lumigan tramadol tadalafil

Sadism, Sodomy and Other Forms of Justice

2010-03-19
By

Renada Williams got mad at her boyfriend. So she had him beaten, raped and tortured.

According to Philadelphia police, Williams, who was angry at her 29 year old lover for undetermined reasons, orchestrated a plan of revenge so sadistic and unconscionable that readers must be warned in advance that the details are graphic and disturbing.

Williams lured the man into her bedroom with the promise of sex.  At some point, she excused herself from the room and returned with two assailants, including one juvenile, whom she had recruited to express her considerable displeasure.  She enlisted the men’s help by alleging that the victim had previously raped her.

The two attacked the innocent man in William’s presence, pummeling him with fists, even as he denied having committed rape.

Then the beating worsened.  The assailants dragged the man from the bed and tied him to a sofa where they went after him with a 4 by 4 wood plank, extension cords and a mop.  Police reported that the wood plank inflicted multiple lacerations. The perpetrators doused the open wounds in Clorox bleach and ammonia.

Next, they sodomized him repeatedly with a mop handle, which they lubricated with Pine-Sol cleaner.

The attack lasted 24 hours, and would likely have continued to a deadly end had Williams’s roommate not arrived and managed to free the victim, despite attempts by the trio to prevent her from dialing 9-1-1 and notifying authorities.

The reaction from police to the case was predictable. “This type of crime shocks your consciousness,” said Detective Captain Jack McGinnis.

There was no indication if he was referring to the brutality of the two men, or the vile scheming of the woman involved.  Perhaps it was both.

With due respect to the police, it hardly matters.

Because, our repugnance aside, we might at some point need to wonder what difference there is between Renada Williams and Crystal Gail Mangum, the infamous liar and false accuser of the Duke Rape case, other than they each sought a different form of power to enforce their will.

And I say we “might” wonder, because it seems apparent that we should actually be asking a question that is really more to the point.

What is the difference between the assailants in this case and the criminal justice system itself?

As it applies to the crime of rape, the answer is as simple as it is disturbing; negligible.

With all the indignation and repulsion we feel for the almost unspeakable things happened to this man, we learn absolutely nothing from it if we don’t recognize that what happened here is not so different than what we sanction and justify routinely in the name of justice.

When it comes to rape, even the substantial number of them that are of the concocted variety, we pay officials to react with the same destructive mindlessness as those two disgusting automatons acting on behalf of Williams.  Indeed, we cheer them on as surely as she must have done while they violated and abused an innocent man.

So, perhaps we should not be so outraged when private citizens emulate the actions of people that we vote for and admiringly call the guardians of the public peace. Thugs with mop handles are thugs with mop handles, even if we dress them in black robes, or call them Mr. Prosecutor.

You see, those two culprits weren’t torturing a human being. No, no, no. They were delivering some by-god-law-and-order on behalf of us decent folk. The enforcers acting at William’s behest were doing so with no less regard for presumed innocence than Mike Nifong or a slew of other state functionaries strewn across the Kafkaesque landscape of the American legal system.

It’s the stuff of Mel Gibson movies; Charles Bronson in slightly older school terms; not justice, but naked vengeance.  And as a culture, we eat it up like beggars at a free buffet.

It is a biologically driven bloodlust to protect women by playing hero for them. Any of them.  At times we play that role so well that we look at a lying, skanky, and drug addled hooker- and imagine that she is actually a damsel in distress. Then we can go after a bunch of college kids, who have never committed a crime in their lives, and do everything we can to destroy them.

We created rape shield laws so that even when the accuser is a lying, skanky, and drug addled hooker, it can’t be taken into account by jurors in determining her credibility.  School administrations, like the one at Duke University, will host rallies, light torches and instigate other fomentations. Media outlets across the land saturate us with the story and run features on the plight of women to drive in some emotional punch.

And unless the accused is able to prove quadriplegia or clinical death at the time of the alleged attack (and often when he can), most of us will sit and wait for the orgasmic moment that the hammer comes down on his head.

