रिकॉर्ड · व्यवस्था · प्रतिक्रिया

कौन है
जेन डो
वास्तव में?

प्रमाण कारण प्रक्रिया। कथाओं को पूरा करना। रिकॉर्ड के लायक है scrutiny।

साक्ष्य पुस्तकालय खोलें तर्क पढ़ें चर्चा में शामिल हों

क्यों इस EXISTS

विवादास्पद मामलों में अभी भी असंतोष के लिए सबूत, प्रक्रिया और कमरे की आवश्यकता होती है।

इस साइट को विरोध, वृत्तचित्र सामग्री, प्रतिस्पर्धी व्याख्याओं और सार्वजनिक चर्चा प्रस्तुत करने के लिए बनाया गया है, बिना आरोपों के इलाज के लिए प्रतिकूल तथ्यों के रूप में। कोर्ट रिकॉर्ड, जिम्मेदार रिपोर्टिंग, संपादकीय तर्क और पाठक टिप्पणियों को विभिन्न प्रकार की सामग्री के रूप में लेबल किया जाता है।

REPORTING CREDIT

रिपोर्टिंग जिसने सार्वजनिक प्रश्नों को तैयार करने में मदद की

नीचे दिए गए लिंक को रिचर्ड लुथमैन / NY न्यूज़ प्रेस में श्रेय दिया गया है। उन्हें जोड़ने या चर्चा करने से उनके दावे को तथ्य के निष्कर्षों में परिवर्तित नहीं होता है।

रिचर्ड लूथमैन - कॉर्नेल सात: चुनाव थिएटर से पहले साक्ष्य रिचर्ड लूथमैन - ब्रेकिंग: कॉर्नेल सात एक्क्सर अनमास्केड NY न्यूज़ प्रेस - कॉर्नेल सात एक्क्सर Unmasked NY न्यूज़ प्रेस - कॉर्नेल सात साक्ष्य

नवीनतम

लेख और विश्लेषण

कानूनी कमेंटरी

जब एक JUDGE CITES एक LAW को लागू नहीं किया जा सकता है

न्यायाधीश Perry-Bond आपराधिक आरोपों की अनुपस्थिति को स्वीकार करता है, वैधानिक प्रश्न का पक्ष लेता है, और चार महत्वपूर्ण न्यूयॉर्क निर्णयों को विशेष रूप से छोड़ देता है।

2026-10-25

आर्टिकल

MAGGIE GANDY: WHO is the LAWYER REPORTEDLY.

एक पूर्व संघीय prosecutor, एक निजी अभ्यास आंशिक रूप से यौन-विचारक जांच के आसपास बनाया, और गंभीर unanswered सवाल के बारे में...

2026-10-25

कानूनी कमेंटरी

एक विशेष प्रोसेसर NEEDS एक विशेष प्रोसेसर?

लुसी क्रेग के लिए सार्वजनिक रूप से समर्थन व्यक्त करने के बाद, न्यूयॉर्क अटॉर्नी जनरल लेटिसिया जेम्स को स्वतंत्र रूप से उनके आरोपों की जांच के लिए नियुक्त किया गया था। अब...

2026-10-25

आर्टिकल

व्हिटनी सील्स चाहते कॉर्नेल को "रात एक गलत" करने के लिए।

कॉर्नेल मुकदमा के पीछे प्रो हॉक वाइस वकील ने जवाबदेही के बारे में एक राष्ट्रीय बातचीत को गले लगाया है। हालांकि, उनके अपीलीय इतिहास एक प्रदान करता है ...

2026-10-24

संपादकीय Rebuttal

JUSTICE PHAEDRA PERRY-BOND

हमारे विस्तृत, बिंदु-by-point आपत्ति NYSCEF दस्तावेज़ No. 86: एक मुकदमा के अंदर छद्म नाम, इसके बाहर मुफ्त अभिव्यक्ति, न्यायिक की सीमा ...

