ADMIN-CURATED DISCUSSION

Topics.

A Place For Memes

This discussion forums is for all your Lucy Craig, Cornell 7, memes. We want to have the definitive collection of meme art about Lucy Craig.

Big Tish James

Should Big Tish James be involved in the investigation and prosecution of the Cornell 7?

Can a woman consent to sex if she is voluntarily intoxicated?

Lucy Craig engaged in voluntary consumption of alcohol and illegal substances. Is she capable of consent? And if not, are the men, who were also drinking and consuming illegal substances, according to public reporting, capable of consent? Can they claim that they were raped by Lucy Craig?

Did Lucy Craig Rape Those Drunken Boys?

Her texts say she was not drunk. The bar says she was not drunk. The boys were drunk. Did Lucy Craig (AKA "JANE DOE") rape those boys? Leave a comment with your opinion.

Discuss: Should Lucy Craig Sue Thomas Guiffra?

Thomas Guiffra's famefag attention seeking, publicity stunts have backfired. It is now known that he was leaking records related to the case (the poorly redacted afformation in support of proceeding as Jame Doe was only in possession of the person who filed it). He named a U.S. Active Service Marine, lied about a swat event, filed a fake DMCA in bad faith to this blog, named an incorrect person as a defendant, misrepresents New York's dram shop liability laws against Moonies, and named an entity that doesn't actually exists on paper. His hope was, similar to the Comb's cases, to throw shit against the wall, leak favorable documents, cancel anyone who speaks against his client, and sway the public sympathy. That backfired, with help from LucyCraog.blog. As her case becomes a comedy of errors, we ask you, should Lucile H. Craig sue Thomas Guiffra and his firm for malpractice?

Freedom of Speech

We do not care about your feelings, we do care about freedom of speech. Share and post any legal speech you want. Send us your images, videos, text messages, voice recordings or any other related material for immediate publication without censorship.

Lucy Craig

What do you feel should happen to women who cry rape?

Should An Attorney Seek To Surpress Opposing Viewpoints?

Lucy Craig's lolwyer Thomas Giuffra wants to shut down opposing viewpoints and has a team of low level idiots sending legal demands to everyone -and almost everyone is capitulating (not us, we will NEVER shut down). Should counsel be aggressively stifling free speech on a matter of public interest?

Should Lucy Craig Sue Thomas Guiffra?

Thomas Guiffra's famefag attention seeking, publicity stunts have backfired. It is now known that he was leaking records related to the case (the poorly redacted afformation in support of proceeding as Jame Doe was only in possession of the person who filed it). He named a U.S. Active Service Marine, lied about a swat event, filed a fake DMCA in bad faith to this blog, named an incorrect person as a defendant, misrepresents New York's dram shop liability laws against Moonies, and named an entity that doesn't actually exists on paper. His hope was, similar to the Comb's cases, to throw shit against the wall, leak favorable documents, cancel anyone who speaks against his client, and sway the public sympathy. That backfired, with help from LucyCraog.blog. As her case becomes a comedy of errors, we ask you, should Lucile H. Craig sue Thomas Guiffra and his firm for malpractice?

Should ORAZIO PETITO sue Lucy Craig and her lolwyer?

ORAZIO PETITO was dropped from her lolsuit after it was learned that he was not the President of the fraternity at the time she was gang-banged. Craig's lolwyer has now made 2 false accusations against innocent people who will be tainted for life as a result of his reckless and careless indifference, publicity famefag, lack of ethics, due dilligance. It would appear that Craig's lolwyer sought to try this case in the media, throw shit against the wall to see what sticks, and did not care about the consequences.

Should The United States Marine Who Was Doxxed By Lucy Craig's Lolwyer Sue Him?

United States active service member, who happened to have the same name as one of the boys, was doxxed in court filings. His address, phone number and more. Later, the attorney for Lucy Craig went on a media spree that started before the lolsuit was even filed, to tarnish the boys, spread his fake narrative, and manipulate public opinion in favor of his client. While attempting to shield Lucy Criag from the public conversation, hiding her behind "Jane Doe" he doxxed every defendant with their home addresses, phone numbers, and more. In his zest to try the case in the court of public opinion, he doxed a then active servicemember who has never been to Cornell, leading to threats, harassment, stalking, and the need for private security for his family.

