The Dark Berry Theory of Race and Justice: The Duke Rape Case
March 13, 2009 by guywhite
This was the reason I started writing about race. When I was reading about the Duke rape case, as more and more information came out as to their innocence beyond a reasonable doubt, I would get mad to the point where I literally wanted to fist fight. No issue has ever animated me so much. I would sit there thinking what it would be like to have the whole community trying to lock you up, with your classmates no longer speaking to you, with the whole country using you as the face of all evil: racism and rape.
To this day, it is still the most emotional issue for me. This is a recap of what really happened. With this article, almost a year before this blog was started, “Guy White” was born.
To anyone who thinks this is an old issue, it is not. Tawana Brawley also seemed like an old issue to Reade Seligmann, Dave Evans and Collin Finnerty. We must always remember and repeat the real facts as proof of what Political Correctness can do. This is affirmative action justice in practice. The reality is that courts don’t railroad blacks, they railroad whites, as is proven by the fact that whites are more likely to get arrested than to be identified as criminals by the victims (here, here, here, here, here, and here).
The Duke Rape case must be repeated in every forum to everyone you know. Never forget, never forgive!
“Try to name a single white riot in recent decades?”
Tompkins Square Park police riot – 1988
Washington State University – 1998
Denver Superbowl riot – 1998
Woodstock concert riot – 1999
Michigan Stat University student riot – 1999
WTO conference riot – 1999
Ohio State Riot – 2001
Seattle Mardi Gras riot – 2001
Minnesota Hockey riot – 2003
VEISHEA Iowa State student riot – 2004
San Bernardino punk riot – 2006
And I know there are others. Rioting is a Universal thing, not to mention you can go back as far as you want and see that blacks have rioted much less than you think. They are the most publicized yet aren’t even the largest riots known to date.
The Duke rape case has been one of the most well-documented criminal dramas in recent memory. But one aspect of the hoax has been misrepresented and then shut out by the media – the role of race in the malicious prosecution of Reade Seligmann, Dave Evans and Collin Finnerty. When the case broke, race was central to the media. But as the accuser’s story unraveled, race disappeared from discussion. But it was not just a story of 3 boys being railroaded by a rogue prosecutor. This is a story of how American elites view their country: the media, the academia, the corporate management, the criminal justice system. In the mind of the elites – disconnected from reality in their wealthy suburbs – the United States is a place where evil whites are in a constant struggle to conspire against the blameless, near-holy minorities. Anything that deviates from that “Party Line” is politically incorrect, hateful and immoral.
On March 13, 2006 two prostitutes from a local “escort service” were hired by Duke University students to strip for two hours at their party. The mainstream media has reported them to be “exotic dancers” making it seem as if they were belly dancers. They weren’t. As anyone over the age of 12 knows, an “escort” is a euphemism for a prostitute and an “escort service” is what common folks refer to as a “whore house”. On the way to the party, the soon-to-be accuser, either “paid” or “tipped” the driver by having sex with him, as was evidenced by his DNA found inside of her a few hours later when the rape kit was prepared.
Shortly after 1 am, the two prostitutes, Kim Roberts Pittman and the accuser Crystal Gail Mangum, left the party. Pittman later told the police that upon leaving, Mangum told her that she “will make the white boys pay”. This was not the first time she pulled stunts like that: similar false accusations were leveled against her ex-boyfriend and ex-husband. In 1996, she falsely accused three men of gang rape, but even her own father disputed the claim and charges were never filed.
In addition to prostitution and false claims against others, the accuser had a long record that included arrests for attempted murder, stealing a cab, pick pocketing, drunk driving, and fleeing from police seeking arrest.
Pittman, the other prostitute, had been on probation at the time for stealing $25,000.
While shopping at the Kroger supermarket after they had left the party, the two women, both black, decided to organize a scam against “the white boys”. Pittman called the police claiming Mangum was unconscious, a curious claim since very few women are knocked unconscious due to rape. When the police arrived, Mangum was in Pittman’s car, faking uncosciousness, according to the police. Shortly later, still at Kroger, the accuser told the police that she was raped, claiming she was at the party with three other dancers – Pittman, as well as “Angel” and Tammy”, the last two being fictional characters she invented on the spot.
Mangum claimed 20 men attacked her and several committed rape. Then she claimed it was two. Then three. Then five.
None of these statements were turned over to the defendants’ attorneys by the prosecutor, as is required by law.
