|
http://www.elitestv.com/pub/2004/Sep/EEN413dd22d36e30.html
Rapper 50 CENT has devised the perfect protection from rape allegations when
he takes home lustful groupies - he secretly films everything.
The P.I.M.P. star has a purpose-made room in his mansion which is secretly
monitored by spy cameras from all angles.
50 Cent commissioned the high-tech equipment as a safeguard from potential
gold diggers after American basketball star KOBE BRYANT was put on trial for
rape.
He says, 'No matter what you do, it's on camera. All angles, you are on
tape. I got it set up. There are spy cameras all over the room.
'They cannot say I took it. It proves they gave it to me - they willingly
gave it.'
And anyone attempting to file a false rape allegation against 50 Cent faces
the prospect of being turned into a porn star over night.
He adds, 'I'd put it on the internet unless they dropped the charges.'
|
| |
| |
http://www.elitestv.com/pub/2004/Sep/EEN413dd22d36e30.html
Rapper 50 CENT has devised the perfect protection from rape allegations when
he takes home lustful groupies - he secretly films everything.
The P.I.M.P. star has a purpose-made room in his mansion which is secretly
monitored by spy cameras from all angles.
50 Cent commissioned the high-tech equipment as a safeguard from potential
gold diggers after American basketball star KOBE BRYANT was put on trial for
rape.
He says, 'No matter what you do, it's on camera. All angles, you are on
tape. I got it set up. There are spy cameras all over the room.
'They cannot say I took it. It proves they gave it to me - they willingly
gave it.'
And anyone attempting to file a false rape allegation against 50 Cent faces
the prospect of being turned into a porn star over night.
He adds, 'I'd put it on the internet unless they dropped the charges.'
Hey. Tapes didn't do Rodney King much good. And I think if there were a
tape of OJ killing Nicole and Ron, the verdict would have been the same. 50
CENT better be careful. Maybe he should have three or four eye-witnesses in
the room to testify for him. Better yet, have the gal sign a consent form!
Otter
|
| |
| |
Hey. Tapes didn't do Rodney King much good. And I think if there were a
tape of OJ killing Nicole and Ron, the verdict would have been the same.
50
CENT better be careful. Maybe he should have three or four eye-witnesses
in
the room to testify for him. Better yet, have the gal sign a consent
form!
This would of course be ideal, but I already find myself asking
how many takers he's gonna get for the camera room.
|
| |
| |
This would of course be ideal, but I already find myself asking
how many takers he's gonna get for the camera room.
If the gals are that starstruck, maybe they won't care.
|
| |
| |
"s_knight8" <s_knight8nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<chlpju$1ok@dispatch.concentric.net>...
http://www.elitestv.com/pub/2004/Sep/EEN413dd22d36e30.html
Smart man. Too bad Kobe didn't follow the same advice.
|
| |
| |
If the gals are that starstruck, maybe they won't care.
Certainly there will be gals who won't care, but I would think
he would be severely limiting the field...
|
| |
| |
About 10 years ago - a place kicker at Florida State got into trouble
for just audio taping his sexcapades. He did it for protection.
|
| |
| |
"s_knight8" <s_knight8nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<chlpju$1ok@dispatch.concentric.net>...
http://www.elitestv.com/pub/2004/Sep/EEN413dd22d36e30.html
Rapper 50 CENT has devised the perfect protection from rape allegations when
he takes home lustful groupies - he secretly films everything.
He says, 'No matter what you do, it's on camera. All angles, you are on
tape. I got it set up. There are spy cameras all over the room.
Well, that's *one* way to avoid the problem. A very scumbaggish solution, IMHO.
Kathy C
|
| |
| |
In article <harry-3B6E59.06101308092004@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
Harry Everhart <harry@everhart.com> wrote:
About 10 years ago - a place kicker at Florida State got into trouble
for just audio taping his sexcapades. He did it for protection.
