variables to frame whatever point they want to make. It weaponizes false information.

  23. Trump has driven these progressive white feminists so insane they think even little boys are trying to "grab them by the pussy".

    1. They could have walked.

  24. Is the meme supposed to be that one of Trump's deplorable white racists unfairly accused a black boy of sexual assault? I suppose there are a few Trump supporters in Brooklyn but odds are she isn't one of them.

    1. Well of course not. If she was, she would have shoutted some foul racial epithets and pulled a gun on the kid.

    2. Turns out she's actually a rabid feminist, with an eminently resistible butt. Though I'm sure her private world is chock full of rapists, given a sufficiently rarefied value of 'rapist'.

    3. Theresa Klein identifies herself as a "big fan" of Shaun King. I'd wager most of these women frightened/offended/suspicious of Black children and men that show up on the social media are politically "left of center".

    4. She ain't no Trump supporter. She's a PC harpie who is very very left wing, and is willing to ruin a 9 year old boy's life for her PC ideology. If there was no video, she would demand the boy be arrested, and the Dem party would stand with her.

  25. This is a product of hypersensitivity to sexual assault. I feel bad for the kid. The woman felt something rub against her butt. To her, it was sexual assault right there. She turned around and saw who did it. The kid, was just trying to navigate a crowded area with a back pack and the back pack brushed up against her. He may or may not have known it happened. But instead of the woman looking for a reasonable explanation, she was already convinced it was sexual assault. Something rubbed her butt, therefore she was a victim of sexual assault. That's the problem. But that's also the messaging that has been going out. Zero tolerance to sexual assault. Lucky for the kid it was on video.

    Sadly there is a lesson to be learned, but it's not going to be learned because no one wants to focus on the root problem. They would rather call the woman names instead of some reflection on the actual elements of the event.

    1. Somewhere in her psyche must be a confused vortex about fear of sexual assault and desire for sexual assault, plus the stronger desire to attain victimhood status.

  26. This is Robbie's kind of story. The twitter sphere is all a flutter so Robbie is on the case. Thanks....Such an important story.

  27. "If believing the woman is the beginning and the end of a search for the truth, then we have left the realm of justice for religion."

    Oh, piss off.

    "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor." Exodus 20:16

    "One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sins: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall a matter be established." - Deuteronomy 19:15

    "A false witness shall not be unpunished, and he that speaks lies shall not escape." - Proverbs 19:5

    1. "A false witness shall not be unpunished, and he that speaks lies shall not escape." - Proverbs 19:5

      New folk song - - -
      Where have all the politicians gone?

    2. Come on, that's all old testament fire and brimstone. Loving christians have all moved on (and progressives are now on the newer-newer-newer new testament).

    3. Eddy, you're assuming that the comparison is being made to existing faiths. I think Robby is right to attribute it to an almost religious zeal. "Believe All Women" is virtually indistinguishable from "sola fides". They are substituting concrete proof for "faith alone".

      1. It's Emily Yoffe, not Suave.

    4. Oh, piss off.

      That's not the point and I suspect you know it. It is great that Christians are called to take a stand against lying but the point Yoffe is making is about belief without evidence. You know, religion.

      1. She's pulling a Reason - "the particular situation I'm discussing has to do with my side, but to stay woke I have to throw off a line about both sides doing it."

        1. It's the equivalent of thumping her chest and saying "this sort of irrationality is Trump-like." A way to compensate for calling out her own people.

  28. not to automatically believe victims accusers.

    Fixed that for you. They're not victims until their accusations are proven.

  29. #himtoo

  30. That nine year old black kid sure is lucky he's not a constitutionalist originalist or the Welchie Boys would be singing a much different tune!

    1. All Reason needs now is to find out he has a poster of Clarence Thomas on his bedroom wall.

  31. Woah- Elizabeth Warren has really hit rock bottom

    1. Seems like airing out an issue before a 2020 run. She's trying to close the door on it.

      1. She wants it filed under "old news" by the time the campaign starts.

        1. Yep

          1. I can understand how she'd rather be evaluated on the excellence of her policy ideas. /sarc

  32. It's revealing the objection is only to the element violating the victim hierarchy and Robby thinks this is "perceptive". In fact it's anything but.