2026-10-23

कानूनी कमेंटरी

Prosecutor Spoke First

राज्यपाल और अटॉर्नी जनरल ने कार्यकारी आदेश संख्या 64 पर एक चुनौती के विरोध को दायर किया है। उनका 52-पृष्ठ ज्ञापन शक्तिशाली हो गया ...

2026-10-23

सार्वजनिक रिकार्ड

दस्तावेजों का निरीक्षण करने योग्य, खोजे जाने योग्य और संदर्भ में उद्धृत किया जाना चाहिए।

प्रत्येक सार्वजनिक पुस्तकालय आइटम को एक समर्पित पेज मिलता है। PDF को उत्तरदायी रूप से प्रस्तुत किया जाता है, OCR खोज योग्य है, वीडियो / ऑडियो ट्रांसक्रिप्ट्स को बार-बार देखा जाता है, और एक ट्रांसक्रिप्ट सेगमेंट पर क्लिक करके मीडिया को उस बिंदु पर कूदता है।

पुस्तकालय

नई डॉकेट प्रविष्टि · पिछले 24 घंटे

हाल ही में डॉकेट फाइलिंग लोड हो रहा है ...

अस्वीकरण

प्रशासकों द्वारा नियंत्रित विषय; उनके लेखकों द्वारा नियंत्रित टिप्पणियां।

बिग टिश जेम्स
क्या बिग टिश जेम्स कॉर्नेल 7 की जांच और अभियोजन में शामिल होना चाहिए?

अगर वह स्वैच्छिक रूप से नशे में है तो क्या वह यौन संबंध के लिए सहमत हो सकता है?
लुसी क्रेग शराब और अवैध पदार्थों की स्वैच्छिक खपत में लगे हुए हैं। क्या वह सहमति देने में सक्षम है? यदि नहीं, तो क्या पुरुष हैं, जो सार्वजनिक रिपोर्टिंग के अनुसार अवैध पदार्थों को पीने और लेने में भी सक्षम थे? क्या वे दावा कर सकते हैं कि उन्हें लुसी क्रेग द्वारा बलात्कार किया गया था?

क्या लुसी क्रेग ने उन शराबी लड़कों को बलात्कार किया?
उसके ग्रंथों का कहना है कि वह नशे में नहीं थी। बार कहते हैं कि वह नशे में नहीं थी। लड़के नशे में थे। क्या लुसी क्रेग (AKA "JANE DOE") ने उन लड़कों को बलात्कार किया? अपनी राय के साथ एक टिप्पणी छोड़ें।

क्या Lucy Craig Sue Thomas Guiffra?
थॉमस Guiffra की famefag ध्यान की मांग, प्रचार स्टंट वापस निकाल दिया है। अब यह ज्ञात है कि वह इस मामले से संबंधित लीकिंग रिकॉर्ड था (जमी डो के रूप में आगे बढ़ने के समर्थन में खराब रूप से रिहा किए गए बदलाव केवल उस व्यक्ति के कब्जे में थे जो इसे दायर करते थे)। उन्होंने एक अमेरिकी सक्रिय सेवा मरीन का नाम दिया, जो एक swat घटना के बारे में झूठ बोला, इस ब्लॉग के लिए बुरा विश्वास में एक नकली डीएमसीए दायर किया, जिसका नाम एक प्रतिवादी के रूप में एक गलत व्यक्ति था, जिसका नाम न्यू यॉर्क के द्राम शॉप लायबिलिटी कानून का प्रतिनिधित्व करता है। उनकी उम्मीद थी, कंघी के मामलों के समान, दीवार के खिलाफ सख्ती से फेंकने के लिए, अनुकूल दस्तावेजों को लीक करना, उन लोगों को रद्द करना जो अपने ग्राहक के खिलाफ बोलते हैं, और सार्वजनिक सहानुभूति को दूर करते हैं। वह वापस, LucyCraog.blog से मदद के साथ। जैसा कि उसका मामला त्रुटियों का एक कॉमेडी बन जाता है, हम आपसे पूछते हैं, क्या Lucile H. Craig sue Thomas Guiffra और उसकी फर्म कदाचार के लिए?

