Was a rape kit performed on the woman? I can't seem to find any information on that.

Thanks to FasterDisaster for what appears to me to be a sound, agreeable post.

One more dialectical observation, although I think I'm done trying to participate: People tend to not only attribute strawmen to their opponents, but they tend to ignore the opponents with the best arguments, and focus instead on the easy targets. This is not productive. It would be better to ignore the stupidest posts -- or to treat them very quickly -- while instead engaging with the most sophisticated arguments among those one disagrees with. Otherwise, the dialectic stays at the level of the weakest.

Not once have I accused her of lying. That's your agenda and how you are choosing to interpret what I am saying. I've said three or four times that I cannot say who is telling the truth. Not sure how that's me accusing her of lying but so be it. Whatever the truth is, I hope it comes out. That might be justice. It seems to me you're the one with the biased mind as you've decided they're guilty.

To my mind it is a mistake to condemn someone for such a vile crime when we have such little evidence to go. Anyway, last response to you as it's a complete waste of time.

If there is one unsung modern failing of the justice system, it's rape kits. Tens-of-thousands of rape kits are literally just sitting in evidence rooms. Some of these are starting to be processed, but I have no idea in what order or what priority which ones get. It's unfortunate.

Jesus, you just don't stop, huh? I know I will regret this, but since you seem to want to make this extremely personal for whatever reason...

I stated my opinion that the "wait and see" rhetoric perpetuates a toxic part of our culture. People disagreed with me and I kept on replying to them. You and others seem hung up on the "if you think rape victims are lying, then you're garbage" comment - you can keep on crying about that if you want, but I'm going to stand by it. If you don't think rape victims lie, it doesn't apply to you. But a lot of other people here come close enough with the "well, let's just wait and see" rhetoric. Most of them never said "the band most likely did it"; they just prided themselves on not "taking a side" as if it were truly some 50/50 chance and they got a badge for being Noble and Enlightened. I disagreed with that. If you want me to water what I'm saying down, well, sorry I guess.

Civil discourse doesn't mean shit if the society still excuses rapists and is inherently skeptical of victims. It means nothing if the ideas being expressed so civilly and politely are terrible and toxic. I think some people here were verging on skepticism of the victim and disagreed, so I spoke about it. Nowhere did I single anyone out and attack their character or assume a thing about them, put rape culture "on their shoulders" or any such thing. If you're taking my posts here and assuming they're personal attacks, then it seems you are the one who can't hold a discussion.

You continually accuse me of being bad at holding these conversations, but the way you do this is no good either - it's all-or-nothing with you in a different way. So because nobody outright said "the victim is CLEARLY lying, fuck that bitch," I should just shut up about the larger issue of rape culture? Fuck that. If you disagree with my points, fine, go ahead, but I am unsure what kind of conversation you're after if you object to anything beyond 'well, it's too early to tell if this case is legit even though rape and sexual assault are normal and happen every day to women everywhere, but still, let's just wait and see.'

"Uninformed judgments," "rash judgments" - maybe if you ignore literally everything that makes up the context of rape and sexual assault in Western society. I don't see how those comments and garish simplifications are any different from me saying what I've said here. But you're the one on the high horse. Sure.

You also are totally wrong about what I said in the Vegas or Nazi threads, but it's pointless to bring that up as you've already made up your mind and so have I.

edit: About this in particular...



I literally never pointed fingers and said anyone was "THE reason" that victims don't come forward, etc. I said ideas being expressed in this thread were part of a larger system and culture that prevents that. This is why it is pointless to discuss this shit with you. You don't fucking understand anything.

And also no, there are many more layers and levels to it than just the worst kind of victim blaming. There are subtexts and subtleties in the way we react to these stories that, while it doesn't make us bad people, can sometimes be wrongheaded. I'm sure you will just take this and think I'm screaming insults at every person who disagrees with me and threatening to kill their mothers or something, so whatever I guess, I am screaming into a void.