When those falsely accused are convicted, as many of them have been, they are sent to prisons where they are regarded as the lowest of the low, and are often subjected to the very tortures for which they were wrongfully convicted- over a period of years.

Yet we are outraged about this being done summarily, and on the street, rather than through the system?

Please.

The culprits in this case are nothing more than vigilantes that cut into the action of a system that routinely does the same from behind a thin facade of legal decorum that is every bit as manufactured as Williams’ phony story.

Rape vigilantism and rape justice have simply become two different railroads, the latter only distinguished from the former by the pomp of placebo credibility, and the fact that vigilantes actually believe they are going after guilty people.

One might imagine that the scores of innocent men now imprisoned are not so comforted by all of this. That comfort is left to be enjoyed by the masses who patronize, buckets of popcorn in hand, the criminal justice systems theatre of lies.

And in the end, the poor unfortunate in this case may well have been lucky.  His accuser could have sought, and would have received, help from the state, had she chosen them to act out her rage rather than a couple of hoodlums.  The way things stand now, he has escaped with his life and his freedom, and he will get one benefit that seldom falls on those falsely accused.

There will be some who will believe his innocence and see him for the victim he actually is.

Paul Elam is the Editor-in-Chief or Men’s News Daily and the publisher of A Voice for Men.

1,581 views
Didn't make Oprah's Book Club. And Ronnie doesn't care. Man up. Buy the book now on Amazon.com. Or listen to Ronnie tell a story at escaping-from-reality.com.


  • http://www.HelpForDaddy.org Simon Date

    Good article, Paul. Thank for highlighting the areas that you do giving us a stark reminder of why we do what we do.

    interestingly, but not unrelated, the Dept. of Justice in Oregon just released this article.

    http://www.doj.state.or.us/releases/2010/rel030810.shtml

    You’ll notice that the second to last paragraph points out that this very encouraging position is going to be funded by a grant from the Violence Against Women Act. Now I ask you how fair that would appear? Is it like a bar sponsoring a ‘Don’t Drink & Drive’ campaign.

    ~Simon

  • uratrick

    Thanks Paul good stuff.

  • http://avoiceformen.com/ Paul Elam

    @ Irlandes

    Indeed, men are often men’s worst enemies, and now you are one of them.

    Counseling is a matter of communication skills and the ability to form a helpful alliance with another human being. Don’t mistake your preaching at men for anything similar to that.

    Apparently you just weren’t very good at what you did, or it would not have ended up with everyone you talked to screaming at you. Or did it ever cross your mind that the problem was you?

    And so I think we can breathe a sigh of relief that whatever “services” you were providing are a matter of history.

    Interesting, I made working with men the focus of my professional attention for a good many years. I had very different results than you did. That probably had something to do with developing the ability to form a relationship with my clients that had a foundation of mutual respect.

    They might have screamed “to” me about their problems, but almost never “at” me.

    But again, you are right, men are often the problem. From where I sit, it is clear enough that you are one of them.

    If this sounds personal, it is. I spent too long watching feminists turn counseling into a misandric joke. It doesn’t look any better when some sadistic and infantile wannabe turns his own failure to offer good services into an excuse to enjoy human suffering.

    It is just plain sick, and nothing else.

  • irlandes

    I was an MRA/FRA activist in the 80s and early 90′s. Most of those who attacked me were men, often divorced men. In the case of men at work who came to me and told me what a pathetic, woman-hating cretin I was, eventually 100% of them called me up screaming with agony and despair. Guess who just got his papers????

    I finally stopped my counseling, when it got so bad, when one of these dummies would call me, I enjoyed their misery. It was hard not to think they deserved it for stupidity. Men are cruel to men, and any activist will tell you men are his worst enemies.

  • http://avoiceformen.com/ Paul Elam

    @ Contraeverything,

    By all means, use the article as you see fit, with attribution.

