This case involves a Title IX investigation - and, on September 28, 2026, the Trump administration formally reinstated the 2020 Title IX regulations originally introduced under his first administration. What a coincidence that this happened while this case is receiving renewed attention. Edit: To all the r*p*st defenders: Her testimony was condensed from roughly 120 pages to just 6, leaving out crucial statements - including that she was terrified, extremely intoxicated, and that she could say with 100% certainty that she had been r*ped. She consented to s*xual activity with TWO men. That DOESN'T mean she consented to the other men or to what happened afterward. The fact that those two men initially had her consent doesn’t absolve them of allowing the others to participate while she was clearly unwilling and incapacitated and said „No" multiple times. And let's not forget the group chat: "free p*ssy" and later "shop still open?" while this was happening, this was an invitation for the other > 50 men to come over and r*pe her too. And even if there are contradictory statements, do you realize that trauma response is a thing and that trauma can affect memory and the way someone processes what happened? People may cope by blaming themselves or even convincing themselves that everything was consensual. As a psychologist, this isn’t difficult for me to understand. I wish more people would educate themselves about trauma responses before judging. If you think her initial contradictions prove she was lying, watch „Unbelievable". It's based on a true case where a r*p* victim initially denied what happened and later disclosed the truth - after investigators uncovered that the same perpetrator had SAd multiple women. - @simotshkaasobased