Aren't the laws different for video vs. audio? So as long as you tape
without sound, you might be okay in some places.
Really, short of video evidence, there's not much that can clear your
name of a rape charge, even if it's dismissed. So if you have something
to lose (reputation, money) then you can either choose to be idealistic
and take your chances, or be realistic and protect yourself.
Max
--
|
| |
| |
This is a rudimentary IQ test... right?
http://www.elitestv.com/pub/2004/Sep/EEN413dd22d36e30.html
Rapper 50 CENT has devised the perfect protection from rape allegations
when
he takes home lustful groupies - he secretly films everything.
The P.I.M.P. star has a purpose-made room in his mansion which is secretly
monitored by spy cameras from all angles.
50 Cent commissioned the high-tech equipment as a safeguard from potential
gold diggers after American basketball star KOBE BRYANT was put on trial
for
rape.
He says, 'No matter what you do, it's on camera. All angles, you are on
tape. I got it set up. There are spy cameras all over the room.
'They cannot say I took it. It proves they gave it to me - they willingly
gave it.'
And anyone attempting to file a false rape allegation against 50 Cent
faces
the prospect of being turned into a porn star over night.
He adds, 'I'd put it on the internet unless they dropped the charges.'
|
| |
| |
I don't know the law as it stands in America but in Australia, as it
currently stands, provided a women comes to your place - you are provided to
tape (video or audio) your encounter and use it as you wish. Thus, you are
allowed to film anyone that uses your showers, sleeps in your bed etc etc.
The has changed or is being changed now, effectively requiring one to have a
consent even if it happens at your home.
I expect 50 cent has sought legal advice on this...and he knows he can do
whatever he wants provided it happens in his home.
Didn't that house belong to Tyson? He might get Tyson's jinx.
- Kwaj
http://www.elitestv.com/pub/2004/Sep/EEN413dd22d36e30.html
Rapper 50 CENT has devised the perfect protection from rape allegations
when
he takes home lustful groupies - he secretly films everything.
The P.I.M.P. star has a purpose-made room in his mansion which is secretly
monitored by spy cameras from all angles.
50 Cent commissioned the high-tech equipment as a safeguard from potential
gold diggers after American basketball star KOBE BRYANT was put on trial
for
rape.
He says, 'No matter what you do, it's on camera. All angles, you are on
tape. I got it set up. There are spy cameras all over the room.
'They cannot say I took it. It proves they gave it to me - they willingly
gave it.'
And anyone attempting to file a false rape allegation against 50 Cent
faces
the prospect of being turned into a porn star over night.
He adds, 'I'd put it on the internet unless they dropped the charges.'
|
| |
| |
Hey. Tapes didn't do Rodney King much good. And I think if there were a
tape of OJ killing Nicole and Ron, the verdict would have been the same.
50
CENT better be careful. Maybe he should have three or four eye-witnesses
in
the room to testify for him.
Haha, reminds me of David Chappelle's "R Kelly is innocent".
He only believes it if the tape show R Kelly showing his identity card and
show his grand-ma there to identify him.
|
| |
| |
Max Chuang wrote:
Aren't the laws different for video vs. audio? So as long as you tape
without sound, you might be okay in some places.
There is what's considered a "reasonable expectation of
privacy." For example, I can tape you surreptitiously
in my living room (eg: a nanny-cam), but not in a bedroom,
bathroom or changing room. If someone is there to engage
in sex, then they can also claim a reasonable expectation
of privacy in whatever room they happen to be in.
Of course, one could argue that the repurcussions of
unlawful videotaping pale in comparison to the repurcussions
of a false rape charge. An interesting test case would be
if the sex was surreptitiously videoed, there was a false
rape complaint, the tape was produced to exonorate the
accused, and the complaintant filed a motion in limine to
quash the tape, on the grounds that it was illegally obtained,
thereby preserving the false rape complaint.