What this stuff really comes down to, I think, is this. Some people want to exercise the privilege of insulated reasoning: To be able to treat a case of alleged rape just like a case of some alleged triviality -- come in open-minded, consider the evidence, proportion one's degree of belief to the available evidence. Others point out that reasoning in this manner may have ethical ramifications in cases of alleged rape. For example, it may cultivate logical coldness, or outright skepticism. Some people say, "I still have the right to reason maximally logically, what people do with my reasoning be damned". Others say, "If your reasoning is made public and used for insidious ends, you should be more careful -- you're accountable for that".

Of course, along the way, there are many people motivated by subconscious misogyny, and others motivated by subconscious self-righteousness. Those sorts of subconscious biases should universally be treated as distorting errors. But we should meanwhile be able to reasonably disagree about the extent to which we can -- here, publicly but relatively privately (not many people read this) -- treat this case like one about my friend telling me Star Wars is cool (hearing his testimony, comparing it with other instances of his testimony, considering potential biases, and ultimately suspending judgment until I finally watch Star Wars).

Well, sure. That seemed like a lot of words to say "we all have a lot of different opinions" to me, but sure. If you want to look at the case like your friend telling you to watch Star Wars that is fine by me, however I disagree as I've already said.

I think the issue a lot of people are having is there doesn't seem to be a lot of nuance when we are talking about people being accused of rape and those that accuse them. There really doesn't seem to be much of a fundamental disagreement between most of the people posting in this thread. We all know sexual assault is all too common and we all know that people sometimes lie about it, even if it is infrequently. I think we can all agree that this looks very bad for the members of Decapitated, and it is very likely that the victim is telling the truth. I absolutely think it is wrong to outright declare her as a liar.

But I also think it is wrong to outright declare the members of Decapitated as rapists. We can spend however long this whole thing takes to play out without casting any judgement, and if it turns out they did it, we will have the rest of our lives to call them rapists. I just don't see how it is beneficial to anyone to have your mind already made up at this point. I think the Duke lacrosse movie did a wonderful job of articulating this exact point. And they didn't have to victim blame or promote rape culture to do it.

Like I said, I think the members of Decapitated likely did commit the crime, but I don't think not wanting to label them as rapists is the same as calling the victim a liar. I don't want to do either of those things until each side has had the opportunity to present all of the evidence in court.

How some some people overreact with the typical attitude "with me or agains me" really desperates me. We are not living in the Middle Ages anymore, justice needs to do what justice usually does, find the truth and judge what has happened. And this can be done simultaneously with the legal, social and human protection of the victim. If the Decapitated member are rapists they will be judge like that, and I hope they are severely judged. At the same time the victim should be helped in every single aspect.

BUT seriously guys, stop judging people with no proof. Because no one here has more info than the published by some sites.

If everyone had articulated that as well as you, maybe it would be easier to have a reasonable discussion. I wouldn't say there's much doubt in my mind that they're rapists really. And I also just don't think it matters if I do or don't call them that. It isn't like I have much power.

And yeah there really isn't much nuance here because the discussion is mostly in very broad terms. It's too early to discuss details of the case because there aren't that many yet. So we're just left with generalities.

I have cleaned up the derail from PFF's misogynistic into a separate, locked thread for reference's sake. I understand it is tempting to respond to such amazingly stupid and hateful drivel, but I'd appreciate some restraint next time, or I'd just lock the thread for good and not bother with the cleanup. (And yes, PFF, a long-time conspiracy theorist, homophobic, racist, misogynistic nutcase from the M-R days, has been perm'ed, shocking, I know.)

Now, back to the thread...


The people who got perm-banned last time (and this time) were misogynistic, victim-blaming shitstains, and calmly explaining that to them isn't a good use of anyone's time. But, I'm sure you already knew that, you just couldn't resist the opportunity to whine.