Several days later, the strippers emailed a public relations firm to see how they can spin the claim to their further advantage. But that was hardly necessary. Making the “white boys pay” was just what the Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong needed. He was appointed temporarily and was running to get elected in a district with a large African-American population and needed to “prove” himself to them.
Confident the charges were true (because, after all, whites are always supposed to persecute blacks) Nifong claimed that the case would rise or fall on DNA evidence. This was a reasonable statement, especially in the light of the accuser’s claim that she was raped vaginally, orally and anally without a condom, with the boys ejaculating inside of her.
The Meaning Of Privilege
Soon the Duke boys lined up voluntarily to take the DNA test. None of their DNA matched that found inside Mangum. The prostitute had the semen of several men inside, including the driver who took her to the party, but none of them were from any of the boys at the party, any of the boys from Duke or even her boyfriend. When these facts came out months later, some columnists mocked Mangum by joking that the only men in the city who did not have sex with her were students at Duke University. A report consisting of 24 pages prepared by doctors and nurses who examined Mangum the night of the alleged rape, described no “blunt force trauma” or any injuries other than a few scratches.
But by now, DNA and other scientific evidence stopped being important for Nifong. Nor was it important that the accuser could not identify her attackers, except for being absolutely sure that a student named Brad Ross was the main rapist. When it turned out that he was at a different party at North Carolina State University, she described her assailant as “chubby”, weighing “260-270 pounds” – a description that fit no one at the party. After she repeatedly could not pick out of photos of anyone at the party, investigators finally gave up and presented her with a photo lineup consisting only of Duke lacrosse players who attended the party so that she could select the attackers without fear of getting it wrong.
Normally, an accuser would be shown pictures of many people, only a few of whom could possibly be guilty of the alleged crime. That this did not happen in this case shows that the prosecution and police investigators already knew that she was likely lying and could not pick the “right” people without help.
Sgt. Mark Gottlieb was assigned to supervise the investigation. Sgt. Gottlieb was supposed to patrol areas in the vicinity of Duke University and nearby projects. In the previous year, the officer arrested 3 times as many Duke students as tenants from the projects, despite the projects’ reputation for high crime. The students were arrested and forced to spend time in jail for crimes such as playing the music too loud. A young man who weighed only 130 pounds was thrown against a police car by Sgt. Gottlieb for carrying open containers of beer.
On another occassion, a group of 9 cops led by Sgt. Gottlieb stormed into a house with 7 students who were asleep. The kids were arrested for allegedly making excessive noise.
Meanwhile, tenants in the projects got slaps on the wrist for serious crimes. A young man who was illegally carrying a concealed .45-caliber handgun and marijuana did not go to jail and was instead written up by Sgt. Gottlib. The other two officers who patrolled the same area arrested 64 people in the previous 10 months – and only two of them were Duke students.
Meanwhile, the media got wind of Mangum’s rape accusations. In today’s politically correct climate, the media, academia and other institutions have certain templates into which all stories must fall. Big corporations destroy hard-working small businesspeople. Employers abuse employees. Business is the problem and government is the solution. Greedy landlords evict poor tenants for no good reason. Lazy, abusive men take advantage of women. And most of all, whites oppress blacks.
No matter what’s the question, “racism” is always the right answer and if you ever challenge the claim of “racism”, then you are a racist who has no moral standing to discuss this or any other issue. Racism is a trump card that not only defeats any other argument, it precludes any further discussion.
Racism as a charge operates on the theory of “the darker the berry, the sweeter the juice.” Under the “dark berry” theory, you can only level racism charges against people who have lighter skin than yours. As such, blacks can never be racist, and whites can never be victims of racism. In fact, in any black-white dispute, the whites are oppressing the blacks. It is a template that never fails precisely because one becomes a racist as soon as he objects to it, so very few people dare to oppose The Dark Berry Theory in public.
The first time I heard of the Duke rape case, it was described by one of the major TV networks as a “tale of two groups of people who are geographically very close, but couldn’t be farther apart when it comes to their class.” On the one hand, you have a black woman struggling through an inexpensive community college and trying to make her ends meet by working as an exotic dancer (just how ‘exotic’ is it to get naked and spread your legs?). On the other hand, two “privileged white boys” were attending an expensive university and spending their free time playing sports.
