Sen. Al Franken Accused Of Sexual Assault By LA Model And Radio Host

[Jacque67 7,328]

Bwahaha.

stone is an idiot savant, and knows how to distract a crowd. People eat up a sex scandal. leaan is just a political pawn. No one else has come forward yet, and Trump has obviously been advised to stay mum after his outburst last night. As Stone would say, r$$$$$$$$g

 

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/360726-stone-appeared-to-know-franken-allegation-was-coming

[Jacque67 7,328]

Knee high black socks.

What a wag Stone is. He knows how to use his useful idiots. Kudos.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/10/meet-the-leader-of-eliot-spitzers-smear-campaign/64361/

[Dashinka 24,500]

48 minutes ago, bcking said:

Even the 6% rate of probably false cases...

 

4 cases all being false would have a likelihood of 0.0012%.

 

The group that had to be thrown out were exactly my point before. It is very hard to professional unless the victim comes forward immediately and there is physical evidence, which is rare. Many of those cases will be true, some will be false.

 

Based in social stigma, cultural climate etc... I would say of the ones that can't be proven either way likely fall closer to the "true" category. But I admit that part is purely 100% speculation.

 

Also - even if we think each accusations has a 50% risk of being false, then the risk of 4 separate accusations being false is 6%, which is quite low. And that is assuming a very high falsehood rate.

Isn’t that the problem with using that statistic?  I am not sure anyone can conclude that many of those cases will be true and only some will be false.  As to your other analysis, you have to factor in political ulterior motives into that analysis which can skew the simple 50/50 output.

[N-o-l-a 7,167]

I was having some serious debate with myself over who I would vote for when he came up for reelection.  He has pissed off a lot of the DFL-ers over his support of Clinton when the state clearly went Sanders.  He didn't even have a valid excuse for it, just Washington politics as usual.  This is the just the cherry on his condescending not-Minnesota appropriate attitude.

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, Bill & Katya said:

Isn’t that the problem with using that statistic?  I am not sure anyone can conclude that many of those cases will be true and only some will be false.  As to your other analysis, you have to factor in political ulterior motives into that analysis which can skew the simple 50/50 output.

I did the calculation even if you assume every single case that wasn't carried to court were all false accusations. Even then the chance of 4 of them all being false is like 6% (my number is in a prior post I don't quite remember what it was). While I agree we can't know the exact numbers, I still think it is extremely conservative (probably too much so) to say that every case that is thrown out is false. Many may be, but unlikely every single one is.

 

I also addressed "political ulterior motives". While yes it is possible that 4 independent women with no relationship between one another could all be "colluding" in a conspiracy together...I think we could hopefully agree that the risk of that is quite low compared to even just the risk that an individual woman is lying independently of the others. 

 

It would be interesting to look at whether the risk of a false accusation goes up based on certain characteristics of the person being accused (wealth, fame etc...). Are accusations more likely to be lies if the person is powerful? You could argue both ways because if the person truly is powerful than the accuser risks retaliation, and the accuser likely also knows that they are less likely to "get away with it" if it's false. It would be an interesting subgroup analysis to do, but it would be very difficult. I don't know the numbers the study you quoted had but it is unlikely they have the power to detect a difference.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

https://mediaequalizer.com/brian-maloney/2017/11/melanie-morgan-after-tv-appearance-al-franken-harassed-me-too

 

Melanie Morgan: After TV appearance, Al Franken harassed me too

[bcking 3,157]

2 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

https://mediaequalizer.com/brian-maloney/2017/11/melanie-morgan-after-tv-appearance-al-franken-harassed-me-too

Melanie Morgan: After TV appearance, Al Franken harassed me too

Jesus NB can you not adjust the font size before you post? (I am demonstrating it to show how easy it is)

 

EDIT: I realize you may be on your phone...if you can't adjust it there, I would suggest finding a way to copy and paste it that doesn't involve making it gigantic. Or waiting until you are on a device where you can post it more appropriately.

Edited November 17, 2017 by bcking

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

If 2 or 4 or 6 cases out of 100 are false, what becomes of the lives of the accused? 

 

I can understand why some women don't want to come forward in cases like this.  But if they refuse to do so by the time the statute of limitations is passed, then they shouldn't be able to try to smear the accused. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

7 minutes ago, bcking said:

Jesus NB can you not adjust the font size before you post? (I am demonstrating it to show how easy it is)

 

EDIT: I realize you may be on your phone...if you can't adjust it there, I would suggest finding a way to copy and paste it that doesn't involve making it gigantic. Or waiting until you are on a device where you can post it more appropriately.

There is a 56% chance that NB is on a phone or mobile device where font zize is not an option. That means there is a 95% chance he will paste it as it copies, a 99.9% chance that if he types a reply, there will be a spelling or grammatical error (s) involved, and a 117% chance that you will not change his style at all.

[Boiler 45,518]

2 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

If 2 or 4 or 6 cases out of 100 are false, what becomes of the lives of the accused? 