Larry Coon
University of California
The NBA Salary Cap FAQ:
http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm
|
| |
| |
In article <413F31F0.146E@assist.org>, Larry Coon <lcnospam@assist.org> wrote:
Of course, one could argue that the repurcussions of
unlawful videotaping pale in comparison to the repurcussions
of a false rape charge. An interesting test case would be
if the sex was surreptitiously videoed, there was a false
rape complaint, the tape was produced to exonorate the
accused, and the complaintant filed a motion in limine to
quash the tape, on the grounds that it was illegally obtained,
thereby preserving the false rape complaint.
Yeah, but even if it wasn't admissible, I can't imagine a DA
wanting the kind of negative publicity of knowingly sending an
innocent person to prison on a technicality. He'd probably
quietly have the case dismissed, and I doubt the accuser would
press their luck once they saw the evidence too.
Max
--
|
| |
| |
Max Chuang wrote:
In article
<harry-3B6E59.06101308092004@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
Harry Everhart <harry@everhart.com> wrote:
Aren't the laws different for video vs. audio? So as long
as you tape without sound, you might be okay in some places.
Yep. surreptitious AUDIO is what violates Federal and many State
laws.
Video could also get you into trouble, if the person had an
expectation of privacy.
Really, short of video evidence, there's not much that can
clear your name of a rape charge,
Without the Audio, how can you tell if she is screaming in ecstasy,
consenting pain, or being raped and screaming "NO!... don't @$#* me
in the ass with your big black cock"
even if it's dismissed.
So if you have something to lose (reputation, money) then
you can either choose to be idealistic and take your
chances, or be realistic and protect yourself.
Or cement your own conviction by recording irrefutable evidence
that you actually DID commit statutory rape with an underage girl,
after giving her alcohol and cocaine.
Max
|
| |
| |
Mtc Lady wrote:
Smart man. Too bad Kobe didn't follow the same advice.
As opposed to just not being a lowlife scumbag criminal adulterer?
|
| |
| |
On 8 Sep 2004 07:22:40 -0700, kathypig1@yahoo.com (kathy) wrote:
"s_knight8" <s_knight8nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<chlpju$1ok@dispatch.concentric.net>...
Well, that's *one* way to avoid the problem. A very scumbaggish solution, IMHO.
Kathy C
It avoids the problem almost entirely once it's been made public --
some secret!
|
| |
| |
Larry Coon wrote:
Max Chuang wrote:
There is what's considered a "reasonable expectation of
privacy." For example, I can tape you surreptitiously
in my living room (eg: a nanny-cam), but not in a bedroom,
bathroom or changing room. If someone is there to engage
in sex, then they can also claim a reasonable expectation
of privacy in whatever room they happen to be in.
Of course, one could argue that the repurcussions of
unlawful videotaping pale in comparison to the repurcussions
of a false rape charge. An interesting test case would be
if the sex was surreptitiously videoed, there was a false
rape complaint, the tape was produced to exonorate the
accused, and the complaintant filed a motion in limine to
quash the tape, on the grounds that it was illegally
obtained, thereby preserving the false rape complaint.
Bull#@($. Evidence of actual innocence isn't quashed, no
matter how it is obtained.
Larry Coon
University of California
|
| |
| |
kathy wrote:
Well, that's *one* way to avoid the problem. A very
scumbaggish solution, IMHO. Kathy C
Well, we are talking about scumbaggish ghetto Negroes who,
married or not, will @$#* anything they can get their dicks into, so
it's no surprise.
|
| |
| |
"Michael Snyder" <msnyder@redhat.com> wrote in message news:<GtA%c.12622$54.178348@typhoon.sonic.net>...
Certainly there will be gals who won't care, but I would think
he would be severely limiting the field...
Nah, a lot of the hos out there just don't CARE!
Riverman
|
| |
| |
Riverman wrote:
Nah, a lot of the hos out there just don't CARE!
Riverman
So why's it necessary to rape someone who does care?
|
| |
| |
About 10 years ago - a place kicker at Florida State got into trouble
for just audio taping his sexcapades. He did it for protection.