    I will have to counter your point, though. It was feminists who lobbied for those laws, but they didn’t pass them. They were passed by people no more feminist than the two dupes who made the attack in this case.

    I am all for dismantling feminist ideology, corrupt and porous as it is. But it is also very important that we point out their collaborators who do their dirty work. On the whole, that is “us.”

  • http://www.thoughts.com/contraeverything/blog contraeverything

    An excellent article, right down to the most powerful word in the text: negligible.

    I would disagree with only one thing: “we” didn’t pass rape shield laws, “they” (femtards) did. In every other area of law, character evidence is admissible as a potential evidence of truthfulness – only in the femtard false allegation industry finds any problem with this.

    I have wholly stolen your article and republished it on my website, properly attributed and linked back. You can check everything at “http://objectifygirls.blogspot.com” if you’d like and let me know if you have any problem with that. You will find that, word for word, it is as you posted it. Thanks for a great one.

  • Pingback: what is the term for babybommers that are taking care of thier parents and children? | Living Frugal

  • Watertiger

    We all have that knee-jerk reaction to justice. If we heard a dog just malled a child, we’d all load up our guns and go shoot the evil, savage dog for biting the child.

    The reason being a vigilante is against the law is this: What if the child threw rocks, kicked, poked, pulled ears and tail for over an hour before the incident? Still think the dog deserves instant death? (I think the mutt deserves a medal for restraint)

    As tempting as it is to play the vigilante, it is wrong, unfair & horribly dangerous. This is why we have laws that everyone is innocent till proven guilty.

    Even if this poor, poor man had been guilty, he still deserved a trial to prove it.

    The girlfriend should be charged to the fullest extent of the law for conspiracy, rape, kidnapping and whatever else the attorneys can think up!

  • Joe P.

    For a similarly sad story, google a U.S. marine named Daniel Smith/rape/”Nicole”/Philippines.

    A Manila bargirl who accused the 22yo on shore leave of raping her in the back of a goverment van while the driver and three buddies watched. Leftist/feminist groups had a Field Day. The driver, who initially swore that SHE was the aggressor, was threatened, “disappeared,” and never testified. Always the great copycats, Philippine law shielded her real name and job. He was actually convicted and sentenced to 40 years in prison. Under a bi-lateral agreement he was allowed to remain in U.S. custody throughout the appeals process.

    “Nicole” eventually recanted as more and more people who knew her came forward, including another marine whom she also accused years earlier. But young Daniel Smith spent over three years under house arrest in the embassy, terrorized by every knock on the door might be the one that takes him away to a stinking Philippine prison.

    End of the story? She is now in California, married to another marine. Daniel was given a bad conduct discharge for conduct unbecoming (sex in a gov’t vehicle).

  • http://remasculation.blogspot.com/ Snark

    Dabir Dalton the neo-Nazi feminist,

    You must surely accept then, that any woman who is subject to any abuse whatsoever, is getting the comeuppance she richly deserves.

    After all, if men are ‘destroyed’ by their spouses, then clearly, women have a dark side as well.

    So, applying the same standards, any woman who is raped, abused, etc., is getting exactly what she deserves. Indeed, you must accept this about yourself – that you got what you so richly deserved.

    By your standards – not by mine.

    But then, I’m not a neo-Nazi (radical feminist).

    The fact that you would look at a story like this, and say that the victim ‘deserved’ it, shows me that you are a sick and defective individual. Sympathy and antipathy are found in almost everyone, but those so entirely lacking in the former as yourself are sociopaths. There’s no two ways about it: you are not normal, and you are not well. You are a very sick person.

    Seeing men and women as ‘competitors’ in the practice of abuse is a clear sign to me that you are likely an abuser, or at the very least an apologist. Of all the people here, you are the only one who is apparently okay with abuse – even supporting it when men are the victims.

    As I say, you are unwell. Typical for neo-Nazis, I suppose. As angered as I may feel about some incidents of abuse, I could never be so overcome with hate, such that it defines my very worldview, and my very being, as is the case for you.