 

I can understand why some women don't want to come forward in cases like this.  But if they refuse to do so by the time the statute of limitations is passed, then they shouldn't be able to try to smear the accused. 

Nobody knows the numbers, that would seem a very low figure.

[bcking 3,157]

6 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

There is a 56% chance that NB is on a phone or mobile device where font zize is not an option. That means there is a 95% chance he will paste it as it copies, a 99.9% chance that if he types a reply, there will be a spelling or grammatical error (s) involved, and a 117% chance that you will not change his style at all.

While your statistics are made up, they all seem fairly logical and sound.

 

That doesn't make it less annoying to scroll past gigantic text. Especially for other people on a phone. I get about 3 letters per frame of the phone.

 

I was mostly just giving him a hard time without any ill intentions though.

Edited November 17, 2017 by bcking

[bcking 3,157]

14 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

If 2 or 4 or 6 cases out of 100 are false, what becomes of the lives of the accused? 

 

I can understand why some women don't want to come forward in cases like this.  But if they refuse to do so by the time the statute of limitations is passed, then they shouldn't be able to try to smear the accused. 

I agree. We have to find a threshold that we are okay with.

 

You can worry about the lives of those who are accused and are innocent. But we should ALSO worry about the lives of those who are impacted down the line by those who are accused, are truly guilty but the case is thrown out and they get to "go about their lives". Most of these events, if true, don't end up being "one time" deals. People who sexually harass or assault tend to do it repeatedly. 

 

That is why I've kept focusing on the "multiple allegations" aspect of cases. Even with a fairly high false rate, repeated independent accusations significantly reduces the likelihood that the person is innocent. Remember when there are 4 people accusing someone of rape, only ONE of them has to be true for the person to be a rapist. 

 

Yes 4 people can be conspiring to hurt someone, and we have no numbers to help inform us on how common/rare that is, but I think a logical assumption would be it is at least rarer than an individual lying on their own accord to smear someone (just based on the difficulty involved in coming up with a conspiracy, finding others to agree to it, hiding the relationship between the multiple accusers etc...). Whatever the number is for false accusations, it is pretty reasonable to assume the number of false CONSPIRACY accusations is lower (I only mean conspiracy in the very basic sense of multiple people joining together with ill intent...not necessarily like a big government/media conspiracy etc).

Edited November 17, 2017 by bcking

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

15 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

There is a 56% chance that NB is on a phone or mobile device where font zize is not an option. That means there is a 95% chance he will paste it as it copies, a 99.9% chance that if he types a reply, there will be a spelling or grammatical error (s) involved, and a 117% chance that you will not change his style at all.

and a 120% chance I dont care 

[Dashinka 24,500]

32 minutes ago, bcking said:

I agree. We have to find a threshold that we are okay with.

 

You can worry about the lives of those who are accused and are innocent. But we should ALSO worry about the lives of those who are impacted down the line by those who are accused, are truly guilty but the case is thrown out and they get to "go about their lives". Most of these events, if true, don't end up being "one time" deals. People who sexually harass or assault tend to do it repeatedly. 

 

That is why I've kept focusing on the "multiple allegations" aspect of cases. Even with a fairly high false rate, repeated independent accusations significantly reduces the likelihood that the person is innocent. Remember when there are 4 people accusing someone of rape, only ONE of them has to be true for the person to be a rapist. 

 

Yes 4 people can be conspiring to hurt someone, and we have no numbers to help inform us on how common/rare that is, but I think a logical assumption would be it is at least rarer than an individual lying on their own accord to smear someone (just based on the difficulty involved in coming up with a conspiracy, finding others to agree to it, hiding the relationship between the multiple accusers etc...). Whatever the number is for false accusations, it is pretty reasonable to assume the number of false CONSPIRACY accusations is lower (I only mean conspiracy in the very basic sense of multiple people joining together with ill intent...not necessarily like a big government/media conspiracy etc).

I would agree with you except for the fact that politics are involved.  If this past year hasn't taught us anything, all is possible when it comes to political power brokers, and everyone has a price.

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, Bill & Katya said:

I would agree with you except for the fact that politics are involved.  If this past year hasn't taught us anything, all is possible when it comes to political power brokers, and everyone has a price.

I didn't say that politics aren't involved. 

 

I agree that is definitely a possible confounding factor in estimating the risk of multiple false accusations. It is very well possible that 4 woman all conspired together (possibly with an intermediary including a media outlet) in order to concoct individual accusations.

 

While that is possible, I just think it is less likely than an individual accusation being false. It is clearly far more complex than an individual woman making up her claim independent of others, and generally speaking the more complex something is the less likely it is. Doesn't mean it's impossible though.

 

So instead of maybe a conservative 1% chance of 4 independent accusations being all false, maybe we have a doubling or even tripling of the risk of all four being false based on a relationship/conspiracy involving all 4 of the women. So then we are at 2-3%. Still quite low. Even if the risk was 10 fold higher because of the potential "conspiracy" element, we would still only be at 10%.