Hell, PFF is a shining example. That guy has been spouting the same nutty drivel since 2002 or so (possibly earlier) back on the metal-rules forum days, and back then people would still often humour him and try to argue with him. If anything, he got worse over time.

Stupid assholes ain't worth it.


I swear, that has been your insipid take in every. single. story involving potentially bad people/scandals in metal since fucking 2002. Shut the fuck up already.


Watched it over a decade a go. Doesn't apply to people who aren't deliberating in a trial jury. Get out of there with this BS.




Thank you for your perspective. People posting their ignorant shite about BSDM or kinks or whatever in this thread have seriously no idea what they're talking about. Or they're the typical concern trolling dipshits like Conan Troutman I guess.


"Hey guys I'm not saying she's lying but maybe <insert incredibly far-fetched and borderline implausible alternative scenario for the 4th time>? Who knows! I'm just saying!"

Fuck. Off.


Swing and... welp, knocked it out of the park. Thank you for this and your other posts.

The prevalence of rape culture, misogyny and victim-shaming is a major and long-standing problem in society and has to be addressed, and naturally it's the overarching context in which any such case is embedded. At the same time, if we want to discuss this actual case rather than the wider societal problem, I think it's more productive to look at the specific information (such as it is) regarding a specific incident, involving specific persons, that occurred at a particular time in a particular place.

Following all the reports so far, it seems that what appeared to be a straightforward account of a disgusting and clear-cut crime is being gradually undermined by each new detail that emerges. Obviously the information has been coming very slowly, and in very small portions, so the best that outside observers can do is guesswork. But rather than venturing theories about what actually happened, let's consider those things seem to contradict the accusers' account.

- The women reported that after the band invited them for some friendly socializing in the bus, they started getting predatory and subsequently raped one of them, while the other escaped after kicking the vocalist in the balls. The woman who was raped was then carried outside and left somewhere.
- According to witnesses at the venue, events began with the women aggressively approaching the vocalist ('groping him'), to the point where one man almost called security. After spending time in the bus, the women then allegedly left it together and had a cigarette outside before walking away, looking 'angry'. The band's attorney claims there are witnesses stating that the women both entered and left the bus on good terms.
- The woman who said she had escaped was later pulled over by a police officer on suspicion of DUI. Eventually, after it looked like she would be getting charged, she told the officer that her friend had been raped by five men.
- The first officer to deal with the women said he did 'not have probable cause that a rape occurred.'
- According to the band's attorney, the main accuser has a history of false claims dating back to 2014.
- The band members weren't extradited until the expiry of the full 30-day period, after which they couldn't have been held any longer.

None of these elements prove anything on their own, but the overall picture they paint is certainly a more equivocal one than the original report indicated.

The topic of false rape allegations is often raised by misogynists as a widespread threat to malekind, while it's a demonstrably marginal phenomenon - only somewhere between 2% and 10% claims are considered false. I stumbled on an interesting and well-researched article examining why, in those few cases, such allegations are made: https://qz.com/980766/the-truth-about-f ... cusations/. It's only worth reading in full. These passages especially struck me in relation to the Decapitated case:

'When one looks at a series of fabricated sexual assaults [...] patterns immediately begin to emerge. The most striking of these is that, almost invariably, adult false accusers who persist in pursuing charges have a previous history of bizarre fabrications or criminal fraud.'

'False accusers almost never tell stories that could, by any stretch of the imagination, be seen as an innocent misunderstanding. In a study of false rape claims made to the Los Angeles Police Department, 78% involved claims of aggravated rape—assaults involving a gun or knife, gang rapes, and/or attacks resulting in injuries.'

As we know, the vast majority of the rapes that happen all the time around us occur in one-on-one situations between people who know each other to some extent; just as false accusations are a rarity, gang rapes by four strangers certainly are too. The author also states that false accusers especially often involve the support of a third party, for example a parent - and indeed, the mother of the main Decapitated accuser complained to the police about their lack of action, in contrast to the supposed fuss they make over petty crimes. It's worth noting that despite the power of rape culture in social attitudes, the authorities clearly took the two women very seriously in this case.