    I do pity you, but more than that, I find you repulsive.

  • http://avoiceformen.com/ Paul Elam

    At the risk of paying armchair analyst, let me tell you what that reads like to me.

    ‘I got hurt by some. I blame them all. And now I take some pleasure in seeing them pay, however indirectly, for what they did to me.’

    All I can say is “Who hasn’t been hurt by other people?”

    I am a big guy. I was 6′ 4″ by the time I entered high school. All through my younger years there were plenty of young men who thought that taking me down in a fight would prove their manhood. As a result I had to learn to be aggressive just to survive it. I hated every minute of it and would not relive it for anything.

    In retrospect, as traumatic as it was, if you added up every bully I encountered with a chip on his shoulder and something to prove, it would not make even 1% of the total number of men I have known.

    But the lesson that I took from all this was not that I would enjoy seeing a bully get his comeuppance, but that those were just lost men who probably got where they were at the hands of another bully, whether male or female.

    I think we all owe a sort of karmic debt for our transgressions in life, but I don’t think anyone deserves injustice or abuse.

  • Dabir Dalton

    Actually Paul I used to care very deeply about the issues you write about but having been on the receiving end of the average males dark side. It seems to me that the men (or should I say fellow competitors) who are destroyed by their spouse are only getting what they so richly deserve.

  • http://avoiceformen.com/ Paul Elam

    @ Dabir Dalton

    YOU are not supposed to care at all. Since you believe the “average” male is just a bully, then expecting you to care about anything in the pages of this website would be unrealistic.

    You are one of the many reasons this website is here. And why some of us do what we can to pass a bit of redeeming truth around.

  • http://www.dapoetslament.wordpress.com Dabir Dalton

    And I’m supposed to care because?

    You see Paul I work with men all day long and am well aware of the constant bullying(which seems to be an inherent character trait of the average male) and verbal harassment males shower upon each other all day long. Whether true or not the guy who wrote the letter didn’t care about what happened to his fellow brothers until what goes around and came around and bit him on the fanny.

    So Again I ask and I’m supposed to care because?

  • Bombay

    Another great article!!!!

  • http://avoiceformen.com/ Paul Elam

    @ Danny

    I understand your concern, so I factor weigh the priorities.

    First, we have the concern that people may dismiss someone based on a prejudice that results in ideas like “That dirty whore must be lying.”

    Compared to that we have the concern that an innocent man may be falsely imprisoned in an abusive environment where most of his life will be taken from him.

    The scale tips pretty easy for me.

  • http://dannyscorneroftheuniverse.blogspot.com Danny

    Part of the problem here is that this type of problem is the inevitable outcome when men are convicted on accusation rather than evidence.

    Were rape convictions held to the same standard as other allegations the problem would be improved significantly. But as it is, a womans pointing finger can land you in prison. I think it might be in the interest of the accused to know and be able to demonstrate that the finger extended from the hand of a whore, if that was the case.
    I’m with you on that I’m just expressing my fear that people may interpret this as “The dirty whore is lying!”. And I put that in quotes to mean that that people who claim innocence when accused of rape are often treated as if they did do it and are trying to dirty her name to make her look so bad that people will just side with him.

    A reasonable person like many of the ones here know the difference but there are those who either don’t know or refuse to acknowledge the difference.

    I don’t think I mistook your words but I will say my response wasn’t worded properly.

  • jjtaup

    @Danny,

    Let’s play a game. Pretend you have a three year old son. You have two sisters. One is a meth addict who does tricks for extra cash after her day job. The other is a church-going prude who, with her husband, hosts bible studies Thursday nights.

    Tonight you’re going to a city council meeting to discuss a new law making it illegal to smoke and talk on the phone at the same time. You need a babysitter. Both sisters are available.

    Who do you pick? Quick, you have 5 seconds.

    That’s all we’re sayin.

