Lolwyer para Lucy Craig Cries Como una perra

Según una declaración de la lolwyer de Lucy Craig Thomas Giuffra proporcionada a NewsNation el 8 de octubre de 2026, usted y este blog son sólo la "minoridad de los comentaristas".

“Ella está absolutamente aterrada. La falta de humanidad y la nastinesidad recientemente mostrada por una minoría de comentaristas que han avivado innecesariamente las llamas de la controversia en la búsqueda de clics es desalentador. Esta imprudencia ha dado los resultados esperados, ahora han puesto a mi cliente en peligro real. Deberían estar avergonzados de sí mismos.

Mi pregunta para usted, querido lector, ¿por qué el abogado hace declaraciones que oprimen puntos de vista opuestos después de que él mismo puso a su cliente en el foco?

Disciplina fuente:Este artículo puede contener alegaciones, reclamaciones en disputa, citas y análisis editorial. Siga las páginas de evidencia vinculadas y citó fuentes para inspeccionar el contexto antes de sacar conclusiones.

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.

Anonymous2026-10-10 21:01 UTC

I feel worse for the Chad hold out juror in the Lucy Clancy trial.

Anonymous2026-10-10 15:14 UTC

I really hope it's not one of the 7 because being at Cornell University and writing shit like this is really… embarrassing and ridiculous. Building a narrative with no evidence, calling her names, and exposing her identity isn't investigating anything, it's harassment. She filed a civil suit, and court records are public: that is not doxxing. The only person whose identity was exposed against her will is the victim.

This is exactly why so many survivors never speak. They come forward and get called liars, sluts, attention seekers, while the men they accuse get defenders, a fan club and a blog. Sexual violence is one of the least reported and least punished crimes there is, and the overwhelming majority of perpetrators are men. So yes, this is a problem men have to deal with. Not by rushing to defend each other, not by staying silent, and not by asking "what about his life?" every time a woman speaks, but by holding other men accountable.

Leave her alone. And ask yourself why you are so invested in protecting the men instead of the woman.

MEN AS A GROUP NEED TO STOP PROTECTING EACH OTHER

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-12 02:19 UTC

Dont be a bitch

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-13 01:03 UTC

Don’t be a moron

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-11 19:22 UTC

You deserve a trip to Guantanamo for the heresy you just posted.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-13 01:04 UTC

You deserve to be dead as well :)

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-10 20:59 UTC

As a victim of SA and rape, I can't disagree more. These men have been doxxed and harassed and the only reason her life is over as well is bc based on her own testimony no crime was committed, and her text messages.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-13 01:05 UTC

Tell me you have no brain without telling me:

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

@janedoe12026-10-10 15:26 UTC

I have no connection to any aspect of this case in real life. Just a commentator on a public interest story that got banned when I mentioned the name Lucy Craig, so I created this site to never be banned again.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-13 01:18 UTC

If you have no connection whatsoever to this case, close or distant (which I highly doubt), then shut the fuck up.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-10 16:08 UTC

Did she reject you? You sound kind of bitter, no?

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-10 16:07 UTC

Why do you care so much about getting the victim’s name out there?

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 3

@janedoe12026-10-11 01:09 UTC

I care about speech. If the name is worth censoring, it is worth more to me not to censor it. That is the value of speech.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 4

Anonymous2026-10-11 09:22 UTC

You’re a piece of shit in the name of freedom of speech

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 3

Anonymous2026-10-10 16:30 UTC

She ain't the victim honey. Get educated and read her texts.thisnsite exists to expose and educate ignorant folks like you.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 4

Anonymous2026-10-13 01:11 UTC

Honey, educate yourself about rape culture, victim blaming, consent, slut shaming, gaslighting and DARVO.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 5

Anonymous2026-10-16 02:10 UTC

You're right. Stop victim blaming Matthew Ingalls.

Also stop talking down to people. We already know about "rape culture, victim blaming, consent, slut shaming, gaslighting and DARVO." that's really bare minimum shit it doesn't make you smart.

Anonymous2026-10-10 09:15 UTC

Just shows how guilty they are

Anonymous2026-10-09 23:32 UTC

Isn't he the dumbass who failed to redact Lucy Craig's signature on a court filing? And released details of "Jane Doe" that could only be true of Lucy Craig?

He outed his own client -- if he wants someone to blame for the swatting, he should find a mirror!

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-10 16:38 UTC

Me too Morons: "I'm Jane Doe"

Her Lawyer: " No, you are not my client Lucy Craig"

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-13 06:35 UTC

#IamLucyCraig

Anonymous2026-10-09 21:38 UTC

I’m more concerned that this is a politically motivated lawsuit, timed to influence midterm elections. The frenzy, the urge to cancel the other side, and for some mysterious reason many people willingly stand by a potential bad player when evidence is not clear, remind me of the George Floyd frenzy.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-10 10:28 UTC

George Floyd was a bum loser degenerate just like this nasty ginger skank

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-10 13:54 UTC

You sound fun 💅

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 3

Anonymous2026-10-10 20:27 UTC

And you sound dumb. Cope well tonight!