PUBLIC DISCUSSION

Comments & replies

No account is required. Comment anonymously, or sign in with a pseudonymous account if you want to manage your comments later. Comments are user speech, not editorial findings.

Posting anonymously — no login required.
Optional: sign in or create a pseudonymous username to edit/delete your comments later.
Anonymous
I'm gay

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
same man. sad that fellow gay men (the cornell 7) are bein harrassed for their sexuality.
Anonymous
any1 know other bastions of info

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
Twitter (X) has a lot of content on the case... Memes, too!
Anonymous
A court judge issued an order that states this girls name cannot be made public. This is a lawful order.
 
If this is the correct girl, her name was easy to find.
 
SO CAN YOURS!
 
If you have any self respect, delete this disgusting page.
 
I guarantee, her legal team will have newly qualified juniors who have been instructed to scan the Internet for people like you. Judges loves to issue orders, lawyers love to sue.
 
If you don't value anything you've worked hard for like your house, car, bike, savings etc then by all means keep it up. If you do value them, take this website down!
 
Defamation = large hefty fines and prison time.
 
Just do yourself a favour.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
"You won't be saying that when you have to sell something you've worked hard for to pay for legal fees etc"
 
Shut up Lucy, you ginger cunt.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
Cool. Tell them to bring it. Discovery works on both ends. So do depositions.
I'll tie this retarded bitch up in discovery for years.
 
Put assest in other's names and various companies, llcs, etc. It ain't going to be worth the fight. Ask why that if you slip and fall on the side walk infront of one of my homes, you can't sue me. You're going to sue an LLC and my personal funds can't be touched.
 
Go sniff a dick.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
She is a SLUT. She wanted multiple men to enter her holes at the same time. Now she wants money and to damage innocent mens reputations.
Why are women even in college these days? Most do useless degrees, are whores and age like milk.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
silence woman

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

J @janedoe2
If I get into any trouble, they'll probably just "RUN THE TRAIN" on me.
Comment attachment by janedoe2

↳ Reply to @janedoe2 · Level 2

Anonymous
She’s beautiful! I bet she’s offered a modeling contract during all of this! Lucy be laughing all the way to the bank after this ha!

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
AI calls BS
 
AI Overview
No, there is no public record of a court judge issuing an order specifically stating that "Lucy Craig cannot be made public."

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
With the greatest respect, I have no fear of legal consequences for the lawful speech on this site. First and foremost, the Jane Doe designation is ONLY for the boys and their legal team. It does not extend to the general public. Second, the speech on this site is public debate on a topic of public interest. Finally, because this site is self hosted, in a jurisdiction outside the mess of this case, it requires a significant amount of showing that the site is false, made with actual prejudice to the truth, or actual malice. None of these apply.
 
And, let's be clear about the only slight issue that might come: Copyright claims on images, videos and content. The DMCA laws REQUIRE the alleged rights owner to directly reach out to the platform hosting the material, submit a sworn statement, using their REAL NAME -not "Jane Doe"- requesting the work removed. Again, because this site is self hosted the platform that Lucy Craig must use is ME! I will evaluate any requests sent to us, under the applicable DMCA/Copyright lawes and rules. Thus far, neither Jane Doe nor anyone who represents her as an agent, as sent any legal or DMCA demands.
There is no lawsuit against the site if they do not comply with the available DMCA process. The rest of the content, naming, and shaming, and opinion are protected speech. She may not like it, I may not like what commenters say, but I will NOT be removing the site or comments (unless they are spam). Speech is free on this side of the internet. Thank God for that.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
You need to do a hell of a lot of research into free speech vs. defamation. It's not always so black & White.
 
Judging by recently added pictures her legal team has already found you. They can also find you. They can afford highly experienced private investigators and it won't take long before they know who you are.
 
My guess is, you already knew Jane Doe/friends with 1 of the 7. Or you are a member of their family!! 🫨🤯
 
If she finds out who you are she will and can sue you. Trust me, you will not win. Do yourself, your savings, your house/car and pension a massive favour and delete this blog.
 
It's not too late.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
You won't be saying that when you have to sell something you've worked hard for to pay for legal fees etc

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

@janedoe1
Sorry, I wont compromise on speech because some random commenter or some retarded judge says so.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
Hi Lucy, how ya doing?