Comments Thread For: Mike Tyson Loses Temper Over **** Case Question

[The Noose]

'I dont see why her going to his room at 3am goes against her.' Really? Ol girl turns up in her p.j.'s, bY HERSELF at 3am!!!!... n all she lookin 4 was a signature 4 her old man rite?? Yeah ok...

Even if she showed up butt naked, doesnt automatically mean he didnt **** her. If a woman says "stop" at any time even during sex, and you dont stop, thats considered ****.

Also look at:

http://www.examiner.com/article/it-s...**d-that-woman


“When I was falsely accused of raping that wretched swine of a woman Desiree Washington, it was the most horrible time of my life.

“It was the most heinous day of my life because going to prison I lost my humanity, I lost my reputation and everything I worked so hard for.

“I’ve done no such thing as take that woman’s chastity at all.


“I have to be honest – I’m a jerk sometimes and I say some things that are crass and coarse – but I would never do nothing to that extent.


“I may have taken advantage of a woman before, but I have never taken advantage of her.


“I don’t know what to say about that situation. It just basically took the life out of me. I never again trusted anybody.”

*-Tyson in a James Toback interview

That and the other quote where he said whilst in prison that "im innocent but ive done worse things than that of which im accused" leads me to believe Tyson either ****d, abused or killed somone before.
I dont know how else to interpret his comments.

[CubanGuyNYC]

I do agree, but your statement greatly suggests that you had already made up your mind that Mike is guilty, while the lengthiest part of your statement suggesting some form of sympathetic fantasy reinforces my earlier response to your statement. do you disagree?

I've made my current stance on this issue quite clear in previous posts.

The "interrogation report" you provide a link to is mildly interesting to read, but it's pseudo-science. The "expert" that wrote his thoughts even goes so far as to suggest Desiree Washington might've been violated by her father. One: What does that have to do with the case in question? Two: What qualifies this individual to make such a statement?

The Michael Marley piece borders on hack-journalism. Marley states he still doesn't believe Tyson committed the ****. That's fine. But he doesn't offer any compelling evidence for his reasoning. He has the temerity to accuse the late Jose Torres of making up Tyson quotes in his book. Pure speculation. Torres knew Mike Tyson. Tyson has never, to the best of my knowledge, complained he was misquoted by Jose. Marley offers the weak logic that Tyson isn't so ****** as to make the statements Torres quoted, yet Tyson is well-known for making such remarks.

Marley mentions a one million dollar settlement Washington received. (Admittedly, this is news to me.) But what is that supposed to prove? Marley seems to imply that a **** victim would not be easily bought. Specious logic. It can just as easily be argued that the settlement is evidence of guilt on Tyson's part.

Finally, Marley relates an exchange with Don King on the matter. King basically says what I and several others have already stated, "Who knows? There were only two people in the room and there were no other witnesses." This, from a man who's no stranger to "the hustle," an ex-con himself and, most importantly, someone who knew Tyson well. I was expecting Marley to claim King thought Tyson was unjustly convicted. If Marley's trying to convince someone Tyson's innocent with that anecdote, he's not doing a very good job.

The circumstances of this particular **** case are grey by nature. It is very difficult to say with any certainty what really happened. But while Tyson's supporters are left reaching for any little circumstantial nuance to discredit Desiree Washington, the fact remains that Tyson had many days in court with sworn jurors who voted unanimously to convict him. You need to have some compelling evidence to fly in the face of that.

[CubanGuyNYC]

Even if she showed up butt naked, doesnt automatically mean he didnt **** her. If a woman says "stop" at any time even during sex, and you dont stop, thats considered ****.



That and the other quote where he said whilst in prison that "im innocent but ive done worse things than that of which im accused" leads me to believe Tyson either ****d, abused or killed somone before.
I dont know how else to interpret his comments.

Really. In one quote he says, "...I would never do nothing to that extent." In the next, he says, "I may have taken advantage of a woman before, but I have never taken advantage of her." Tyson's supporters would perhaps like to use this as evidence of his honesty, but it's contradictory at best and su****ious at worst.

[panicchaser]

Even if she showed up butt naked, doesnt automatically mean he didnt **** her. If a woman says "stop" at any time even during sex, and you dont stop, thats considered ****.




That and the other quote where he said whilst in prison that "im innocent but ive done worse things than that of which im accused" leads me to believe Tyson either ****d, abused or killed somone before.
I dont know how else to interpret his comments.

“I may have taken advantage of a woman before, but I have never taken advantage of her"

^^^ Ok. Well let's keep that text bolded while we consider the fact that as i've stated previously, Mike is obviously not a well-versed man. This bolded statement as well as the statement Mike made saying He has done 'WORSE THINGS' is not sufficient enough to say that my man did the crime and it certainly does not mean he was referring to ****!

What IS distubing is the fact that you said. 'I dont know how else to interpret his comments.' That statement alone is ignorant. It tells me that if evidence were 99% for Mike bein' innocent, it wouldn't take much to sway your vote to that 1% because you're not takin' time to break sh.it down.

There are possibilities in all things. I get that. That does not mean that my man may not have done the crime, but that certainly doesn't mean my man dId commit the crime either. What that dOES mean is that based on all comments and specuations in here with reference to the events that took place, i am not convinced my man dId the crime due to lakk of substantial evidence!

We don't know that ol' girl said stop but in saying that, one can easily misconstrue a soft no as foreplay as opposed to a scream, which if she did, would have woken up the hood and been definite grounds for my man to do the time.

I'm sorry doggie, Mike is a lot of things but my man is not a rapist!

[ROYistheGOAT]

Even if she showed up butt naked, doesnt automatically mean he didnt **** her. If a woman says "stop" at any time even during sex, and you dont stop, thats considered ****.



That and the other quote where he said whilst in prison that "im innocent but ive done worse things than that of which im accused" leads me to believe Tyson either ****d, abused or killed somone before.
I dont know how else to interpret his comments.

Lol it's obvious tyson has killed someone or shot someone before, he was a stick up kid, what do you expect he did when robbing numerous people? Doesn't mean he ****d the woman he was convicted of raping.