I'd like to know more about the above claim by Burnyoursins that 'There are members of other bands they've toured with who've stated that in all likelihood, this did happen based on their own experiences with the band.' All I came across in terms of character testimony were phrases like 'decent hard-working guys', 'chill dudes' and the like, which obviously have no evidentiary value, but are certainly a far cry from a reputation for sleazy behaviour.

Obviously people who aren't particularly interested in the band aren't going to use their time for amateur sleuthing. But anyone who wants to probe the knowns and unknowns of the case will already find a few things to look into, and probably more to come.

If anyone wants more details on this, I don't think there are any. The band's lawyer was quoted as saying "the accuser has a documented history of providing false information to the police dating back to 2014."

Even if this is true, it means nothing. What's a "documented history"? One time? What "false information" did she provide? Was it the victimless "no, I didn't know my taillight is broken" kind of false information that nearly everyone will give to the police at some point?

Even if the woman is a compulsive liar, there's still the fact that it wasn't her that reported the rape. It was a friend.



How do we know this? Why was she allowed on the bus if she was being a nuisance?

The story has reached "well, my friend's uncle's grandma's goldfish was there and he saw..." stage, and we need to be careful about spreading misinformation.

Nothing online, sure. But the specificity of the time frame and the use of the word 'documented' suggest that there's more information there. If the only false information was about stealing peanuts from the corner shop, I somehow doubt the lawyer would have bothered trying to use that.



Sure, though I don't know how that affects the question of veracity, especially as she brought it up surprisingly long after coming into contact with a police officer, despite having supposedly fled the bus.



'Know'? A man who was there said it, so obviously he is either lying or telling the truth, like anyone else. This was his claim as reported by The Spokesman earlier this month:



If they were allowed on the bus, then obviously someone deemed it unnecessary to remove them. Maybe the band liked it. Different people will have different opinions about what's permissible in such a situation.



I'm just passing on what has been reported in an official media outlet, having been surprised by how sure most of the posters in this thread seem to be about the band's guilt. I'm not sure that qualifies as spreading misinformation, especially as I've emphasized that rather than saying 'This is what happened:', one should simply look at inconsistencies or contradictions, taking the women's report as the default and noting deviations that come from other sources than the band members themselves. As a longtime fan of the band, especially after the tragic bus accident in 2007, I was horrified to read the news and what seemed like a pretty conclusive report with little room for doubt. Accordingly, some of the things that have emerged have given me a little hope that it's not true, even if that's the statistically more unlikely scenario. That's all. If it were a band I care nothing about then I wouldn't bother, and would simply note later on what verdict was reached without trying to work anything out for myself. But that doesn't mean I'll cast doubt on any accusations simply because I don't want them to be true.

Good riddance of a garbage band nobody cares. Lack of getting laid gets along with their crappy music well.

Source?

Okay, while my post was conciliatory, I have to say that this exhibits super, super, super weak reading comprehension, and I am thus not surprised that botched debates follow you.

@asymmetricist: I can PM you, if you like. I'd rather not share my source of information in a public thread, this came through a few friends of mine. Also, to Morrigan, it's unfortunate that kink is used so often in these sorts of discussions as a means of attempting to explain scenarios in which a person involved in something like this could have sustained injuries, other than being raped. "They could be into some weird sexual stuff" is offered up as an explanation by people, who clearly have no experience with BDSM or any other sort of kink, more than I could possibly care to count.

Yes, please do PM.

I think your conjecture earlier was kind of unfortunate then.

Generally speaking, I find these sort of topics an incredible waste of time to ponder about. I try my best to think about things I can actually gain knowledge from, but a few .com articles about a polish band raping some chick does not leave me with much. Could it have happen, could it not have happen- who the fuck knows? The media is a whore and only releases this shit for advertising revenue- otherwise, it'd be better if these sort of things were not available to the public until a verdict was actually made.