भाषण की स्वतंत्रता
हम आपकी भावनाओं की परवाह नहीं करते हैं, हम भाषण की स्वतंत्रता की परवाह करते हैं। किसी भी कानूनी भाषण को साझा करें और पोस्ट करें। हमें बिना सेंसरशिप के तत्काल प्रकाशन के लिए अपनी छवियां, वीडियो, टेक्स्ट संदेश, वॉयस रिकॉर्डिंग या किसी अन्य संबंधित सामग्री भेजें।

लुसी क्रेग
क्या आपको लगता है कि महिलाएं जो बलात्कार करती हैं?

नवीनतम चर्चा

नवीनतम टिप्पणियां

नवीनतम टिप्पणी लोड हो रहा है...

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.

Anonymous2026-10-25 23:37 UTC

So brave. Tompkins County (Ithaca -home to Cornell) public commenters.

(Fun fact, I cannot tell if this is a man, woman, or robot -so I cannot assume gender).

9pm-M5KGXwkr9JT3.mp4

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-25 23:41 UTC

"Jane"

tXynGS7N_UnyP380.mp4

@janedoe12026-10-25 22:42 UTC edited

We are now hard translating every page (in progress) into 12 languages, so that we can insert the LucyCraig.blog site into search engines around the world, in their native languages. The various hardcoded language translations will be automatic after the initial build.

Each language will act as a standalone site, native to that language, not just a onscreen translation. Comments on an any language version will appear on other languages, with the option for the viewer to translate to their native language, and vice versa.

When we begin getting non-English speakers commenting, every comment now has a translation button as well to translate from every language to every language (original langauge written always displaying first). Let's welcome our non-English friends when they begin to arrive and introduce them to our favorite lying Train Hoe.

Also, every article is getting an audio mp3 attached (it will become visible on the language button when articles are on the screen -for now, audio is just english, later we will expand to other languages) for the visually impaired to be able to listen to our audio. Fun fact, the NY Times requires you to have a paid subscription to access their text to audio feature (even on their non-paywall articles), forcing visually impaired individuals to pay to hear an article they cannot otherwise read.

These updates should be processed in a few hours, then we will start the worldwide SEO burns and submissions (we have already accounted for the language and newly created mp3 audios of articles pages in our sitemap, so its an easy process after processing).

What other features should we add to our blog? Time to make LucyCraig.blog a worldwide sensation, and rhe best fucking site on the internet. Drop your suggestions below.

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-25 23:27 UTC

All aboard! 🚂

@janedoe12026-10-25 19:11 UTC

We sent the following FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT demand to the judge to investigate potential state sanctioned censorship, or privately paid censorship that carries over into state censorship (in violation of the first amendment).

We will get to the bottom of the DeleteMe demand and we will not delete anything, in fact we will expand, investigate more, and open inqury based on the potential civil rights violations.

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

Comment attachment by janedoe1

Anonymous2026-10-25 17:24 UTC

Lucy Craig is the Cornell whore Jane Doe.

Anonymous2026-10-25 14:14 UTC

Why does this website, which claims to be about free speech

Censor and delete posts?

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-25 15:44 UTC

Your opinion is just so powerful, it could instantly reform this website of reprobates. We are terrified by the power of your insights - is humanity ready? (lemme guess, we are all rapists, we should die, and you think thats a very funny thing to say?)

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

@janedoe12026-10-25 14:17 UTC edited

I see your comment. What was censored? If you are one of the 5 previous comments we have hidden, it was spam, redundant self-promotion, or full on doxxing (be it plaintiff or defendants)... we have explained every comment we have hidden. We are very transparent. We did discover a bug (after your comments and we started looking for an explanation that might explain your frustration.) That bug is explained below one of your orher comments below. We will fix it..

Anyways, I see your comment, so, enjoy.

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

@janedoe12026-10-25 14:13 UTC

Here is why the admins are so confident. Why our site has not been able to be cancelled.

LucyCraig.blog operates on the parallel, independently managed infrastructure of "MultiPress.io" (https://multipress.io/), a global network of privately operated servers spanning ~20 speech favorable countries.