    Apparently even at Reason we can't stand up for equal rights.


    Michael Avenatti is scheduling a press conference at which he will reveal a sworn certification from a 25-year-old woman who regularly attends children's birthday parties, and who claims to have seen this nine-year-old boy organizing gang rapes.

    1. That's too unbelievable, even for Avenatti.

      But I'd bet if you dragged a dollar through this kid's school playground you'd find stories of him enticing girls to play "Doctor" or "Show Me Yours And I'll Show You Mine".

    2. There was a time when Dems thought Avenatti would make a great presidential contender.

      1. For them, he still is

  34. The idiot appeared to be motivated by the boy's mother, not by the actual (alleged) behavior by the boy. She wouldn't have so flippantly made gyrations about it otherwise. She wasn't offended or bothered by the alleged "groping", she was annoyed by it and likes to argue.

  35. If this woman's butt were smaller, this wouldn't have happened. She should go to Italy if she wants to see what real butt grabbin looks like

  36. If this woman's butt were smaller, this wouldn't have happened. She should go to Italy if she wants to see what real butt grabbin looks like

  37. Sorry for the duplicate post

    1. You had to pad out your post because you didn't have much to work with - like the woman with the little butt.

      Seriously, I'm sure the situation could have been handled better, but then again, if you're in a public place and accuse a child of groping you, then you're going to get a reaction, especially if it turns out you were wrong.

  38. "If believing the woman is the beginning and the end of a search for the truth, then we have left the realm of justice for religion."

    Of course, progressivism is the new religion. And the Reverend Kirkland is what passes for its clergy.

  39. "Believe all women" means "Don't believe any man." Very sexist.

    MeToo feminists don't want you to know that there are as many unscrupulous women as unscrupulous men. See what unscrupulous women do:

    "How We Waded Into The Sexual Harassment Quagmire -- Taking the Long, Hard Path Out" http://malemattersusa.wordpres.....-quagmire/

  40. So, now we're back to not believing all women?

    Could Reason prepare a flow chart of when women are deemed credible and when they are not? K thnx.

    1. If they have any actual evidence, they can be believed enough to investigate the issue.
      If not, not.

    2. If you would have asked a woman if any unsolicited touching of her butt was sexual assault two weeks ago, the answer would be yes. The kid is guilty by that definition. That's the problem with people thinking of things in binary.

      A more reasonable answer would be it depends, was it intentional?

      But the message was loud and clear that intentions do not matter. Now we have seen the effect of that. Unfortunately instead of learning an important lesson, they just decided to call her Cornerstore Caroline.

  41. "Serious question. How do we square the idea that women don't make false accusations and should be believed, with the fact that white women have used false accusations as weapons against black men, and black people generally throughout this country's history?"

    You throw that idea in the trash, because the truth trumps politics.

    1. It's an intersectional diagram in four or five dimensions. We include factors such as whether the black person is conservative (thus losing points), whether the woman is a single mother and/or LGBTQ (thus gaining points), and all sorts of evidence-based variables that you rubes wouldn't understand.

  42. not to automatically believe ACCUSERS.


  43. According to the left, this woman should be believed, and the little boy should be jailed for the rest of his life. The video footage should be destroyed as well. The owner of the bodega should also be arrested for assisting a sexual predator.

    At this rate, the PC brigades will deface Emmett Till's statue with the word "rapist" on it. I'm sure it's being discussed at the highest levels of the Dem party. After all, Emmett was accused of sexual misconduct, and we should believe all women,, Isn't that right Obama? Pelosi? Gillibrand? Schumer? Hello?

  44. Who you gonna believe? A woman, or your lying eyes?
    Doesn't anyone else know that videos can be edited?

  45. Well, well, we'll! Another To kill a mockingbird moment . Screw Spartacus!

  46. Sorry Robby, but her story is "credible" and it would be an insult to all "survivors" to disrespect her truth so he must face justice. Just because there is evidence to counter her narrative you should be woke enough to know that truth and facts are tools of the patriarchy and thus illegitimate.