As fucked as it is though, whether true or not, Decapitated still makes great music..

To people who say they will stop listening to Decapitated because this. You are aware that the line up of the first 3 albums (the only decent ones of this band imo) only Vogg is still in the band. Not sure how you would let one guy being shitty ruin those albums for if you are a fan of those albums.

That was bugging me as well but I let it go. It’s not like it’s really the same band anymore. Still I will never support anything they do in future if they get convicted.

And furthermore, judging by what's known up to this point, most of the accusations seem to be pointed at the singer and bassist rather than Vogg. Look at this article which goes over the victim's statements - he's the only member who doesn't have a specific accusation which implies his direct involvement with the rape, in fact he's mentioned only by name for helping her put her clothes back on, and then helping carry her out of the bus. Also, he's the only member who cooperated with police and agreed to provide DNA samples. That said, if that's all accurate and he was a "bystander" or something I'd still love to know what the hell was going on in his mind and why he didn't try to stop it or alert someone...

And yet his charges are just as severe, 1st degree kidnapping and 2nd degree rape.

That's an easily disproven claim.

they made some good shit way back. Winds of Creation is as good as anything else from that time period. They hit the shitter when Vitek was still alive though, and have only sunk further and further since.

I didn't hear about that part of the story she gave. That's so bizarre.

To answer the question, maybe he didn't know what happened. Maybe he didn't know how to react. Lots of people can say how they'll react in am emergency situation, but until that emergency happens you really aren't tested.

No, there's absolutely zero information to suggest one of the band members in particular was only a bystander. Just because the article names other band members specifically and then says “Waclaw (Kieltyka) helped her put her clothing on and carried her out of the bus with another male.” it doesn't mean you can just skip over the part that says “She saw in the mirror and out of the corner of her eye each of the band members taking turns raping her.”

As pointed out numerous times in the thread already, Kieltyka is one of the two band members being charged with second degree rape rather than third degree rape (which given the allegations that she saw each of them, this would suggest that two are alleged to have had intercourse with her without her consent (third degree rape) and the other two are alleged to have done the same but using forcible compulsion - aka using force to put someone into fear of imminent death or bodily injury). Arraignment is 10:30am on Tuesday the 24th.

If Vogg is indeed cleared of all wrongdoing, then yes, I will still be able to listen to those albums.

I've heard people say in the past that if a band had a member charged with a heinous crime like this, they'd only avoid the material that performer played on, and the other albums would be untainted.

The thing that is disturbing to me is the lack of help "the friend" provided if that article is true. If she knew or suspected rape then why did she not report it, but chose to run and not call the cops? So maybe she should be charged as well. Strange story and the worst thing is that if they did do it its gang rape, if its a lie then people are going to use a case like this to "slut shame"a real victim. So there is no good to come out of cases like this, but hopefully no one got raped or hurt

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2017/oct/24/polish-death-metal-band-members-plead-not-guilty-t/

All four band members pleaded not guilty and all of the band members have a trial date set for December 18th.



It may seem weird initially, but that kind of reaction is fairly common, there's a lot of research on it in the psychology world.

Bystander syndrome is indeed sadly common.

Doesn't particularly mean anything at this stage, but seems like they'll be spending Christmas and the new year without family.

I want them to be innocent but, honestly, it's not looking good.

I'll likely still listen to their albums.

Release without payment of the bond (which was $100,000) is pretty unusual for such severe charges, and the moshing description certainly calls into question the assumption that the bruising was evidence of being restrained.

It would be beyond stupidness to gangrape a woman while on tour playing as a band.. i really hope that cunt made it all up but who knows.. polish people are sadly perverts today.

Congrats on being able to cram ignorance, misogny, and racism into one tiny post you horrific piece of garbage.

Combat hate with hate.