This infrastructure was not built overnight. For more than five years, our administrators and infrastructure partners have been developing an alternative to the centralized internet, one designed around jurisdictional independence, local legal compliance, operational resilience, and freedom from the censorship policies of major technology corporations.

We did not simply rent a foreign server and call ourselves independent.

We built an entirely separate publishing infrastructure, from email systems and domain management to physical hardware, distributed hosting facilities, and independent operators across ~20 nations.

And we did it for one fundamental reason: Freedom of expression should not depend on the approval of Silicon Valley, American corporations, or governments with no jurisdiction over the infrastructure hosting that expression.

Jurisdiction Is Not an Afterthought. It Is the Foundation.

Every country has different laws governing expression, publication, privacy, pornography, defamation, political commentary, and other categories of speech.

What is lawful in one country may be prohibited in another.

For example, Brazil maintains significant legal restrictions on certain forms of racist expression, while other categories of adult content may be lawful under applicable regulations. Other countries take substantially different approaches to both subjects.

We spent years studying these differences.

Our research extends beyond written statutes. We examine constitutional protections, judicial precedents, practical enforcement patterns (some countries are just too poor or undereducated to enforce cyber crimes and law enforcement in those countries are more willing to reduce charges and accept higher fines instead of court procedures and complex litigation), international legal assistance agreements, extradition frameworks, investigative cooperation, and both formal and informal aspects of local regulatory practice.

We do not attempt to force every publication into the same legal environment. We identify an appropriate legal environment for each publication.

Before onboarding a platform, we evaluate its intended content, operating model, jurisdictional exposure, and legal requirements.

We then select a primary hosting jurisdiction and a geographically separate backup jurisdiction with compatible legal conditions.

For LucyCraig.blog, we selected two jurisdictions in which we expect United States civil and speech related criminal claims concerning protected expression to face significant legal and procedural barriers to enforcement.

This is not accidental. It is the result of deliberate infrastructure planning and jurisdictional analysis learned over years of platforming free speech.

Twenty Countries. Independent Operations. No Single Point of Failure.

Our infrastructure is expensive to build and maintain.

Unlike companies that simply resell capacity from Amazon Web Services, Google Cloud, or Microsoft Azure, our network relies on physical hardware and facilities distributed internationally.

We establish and maintain micro data centers, lease facilities, deploy equipment, secure network connectivity, and arrange local operational support.

Each location operates independently, subject to its own applicable laws, regulations, and operational requirements.

Each location also has a designated redundancy partner in another jurisdiction offering comparable legal and operational characteristics.

If a primary location experiences an outage, whether caused by an earthquake, telecommunications failure, power interruption, hardware incident, or government intervention, its partner is designed to maintain continuity of service.

Yes, we have even planned for the possibility of police raids.

Thankfully, we have never experienced one.

The objective is straightforward: no individual infrastructure provider, country, or corporate intermediary should represent an unnecessary single point of failure for an otherwise lawful publication.

We Respect Local Laws. We Do Not Export Everyone Else's Censorship Rules.

Our policy is simple.

We comply with the applicable laws of the jurisdictions in which we operate. We take those obligations seriously.

If a particular category of expression is unlawful in Brazil, we will not place that publication on Brazilian infrastructure.

Instead, where appropriate and lawful, we evaluate jurisdictions whose laws permit that category of expression.

If material is lawful in the chosen hosting jurisdiction, the fact that another government dislikes, condemns, or would prohibit the same expression does not automatically determine our editorial or hosting decisions. (YOU HEAR THAT JUDGE WHACKADOODLE?)

We recognize that cross-border legal obligations can be complex. Foreign court orders, international cooperation agreements, and the legal responsibilities of individual publishers require case-specific analysis. We have studied everything from the Hague Convention to extradiction treaties, to INTERPOL Constitution (especially Art. 3) and Rules.

A foreign government's objections should not automatically become the censorship policy of an independently operated platform in another country. Be it police, criminal, civil or other government dislikes.

That distinction is central to our infrastructure philosophy.

Localized Self-Hosting: Taking Independence Even Further

We also offer another deployment model: locally operated, privately hosted publishing infrastructure.