  • http://avoiceformen.com/ Paul Elam

    @ Danny

    Part of the problem here is that this type of problem is the inevitable outcome when men are convicted on accusation rather than evidence.

    Were rape convictions held to the same standard as other allegations the problem would be improved significantly. But as it is, a womans pointing finger can land you in prison. I think it might be in the interest of the accused to know and be able to demonstrate that the finger extended from the hand of a whore, if that was the case.

  • http://dannyscorneroftheuniverse.blogspot.com Danny

    Which does imply to me that you think the being a drug addict and a hooker should not be taken into account when considering testimony that could well be the only evidence that sends someone to prison.
    Rest assured I don’t. I just think it should not be a matter of, “She’s a hooker so she must be lying.” or “She’s a church going mother so she can’t be lying.”

  • http://avoiceformen.com/ Paul Elam

    @ Danny

    Part of the clarification may be that you mistook my words. I never made the claim that women with more respectable outward appearances didn’t make false accusations, but just demonstrated that even the obviously worst of women could do so without resistance.

    I used a fair description of Crystal Gail Mangum to make the point.

    You, on the other hand said “Thing is a lot of the women that use the justice system as their tool of revenge aren’t like that but even if so it would obviously have no bearing on her crediblity.”

    Which does imply to me that you think the being a drug addict and a hooker should not be taken into account when considering testimony that could well be the only evidence that sends someone to prison.

    If that is the case, the critique of your post was justified, IMO.

  • http://dannyscorneroftheuniverse.blogspot.com Danny

    Virtue:
    So you don’t feel that men accused of rape have the right to face their accusers in court?
    I most certainly do.

    You don’t feel they have the right to question their accusers in court?
    Yes I do feel they have that right just like with any other crime.

    You don’t feel they have a right to an adequate defense?
    They most certainly do.

    When its a case of he said she said the it comes down to the credibility of each person.

    So when a drug addled hooker falsely accuses me of rape your damn straight I want the jury to know what kind of person she is.
    Hold up. I think we’re closer to each other on this that we think. When I made that first comment I was speaking about how it’s not right to make false accusers out to be nothing but drug addicted hookers. I’m not saying the drug addicted hookers do make false accusations I’m saying that those are not the only ones that would so such a thing. Being a drug addicted hooker doesn’t make one any more likely to do this than being a suburbanite housewife that’s about to go through an ugly divorce. Its not the occupation or socioeconomic class that leads them to do such things. Its the fact that they want to destroy someone’s life and they know that a false rape accusation is a surefire way to not only get the sympathy/empathy others but if you play your cards right you can get someone to carry out the revenge for you (be they angry friends, random people, or a court of law).

  • SingleDad

    And the children are watching and learning. I have noticed lately that the children have learned that they too can abuse the justice system against thier parents or anybody else that they feel deserves to be punished, and are rewarded for it.

  • Virtue

    Danny.

    So you don’t feel that men accused of rape have the right to face their accusers in court? You don’t feel they have the right to question their accusers in court? You don’t feel they have a right to an adequate defense?

    Because that’s what rape shield laws prevent.

    When its a case of he said she said the it comes down to the credibility of each person.

    So when a drug addled hooker falsely accuses me of rape your damn straight I want the jury to know what kind of person she is.

  • http://dannyscorneroftheuniverse.blogspot.com Danny

    I’m feeling your fire all except for this:
    At times we play that role so well that we look at a lying, skanky, and drug addled hooker- and imagine that she is actually a damsel in distress.
    Thing is a lot of the women that use the justice system as their tool of revenge aren’t like that but even if so it would obviously have no bearing on her crediblity.

    But like I say I feel your fire on about how people will turn a blind eye to it happening in the court system but will act all outraged when it happens on the street. If Magnum had gotten away with her false accusations and those three guys had gone to prison and suffered similar to what has happened here people would either act like it didn’t happen or say they deserved it.







Right.

Man up.

Buy the book now on Amazon.com. Or listen to Ronnie tell a story at escaping-from-reality.com.

Search