Audio tape violates wiretapping laws. Video without sound is legal.
|
| |
| |
Certainly there will be gals who won't care, but I would think
he would be severely limiting the field...
So you start with several million groupies and half of them are turned off
by the idea. So what? -Dave
|
| |
| |
Max Chuang wrote:
There is what's considered a "reasonable expectation of
privacy." For example, I can tape you surreptitiously
in my living room (eg: a nanny-cam), but not in a bedroom,
bathroom or changing room. If someone is there to engage
in sex, then they can also claim a reasonable expectation
of privacy in whatever room they happen to be in.
There is a "reasonable expectation of privacy" only in states where the
state constitution grants an explicit right to privacy - the U.S.
Constitution does not grant a right to privacy (though some, including me,
feel there is an implicit one in the combination of the 1st, 5th, 9th, and
14th amendments).
California, for example, grants a right to privacy. Nevada does not. So in
California you can tape a phone conversatin only of both parties agree. In
Nevada, one party can tape a phone conversation without the other party
knowing it. Which is why the television show Crank Yankers makes its prank
calls from a location in Nevada.
I don't have time to look it up, but given its less-than-progressive laws in
other areas, I would guess the Florida constitution (that is where fifty
cent is doing this, right?) grants no such right.
In any event, this is a guy who is already known to have a hobby videotaping
himself having sex, so does anybody think this is really about false rape
allegations?!?
In fact, I would guess his attorneys advised him to make public the
information about his spy camera room, as a prophylactic against future
civil suits by women who didn't know they were about to star in his home
movies.
Bo Raxo
|
| |
| |
Yep. surreptitious AUDIO is what violates Federal and many State
laws.
Video could also get you into trouble, if the person had an
expectation of privacy.
You rip off your clothes, suck and @$#* someone's brains out, and then claim
that you wanted a little privacy?
LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :) -Dave
|
| |
| |
On 8 Sep 2004 02:22:02 -0700, reallyneedinfo@yahoo.com (Mtc Lady) wrote:
"s_knight8" <s_knight8nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<chlpju$1ok@dispatch.concentric.net>...
Smart man. Too bad Kobe didn't follow the same advice.
The encounter was not in a room that Kobe can install any camera.
|
| |
| |
On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 10:56:07 -0600, "S. O. Damocles" <so@damocl.es>
wrote:
Mtc Lady wrote:
As opposed to just not being a lowlife scumbag criminal adulterer?
You still have the same limited vocabulary.
|
| |
| |
On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 13:53:12 -0600, "S. O. Damocles" <so@damocl.es>
wrote:
kathy wrote:
Well, we are talking about scumbaggish ghetto Negroes who,
married or not, will @$#* anything they can get their dicks into, so
it's no surprise.
It is not a sunrise to see that you are a racist too.
Talk about being a scum bag.
|
| |
| |
Video cameras were portable last time I looked.
For well-known targeted people like him, I'd be
carrying one at all times.
|
| |
| |
Yup, I agree heartily. There is an outfit online that sells wireless video
cameras that look like clock radios. A couple of 'em on coffee tables in
the room won't look super suspicious (I once was in a hotel room that had
three clock radios in it) and it would capture everything on a hidden VCR
that will record only 10 frames per second rather than 30 and therefore give
you 18 hours of tape instead of 6. Rich men take heed.
Video cameras were portable last time I looked.
For well-known targeted people like him, I'd be
carrying one at all times.
|
| |
| |
Well, that's *one* way to avoid the problem. A very scumbaggish solution, IMHO.
Actually, falsely accusing someone of rape is 'very scumbaggish'. I
don't see anything wrong with a potential target of such accusations
protecting himself. If he pulls the tape out the next morning and has
a good laugh over it with his friends, now that's a different story.