Even month later when facts were already largely known, The Washington Post wrote: “She was black, they were white, and race and sex were in the air… [it was] reminiscent of a black woman’s vulnerability to a white man during the days of slavery, reconstruction and Jim Crow.”
Yes, according to the media, it was not a story of a lying whore trying to get rich through a scam that would lend hard-working, intelligent boys in prison for many years. No, it was a story of a struggling black woman defending herself against white boys who are privileged merely because they are smart enough to go to a good college. One of the lies promoted by the media is that admission to college is based on one’s income. Donating millions to a university might get your child an acceptance letter. Yet, those are an exception to the rule. Very few of the alleged “privileged white boys” have the means to donate millions to a school. More than 99.99% of people get in based on their credential – high school grade point average and SAT scores… or a proper skin color to guarantee admission under the affirmative action scheme.
Those who lack the means to pay private school tuition can receive government and private grants, scholarships or government-sponsored loans. Worst case scenario, a bright student can go to a school that is only slightly worse on a full or near-full scholarship. That the two prostitutes were attending a community college, while the accused boys were in an excellent university is a reflection of the intellectual ability of these people. This fact, of course, could not be admitted by the politically-correct media.
The Duke case was perfect to prove the “dark berry” theory. Racist whites – who were presumed to be rich based on their attendance of a good school – attacked poor, disadvantaged black women, forced to sell their bodies just to go to college. Thus, the Duke rape story had everything the liberal media wanted – gender, class, wealth, education and most of all, race!
Whites Abusing Blacks
BlackNews.com reported that “in the wake of the Duke scandal, black women across the country report on how often they are harassed or treated as simply objects available to hit on by white men.” Jesse Jackson Jr. wrote of the “history of white men and black women”, of the white’s “special fantasies” that “arouse fears” among blacks.
Claiming that black women live in fear of white men is not only politically correct, it actually makes one seem sensitive and caring. Yet, if one were you suggest that white women might have reason to fear black men, he would be condemned as a Jim Crow-style racist and driven out of polite society. This may lead people to believe that the claims of white-on-black violence are true. They are not. As published in the “Color of Crime” report by the New Century Foundation, which used government statistics, more than 90% of black victims of crime are victimized by other blacks. The other 10% is committed largely by Hispanics, and less so by whites and Asians.
According to the same report, black men are 110 times more likely to rape white women than white men are to rape black women. Blacks are 135 times more likely to commit a robbery against whites than the opposite. The odds of a black person being robbed or raped by whites are slim to none. As uncommon as white-on-black rape is, the more serious gang rapes by whites against blacks are even less common and nearly unheard of. The previous famous case of white men gang raping a black woman was the Tawana Brawley hoax where another black woman lied to the cheers of the elites. Yet, the media, academia and black activists promote the idea of black women fearful of the crazed white gangs, while attacking as racist anyone who cites government statistics of blacks raping whites 110 times more and robbing whites 135 times more as reason why white women may be afraid of black men in dark alleys or why taxi drivers may be afraid to pick up young black men.
No Justice, No Peace
Another delusional idea promoted by the elites in the media and academia is that any attack on whites, especially women, will provoke an unrestrained, disproportional response, while blacks suffer injustice quietly. Thus, in the wake of the Duke rape hoax, black columnist Leonard Pitts wrote in Miami Herald/Knight Ridder: “imagine the response if the woman were white and reported being raped by three black members of the basketball team. You’d have to call out the National Guard.”
In fact, it is blacks who regularly riot whenever they are unhappy with a verdict. Try to name a single white riot in recent decades? Don’t talk theory. Don’t discuss your ideas on race. Try to name a single white riot in the last four decades because whites were unhappy with a verdict?
O.J. Simpson? Michael Jackson? Kobe Bryant? Lemrick Nelson? In all these cases, blacks were accused of committing a violent crime against a white person. In the case of O.J. and Lemrick Nelson (the admitted murderer in the 1991 anti-Semitic riots in Crown Heights, N.Y.), the evidence was overwhelming and they were found not guilty because in cases involving black-on-white crime, black jurors refuse to listen to evidence and not only vote not guilty, but also intimidate white jurors by calling them “racist”. Furthering the intimidation of the judge and jurors is the cloud of black riots – “no justice, no peace” Al Sharpton likes to chant. Before the O.J. Simpson verdict, for example, Americans heard pundits discuss the potential black rioting if there will be no “justice” as if it is a completely reasonable response.