Through our international workforce and partners, we can establish small, dedicated servers in private residences or independently controlled premises.

Sometimes the equipment is installed in a dedicated workspace.

Sometimes it sits in a spare bedroom, home office, closet, or another suitable location.

The scale of the installation is less important than the legal and operational independence of its operator.

Our localized publishing model uses two distinct operational layers.

Layer One: Content Management

The publication owner or content contributor accesses a separate management dashboard where material, revisions, and publishing requests are submitted.

This administrative environment is separated from the physical publishing infrastructure.

Layer Two: Local Publication

A locally based operator receives the approved publishing instructions and performs the actual publication through the locally controlled infrastructure.

Under this model, the local operator does not need to know the identity of the underlying content contributor or client. The operator works through a controlled publishing workflow rather than communicating directly with the contributor.

The locally based operator retains responsibility for complying with the laws governing the actual publishing operation.

This arrangement provides technical separation, limits unnecessary disclosure of contributor information, and distributes operational responsibilities across distinct systems and people.

It means that the physical publishing operation is not automatically subject to the same jurisdiction, legal process, or corporate pressure as the person who originally submitted the content.

International extradition and legal assistance rules also distinguish between different kinds of offenses, and speech-related cases may encounter substantial barriers involving dual criminality, constitutional protections, and treaty limitations. Those protections vary by country and offense rather than amounting to a universal exemption.

That is precisely why careful jurisdictional analysis matters.

We Are Not Dependent on Big Tech's Permission

Modern internet publishing has become dangerously centralized.

A handful of corporations control an extraordinary proportion of the world's hosting, content delivery, domain services, communications infrastructure, and online distribution.

A publication can theoretically enjoy constitutional protection for its speech while simultaneously finding itself unable to obtain hosting, payment processing, email delivery, or other essential services because a private intermediary dislikes its content. (Like us here at LucyCraig.blog)

And governments can exert pressure through regulatory threats, public campaigns, litigation, and informal channels that never produce a formal censorship order.

Our response was not to complain about this structure.

We spent five years building an alternative to it.

We operate our own infrastructure, manage independent technical systems, distribute operational responsibilities geographically, and select jurisdictions based on the actual legal characteristics of the publication being hosted.

These arrangements are complex, costly, and operationally demanding.

But meaningful publishing independence requires more than a slogan on a homepage.

It requires infrastructure that can actually sustain that independence.

LucyCraig.blog Is Just One Publication

LucyCraig.blog is something of a personal project for our administrators.

It allows us to demonstrate what independent publishing looks like when a platform is not built around dependence on major American hosting corporations or their content moderation policies. Without fears of constant subpoenas, deplatforming, and other legal headaches that a publisher should not endure.

But LucyCraig.blog represents only a small part of our work.

More than 50 major free-expression platforms already operate on our parallel infrastructure, with installations distributed across ~20 countries.

Each publication is individually assessed.

Each hosting environment is selected according to its legal and operational requirements.

Each location functions under applicable local law, with independently planned redundancy and continuity arrangements.

We do not promise that every form of expression is legal everywhere. It is not.

We do not promise that foreign infrastructure makes someone immune from legal liability. It does not.

What we provide is something far more substantial: an international publishing infrastructure designed to preserve lawful expression, respect jurisdictional differences, reduce reliance on centralized technology companies, and resist censorship demands that have no applicable legal authority.

We have been building and operating this infrastructure for more than five years.

We have invested in physical hardware, international relationships, legal research, independent operators, and genuine geographic redundancy.

We did not build MultiPress to ask permission to publish.

We built it so that lawful independent publishers would not have to depend on the permission of a handful of powerful technology companies.

Twentyish countries. Independent infrastructure. Local legal compliance. Global publishing resilience.

"MultiPress.io" (https://multipress.io/). The infrastructure behind independent expression and free speech of LucyCraig.

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-25 15:49 UTC

This is important stuff! Can we ask what other sites youve done?

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

@janedoe12026-10-25 16:32 UTC edited

No. We respect their independence. Unless they choose to associate, we will not disclose them.