    Or is that just when there's a Republican in the crosshairs of this see something say something witch hunt?

    1. Thanks for using sarcasm to illustrate the insane nature of this new "victimhood" culture.

  47. Insert clever "to kill a mockingbird" joke here.

  48. Honest opinions please:

    Suppose the boy had intentionally touched her while he was passing by. And suppose it was an adult.

    Is that sexual assault to begin with? While it's certainly unwanted contact, what type of punishment would you think is *actually* appropriate given the amount of victimization?

  49. I was standing next to a pregnant woman and her unborn foetus sexually molested me. Either you believe me or you're a sexist, misogynistic, homophobe who supports rape culture.

    1. I forgot "racist".

  50. Since the woman made a mistake, she did NOT make a "false" accusation?"false" implies that she was lying. She made a mistaken or a wrong accusation,and you don't have to be "maximally charitable" to acknowledge that. And since when she felt the backpack against her butt she did NOT know the race of the boy, her accusation had nothing at all to do with the boy being black. The Root's observation is therefore doubly hysterical. The real outrage is that she called the police. That's all. I'm against the attack on the presumption of innocence just as you are, Mr. Soave, but you have been irresponsible because your language is careless and your reasoning reckless.

    1. His language was perfectly acceptable. False does not imply she was lying. You give her too much credit. Her assumption was objectively unreasonable.

  51. Oh, and the headline should read "a nine-year-old black boy." Order of adjectives is important.

  52. One name tells it all:

    Tom Robinson
    (BKA as Atticus Finch's client)

  53. What's missing in all of these discussions is the very real need for imposing serious consequences on those who are demonstrably guilty of making false accusations. In this case, criminal and civil penalties should be levied against the woman. At the very least, something akin to reckless endangerment, along with financial compensation to the victim - here a 9-year old kid and his parents.

  54. Senator Hirono from Hawaii summed it up: the victim is to be believed when you don't like the accused's politics.

  55. But her accusation was credible, right? And she should have been believe up to the point the tape was checked, right? And she should have been believed so hard that no one would bother to check the tape, right?

    That's sort of the take-away I got from your Kavanaugh articles.

  56. this sort of trash is very beneath your intellectual acumen mr. soave.

  57. On the upside, perhaps the cops will be less likely to respond to Cornerstore Caroline's call the next time this kid's mother sees her on the street and kicks the living shit out of her.

  58. But in truth, we can't definitively say that false allegations are as low as 2?8 percent, the statistic often cited by activists.

    They're claiming 8 percent is low?

  59. OMG I could not believe how rude and crude the white woman was, especially in front of the other woman's two young children. What a piece of work.

  60. "How do we square the idea that women don't make false accusations and should be believed."

    Does Mr. Soave believe this to be true. An objective critical analysis is that the statement is patently false. Being a member of a gender or sex does not make one's accusations magically true.

    In my own life, post college I was once accused of sexual assault by a total stranger who I'd never been within 10 feet of. A white woman who invented this phantasy from whole cloth. If her accusation had been automatically 'believed' the 5 police officer's who showed up threatening to arrest me would have placed my black body in jail. Luckily truth prevailed ? in addition to my innocence there were witnesses, unbeknownst to me, who had seen us ? and she was unable to secure my arrest and was proven to be a fraudster.

    Mr. Soave would be advised to use his grownup intellect here. Automatically 'believing' anyone without exploring facts is not, and never was justice.

  61. No need for the government to get involved here. This is nothing a good old fashioned ass whipping wouldn't fix.

  62. WOW. What kind of a person thinks to call the cops on some kid that touches their butt... Telling the kids mom, and if they were being dumb about it, possibly chewing them out/getting angsty... Sure, I can see that. But THE COPS.

    People are friggin' nuts in this country nowadays.

  63. Yeah. She should have turned the other cheek.

  64. See, now, this is the type of surveillance i condone.

  65. wow, this is insane,
    thanks for sharing.

  66. First mistake is being in Brooklyn.

  67. Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy is a cellular therapy which redirects a patient's T cells to specifically target and destroy tumor cells.https://www.creative-biogene.com/

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.