But was there a white riot after a dismissal or not guilty verdict in any of these trials? Jews peacefully protested the acquittal of Nelson. In all other cases, white people simply accepted the outcomes.
Meanwhile, the New York Daily News reported that this was not merely a case of southern racists from North Carolina attacking blacks, but a metaphor for all of the United States because two of the three boys were from the Northeast. This, the Daily New concluded, proved that racism is not limited to the South, but is widespread throughout the United States and the white race in general.
A local Carolina radio station host, an African-American, declared confidently that the boys must be guilty because they are white, and the “victim” is black. The race of the parties proved everything that needed to be proven! This was how the media and Duke University treated this case.
Nobody cited that Reade Seligmann was the only white student in his African-American studies class. Nobody questioned why racists would want to hire blacks to entertain them, since a racist would probably be disgusted by a sexual encounter with a person belonging to a race he hates. All that was required for a public lynching of the defendants was to knowledge that the accuser was black and the boys were white, just as the politically correct template requires.
“How is a Duke community citizen to respond to such a national embarrassment from under the cloud of a ‘culture of silence’ that seeks to protect white, male, athletic violence,” thundered African-American studies professor Houston Baker in a letter to Duke administration and to the media, demanding “restoration of confidence” by the university. He spoke of “this horrific, racist incident”, of defendants who can “feel safe under the cover of silent whiteness” and “a clear urgency of any felt sense of confidence or safety for the rest of us who live and work at Duke University.”
Duke University promptly suspended the lacrosse team for the rest of the season, punishing the whole team for allegations against 3 boys, allegations made by a prostitute with a long criminal rap sheet and a history of making false claims. The coach of the lacrosse team was fired and no other university would offer him a job, until finally this superstar coach was forced to accept a job for a college with a second-tier lacrosse program.
As later recounted by Reade Seligmann during the Mike Nifong ethics violation hearing, the lacrosse team could barely attend college as they were seen by everyone as rapists and racists. A liberal organization on campus put up their pictures with a “WANTED” sign, as if they were fugitive criminals out on the loose terrorizing the community. The boys and the former lacrosse team coach were stalked, and the family of the coach was forced to flee their home. The coach’s daughter was a high school athlete but had to quit the team as she ran to another city and another school.
On April 7, a full page advertisement appeared in the student newspaper signed by 88 professors, supported by three academic departments and 13 programs, condemning the whole lacrosse team, claiming that the alleged rape was indicative of the way minorities live every day. “These [minority] students are shouting and whispering about what happened to this woman and to themselves.” [emphasis mine] Meanwhile, in the several years prior to this incident, there was not a single document case of a gang rape by whites against a black victim.
DNA, Video Tapes and Other Fiction
But as days turned into months, evidence began to come in. Several more DNA tests all proved that the boys and the prostitute absolutely could not possibly have had sex – much less unprotected sex where they ejaculated into her. Proof was also found that Reade Seligmann, the primary “rapist” according to the accuser, was not even present at the party at the time of the alleged rape. He appeared on video in a bank vestibule, and also used his credit card. The accuser’s phone records showed that she was talking on her cell phone to her father at the time when the rape supposedly happened. The driver who took her to and from the party stated that she was in his vehicle together with him at the time the rape allegedly occurred.
Any of the above facts should’ve been enough to end prosecution. The American justice system does not ask whether it’s possible that the accused is guilty, it asks if there’s any chance, any chance at all, that the defendants are not guilty. If so, the District Attorney must end prosecution. But DA Mike Nifong was running for office in a district with a largely black population and their vote depended on his ability to imprison the “white boys”. And before he even had a chance to act, many blacks made clear their distrust of him because of his white skin. Duke University Professor James Coleman said of Nifong: “I personally have no confidence in him.” Cash Michaels wrote in the black-oriented Wilmington Journal of a “High-Tech Lynching” of the accuser by Nifong who was protecting the white boys by hiding evidence of rape.
Nifong sent the police to the house of Mangum’s driver who asked if he had something new to say about the matter. The man, Moezeldin Elmostafa, refused to change his story and was promptly arrested because 3 years early he was the cab driver who drove someone else to a store where that other person shoplifted. Mr. Elmostafa was eventually found not guilty. Nifong also spoke to Mangum’s fellow stripper that night, who also said that the rape is a hoax. The stripper was pursued to change her mind and was given a sweetheart deal for her own outstanding criminal charges.