LucyCraig.blog is the first time the admins have actually created a publishing site, we are typically just the technology behind many other free speech related sites that have been deplatformed, threatened, or just feared that big brother was eventually going to come for them.

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-25 14:40 UTC

You shdn't have taken up that website name & address (2nd line, last line). Now they'll be sued by you-know-who for supporting this site :(

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-25 17:33 UTC

If she doesn't like it, Lucy Craig can go snort ket off 7 more cocks.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

@janedoe12026-10-25 14:42 UTC edited

We own the whole infrastructure, as explained. There is no way a civil suit or US criminal charges will touch them, any of their clients, or LucyCraig.blog.

The local laws control, not the US laws. We created and own the infrastructure, not big tech.

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-25 14:16 UTC

But you choose to cancel other opinions on this website.

The hypocrisy is ripe.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

@janedoe12026-10-25 14:36 UTC

We did discover a bug. Apologies for that. We have deleted 5 comments for various legitimate reasons, and have been very transparent about that. The bug we found is that when a parent comment has replies, and the parent comment is removed, the replies become invisible (not removed, not deleted, not technically hidden). The replies on a comment we removed (one of the 5) had no parent to attach to and thus disappeared.

When you see on other platforms "the original post has been removed" but still see the replies, this is the same concept, except our replies did not attach because we had no placeholder indicating the original commebt was removed.

We are building this platform, in real time, and will make errors. We will find a way to restore the replies on hidden or removed parent comments, so that your speech lives.

Our apologies.

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

Anonymous2026-10-25 13:10 UTC

So the ginger girl who willingly did several gangbangs is Lucy Craig. She's a whore and instead of taking responsibility for her actions she is trying to claim to be a victim. Stupid typical dumb feminist whore.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-25 17:37 UTC

Yes. We've only documented one gangbang for Lucy Craig, but a whore like that has surely made skanky behavior a habit...

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-25 15:01 UTC

Not several. 1 major GB covering many minor 3SUM s

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-25 15:40 UTC

A gangbang is more than the sum of its threesomes

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 3

@janedoe12026-10-25 16:39 UTC

Mathing

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

Anonymous2026-10-25 04:38 UTC

Have you noticed, there are no more pro-Lucy posts here! Admins, can you run some stats on pro/anti/neutral comments and how these have shifted over time?

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-25 14:12 UTC

Thats because the "free speech website" censors posts.

Anonymous2026-10-24 21:27 UTC

bruh

@janedoe12026-10-24 17:41 UTC

The creator of this blog website will dox themselves if this comment reaches 150 trains by Nov. 15th, 2026.

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-25 04:35 UTC

You just want the google add revenue! Honestly, you deserve some cash for this, maybe think about how that could work, if you had a second company in between this and google ads.... Also, You need some sort of virtual phone number you can put here and record the hate from her supporters!

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

@janedoe12026-10-25 12:18 UTC edited

No advertisement ever. The admins all have well paying, work from home, jobs.

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 3

Anonymous2026-10-25 12:57 UTC

Very impressive, but you do deserve some sort of recognition, maybe write your memoire in 30 years

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-24 17:43 UTC

Dilemmas, dilemmas... 🤔

Anonymous2026-10-24 16:16 UTC

Defendant harassed in real life by Jane Doe whackadoodle supporters.

This clip is old, but is not yet in the library.

jJ2z8h4yJeOzfJNf.mp4

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-24 22:31 UTC

Bitch is angry la

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-25 04:22 UTC

Bitch is putting on a show. O dont know which guy it was, bit probably someone who snorted ket off her tits, so that cunt attacked him over something that was very minor (and consenting per Lucys slut statement)

Anonymous2026-10-24 13:40 UTC

Sorry your honor, the sign said it was a designated rape zone.

Someone at Cornell put up designated rape zone signs around the campus.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-24 16:22 UTC

The person putting up the signs is requesting venmo donations.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-24 16:29 UTC

More.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-24 14:40 UTC

When is someone gonna add a TRAIN CROSSING sign? 🤔

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-25 01:38 UTC

or...?