Buggzy
"I had 'em so comfortable, they slept on me"
|
| |
| |
Harry Everhart <harry@everhart.com> wrote in message news:<harry-3B6E59.06101308092004@comcast.dca.giganews.com>...
About 10 years ago - a place kicker at Florida State got into trouble
for just audio taping his sexcapades. He did it for protection.
----
It stills beat a rape rap I'll bet.
----->Hunter
|
| |
| |
"Michael Snyder" <msnyder@redhat.com> wrote in message news:<GtA%c.12622$54.178348@typhoon.sonic.net>...
Certainly there will be gals who won't care, but I would think
he would be severely limiting the field...
----
So be it. You can't have everything. You can just not say anything
untill someone tries to bring you up on charges. After that, perhaps a
lot of girls will not go with you but it will still be worth it if it
ment not being falsely accussed as being a rapist. I would think that
would dry up the "booty pool" just as quick if not faster.
----->Hunter
|
| |
| |
Larry Coon <lcnospam@assist.org> wrote in message news:<413F31F0.146E@assist.org>...
Max Chuang wrote:
There is what's considered a "reasonable expectation of
privacy." For example, I can tape you surreptitiously
in my living room (eg: a nanny-cam), but not in a bedroom,
bathroom or changing room. If someone is there to engage
in sex, then they can also claim a reasonable expectation
of privacy in whatever room they happen to be in.
Of course, one could argue that the repurcussions of
unlawful videotaping pale in comparison to the repurcussions
of a false rape charge. An interesting test case would be
if the sex was surreptitiously videoed, there was a false
rape complaint, the tape was produced to exonorate the
accused, and the complaintant filed a motion in limine to
quash the tape, on the grounds that it was illegally obtained,
thereby preserving the false rape complaint.
Larry Coon
University of California
The NBA Salary Cap FAQ:
http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm
----
I would then, if found guilty, publish the tape on the internet and
let come what may. Or you can sue in civil court.
----->Hunter
|
| |
| |
"S. O. Damocles" <so@damocl.es> wrote in message news:<VOG%c.131$IJ.2703@news.uswest.net>...
Mtc Lady wrote:
As opposed to just not being a lowlife scumbag criminal adulterer?
----
You equate adultery with rape? Would you like to see laws on the books
against adultery? So states still have them, but are not enforced,
like the laws that say you have to tie up your horse 5 feet from a
door way and not in front of it.
Sounds like you have had your heart broken once.
----->Hunter
|
| |
| |
Sports Fan <sports@fan.home> wrote in message news:<vjcvj0ddajv545uotq785efir279u3eln9@4ax.com>...
On 8 Sep 2004 02:22:02 -0700, reallyneedinfo@yahoo.com (Mtc Lady) wrote:
The encounter was not in a room that Kobe can install any camera.
-----
Kobe can afford any number of small videocams that he can travel with.
I am sorry. A violation of the privacy and/or wiretap laws in any
state and the penalties thereof beats a rape charge any day in my
book.
---->Hunter
|
| |
| |
"Azeus" <azizerrafay@NOSPAM_DAMNED_hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<chnb0v$doo$1@news.cistron.nl>...
Hey. Tapes didn't do Rodney King much good. And I think if there were a
tape of OJ killing Nicole and Ron, the verdict would have been the same.
50
in
Haha, reminds me of David Chappelle's "R Kelly is innocent".
He only believes it if the tape show R Kelly showing his identity card and
show his grand-ma there to identify him.
----
Yeah, but the R. Kelly situation is different. He is shown with an
underage girl, which is rape, even if it is non violent consensual
sex, so the tape shows his guilt and he was using it hor purent value
and not as a safety net. One has to say plenty of overage girls were
throwing themselves at him. Why choose the minors?
---->Hunter
|
| |
| |
"Larry Coon" <lcnospam@assist.org> schreef in bericht
news:413F31F0.146E@assist.org...
Of course, one could argue that the repurcussions of
unlawful videotaping pale in comparison to the repurcussions
of a false rape charge. An i |