Nifong needed to prove his commitment to the black community and he would do anything to achieve “justice”.
“I’m not going to read fiction,” he declared when presented with exculpatory evidence. Fiction such as multiple DNA tests, credit card charges and video tapes…
Nail ‘em to the cross or get nailed yourself
The election was not the only reason Nifong chose to continue prosecuting and persecuting the boys. The black crime in the United States is almost 10 times greater per capita than white crime, and the more violent the crime, the more likely blacks are to commit it. This is confirmed by many studies, including a major government survey of crime victims. Crime victims rarely have reason to lie about the person who attacked them. If you got raped by an Asian, you will not claim he’s black, no matter how racist you may be. You want the criminal who raped you to be thrown in jail. Same for all the people who got robbed, assaulted and otherwise victimized.
You can deny that blacks commit more crime, but that will not “solve” the problem of blacks getting arrested far more often than whites. The problem is that the vast majority of cases involve either a victim or a witness who personally knows the criminal. They may be family, friends, or members of the same or rival gangs. If a victim says, “I’ve been friends with Tyrone Johnson for 12 years and he is the person who stabbed me because I slept with his girlfriend”, the police have no choice but to arrest Tyrone Johnson, and the district attorney has no choice but to prosecute Mr. Johnson – even if he’s black.
But the politically correct race warriors cannot allow us to admit that there may be any differences in crime rates among races. The politically correct elites quickly move out of their neighborhoods when a significant number of blacks move in because of the skyrocketing crime rates, and then sit in their wealthy suburbs criticizing those who were not rich enough to simply abandon their homes when the neighborhood gets destroyed. The wealthy suburbanites send their children to 99%-white schools, while criticizing poor whites who are opposed to their children being bussed into “inner-city” schools where they are regularly assaulted by blacks – the very blacks who are incited against whites by the wealthy suburbanites.
As part of their campaign of hypocrisy, the wealthy come up with reports proving that the police and prosecution are racist because they arrest more blacks than whites.
District attorneys and police officers live in constant fear of being fired due to an accusation of racism for which there is no defense. Merely stating the fact that blacks commit 10 times more crime than whites, that their crimes are more violent and that they have much higher rates of recidivism (persistent offenders are more likely to be imprisoned and to get longer sentences), would prove the prosecutors to be KKK-style racists.
The only way for prosecutors to protect their career is to nail to the cross any white person who may be accused of a felony, whether or not he’s actually guilty.
Several years ago, a white boy who was viciously attacked by a gang of blacks in his school put up a burning cross in the school yard. The punishment was not suspension or even expulsion from school. No. He was sent to jail. Not for a few days, or even a few months. This crime, which offended many but did not physically injury anyone, resulted in a punishment of 10 years in jail. Ten years for a high school boy without any previous criminal record for an act that harmed no one! A quick search on Google for ‘cross burning jail’ reveals many cases of people being sent to long terms in jail.
For Nifong the Duke case would’ve been a bonanza even if he weren’t running for office. It would establish good graces with the black community, avoid a demonstration or even a riot outside his office, and establish a defense against future claims of racism. Once and for all Nifong would prove that he is “the good white guy” defending blacks, not just another racist southerner throwing poor black men behind bars. All he had to do was nail the Duke boys to the cross, evidence of innocence notwithstanding. And so DNA, videos and everything else became fiction.
This was not the first time when all evidence common sense was suspended in an attempt to finally find a case of white gangs attacking innocent black victims. In November 1987, Tawana Brawley, then 15, ran away from home to visit her boyfriend Todd Buxton in prison, and was afraid to return. She was seen by her neighbor Joyce Lloray in a vacant lot climbing into a garbage bag. She then claimed to have been abducted and gang raped by 6 men, some of them police officers. A subsequent examination by a rape technician found that she was not raped and was doing a poor job faking trauma. In fact, unlike Mangum, Brawley probably did not have sex, consensual or forced, with anyone during the previous four days when was allegedly being gang raped.
She appeared well nourished and even brushed her teeth the same day. She no burns on her body, despite her clothing being charred. A shoe she was wearing was cut through, yet she had sustained no injuries to her foot. Nor was there any evidence of exposure to elements, which would be expected in a victim held for several days in the woods at a time when the temperature dropped below freezing at night. The racial epithets written on her were upside-down: exactly how she would write on herself and the opposite of the way someone else would write on her body. Most of all, her schoolmates indicated she had attended a local party during the time of her supposed abduction
Nevertheless, Al Sharpton and C. Vernon Mason organized a media circus where the journalists viciously attacked the whites. Public rallies were held in support of Brawley around the country, and luminaries such as Bill Cosby came out in support.
The case went to the Grand Jury. Unlike a regular jury at trial, the Grand Jury does not decide guilt or innocent. The defendant’s attorney does not get to present his case to the Grand Jury. The only thing the Grand Jury needs to issue an indictment is enough evidence to recommend trial, rather than dismissing the case. It is very rare for the Grand Jury to dismiss the case because they hear all of the prosecutor’s case and very little of anything favorable to the defense – and the defense lawyer isn’t even allowed to speak to the Grand Jury, only to recommend to the jurors to hear statements from some witnesses. But in that case, after hearing 180 witnesses, seeing 250 exhibits and recording more than 6,000 pages of testimony, the Grand Jury dismissed the charged. One of the witnesses who refused to testify to the Grand Jury despite a subpoena was none other than Tawana Brawley herself. In 1998, one of the defendants was awarded $345,000 for a defamation of character law suit he brought against Sharpton, Maddox, and Mason. Tawana Brawley meanwhile moved to Virginia and changed her name to Maryam Muhammad.
All’s well that ends well, of course, except for Harry Crist, who committed suicide after he was named by advisers of Tawana Brawley as one of white attackers. Brawley, Sharpton and the media drove Mr. Crist into the grave, without any punishment. One would think that they would be more careful now, but the Duke rape accusations by a black woman against white boys suited the elite’s template a little too perfectly to be doubted.
Search For The Great White Defendant Continues
The Duke hoax was proven false. After almost a year, Mike Nifong was taken off the case. Attorney General Roy Cooper stepped in and after reviewing the evidence pronounced the boys innocent, citing inconsistencies in Mangum’s accounts of the evening as well as the boys’ unimpeachable alibis. Mike Nifong not only lost his job, but got disbarred for “dishonesty, fraud, deceit and misrepresentation”.
The Great White Defendant once again proved to be innocent. That hardly undermined the claimed by white elites and black supremacists that white men are America’s oppressors. After the case was dismissed, only Fox News showed the prostitute’s picture. CBS and MSNBC revealed her name, but not her picture. Every other network decided to protect her – protection they did not offer to the accused boys when their names and pictures were all over the news. The black woman needs to be protected no matter what, no matter that she has been proven a lying whore.
When it first became clear that the Duke rape case was a hoax, the New York Time lied: “In several important areas, the full files, reviewed by the New York Times, contain evidence stronger than that highlighted by the defense.” In fact, the defense attorneys’ assessment was absolutely accurate and no evidence, weak or strong, suggesting rape or any other criminal activity existed.
But the search for The Great White Defendant continues. Even after the hoax was exposed, Duke English professor Cathy N. Davidson who was among the 88 professors to publicly condemn the students immediately following the accusation, wrote that the letter was “focused on racial and gender attitudes [that are] all too evident” in American society. Yes, even when the reason for our conclusion proves false, we will still state our conclusion as just being “all too evident”. No matter what, the idea of white men as oppressors can never be challenged. Ann Coulter responded: “This would be like defending a letter written during the Dreyfus affair on the grounds that the letter didn’t explicitly accuse Alfred Dreyfus of treason against France, but simply took the occasion of his arrest to decry the treasonable attitudes of the Jews in society at large.”
Prof. Davidson remains “dismayed by the glaring social disparities” and says the incident “underscores the appalling power dynamics of the situation.” Adolph Hitler too was dismayed by the “glaring social disparity” where Jews won every Nobel Prize awarded to an Austrian citizen and were 25% of lawyers in Berlin, despite their much smaller population.
Eventually some deranged group of whites will rape a black woman. Or maybe no white gang will ever rape a black woman, but they will simply not have video tapes, credit card purchases, witnesses and an idiot complainant who claims she was raped without a condom and then submits to a DNA test. And so the poor schmucks who’ll be accused next time will not be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they are innocent. They will be thrown in jail for the rest of their lives and will be used by the media and the academia to prove that white men abuse black women. After all, the elites and black supremacists need to prove the theory that ‘The Darker The Berry, The Sweeter The Juice’, and if their ideology requires human sacrifice, then so be it.