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 3

Anonymous2026-10-25 06:39 UTC

"Keep sex Legal, Horny, and Consenting! (#LHC)"

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 3

Anonymous2026-10-25 06:36 UTC

Or "Free pussy upstairs"

Anonymous2026-10-24 13:29 UTC

that's what you get for being a slut

Anonymous2026-10-24 06:58 UTC

What do we know about Lucys past? We know she reads smut and listens to grooming shows in the form of call her daddy. She says she cuts herself (and feels bad when her sexual partners dont ask about the scars), she claims to be bi (ten tick tock points for that!) , she says she has a condition that makes her feel dizzy. Any old writings where she talks about threesomes? Would she be on any medications for hwr condition and how does that gel with alcohol and booze (and a lot of cock) ? She was a trained sober monitor, did she ever give safety talks? Why does she say she had a bad wxperience with anal? Has she cried rape or assault before?

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-24 14:42 UTC

She had a few mentions in her high school newspaper: French competition, Harvard Summer School for Highschool students... But highschool acquaintances of Lucy should be interviewed for background

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-24 15:44 UTC

Indian Springs School are scrubbing their site of any mention, but she lingers. Several awards, several images (its one of those fancy boarding schools where rich girls have to wear a tie).

Her parents abandoned her at boarding school and she developed daddy issues.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 3

Anonymous2026-10-25 06:35 UTC

I can believe they wanted her out of the house! Imagine listening to her spouting whatever tik tok bullshit she saw, and making videos of herself doing "trends", and preaching about sex and equality... Must have been emotionally exhausting for them.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 4

Anonymous2026-10-25 10:59 UTC

Lucy Craig is the typical slut: needs to keep her legs open and mouth shut!

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 5

Anonymous2026-10-25 11:51 UTC

Closing her mouth would halve her efficiency

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-24 15:37 UTC

Next A24 documentary

Lucy: How a train comes to be

@janedoe12026-10-23 21:18 UTC edited

The court has placed a weak captcha on viewing the PDF files, making automatic transfers difficult, but not impossible. We are creating a workaround to keep the transfers updated automatically. Until then, we will and have manually added the new documents to their docket positions.

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

@janedoe12026-10-23 20:53 UTC

New Article: https://lucycraig.blog/article/to-justice-phaedra-perry-bond

TO JUSTICE PHAEDRA PERRY-BOND

THE FIRST AMENDMENT IS NOT SUBJECT TO YOUR APPROVAL

Your Honor, a Warning Is Not a Finding of Guilt. And a Courtroom Is Not a Newsroom.

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-24 08:18 UTC

Hoping this whole site's on INTERNET ARCHIVE!

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

@janedoe12026-10-24 12:35 UTC

No worries. We are not getting shut down. Nothing will happen to our administrators. The judge is just stupid. We have been doing free speech platforms for 15 years. This is not our first rodeo with an ignorant court acting on spur of the moment emotions instead of logical constitutional grounds.

However, we have a full sitemap at in the footer if anyone wants to add every page automatically to the archives.

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 3

Anonymous2026-10-24 13:11 UTC

You're a real one @janedoe1.

Grateful that the real, genuinely stunning and brave (unironically) women like you still exist. Her kind

are as big a bunch of sociopaths as the men in their demographic.

Anonymous2026-10-23 18:52 UTC

The drug addict Lucy Craig is taking more drugs according to her lolwyer.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c6x295kp2pr1o

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-24 04:36 UTC

Relying on medication to get rest. Well, she deserves it, but thats probably not true, a ditz like that, you could probably get her mind off it with a ball of string. Does anyone know if she took anything for depression or mood stabilsers etc before all this?

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-23 23:34 UTC

She still taking them by snorting them off a cock?

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-24 04:40 UTC

Send her that picture every year on her birthday

@janedoe12026-10-22 12:22 UTC

Lucile "Lucy" Criag has been 100% confirmed as Jane Doe.

The document, a rejected filing reciept -rejected due to poor redactions- could only have been leaked by Criag's own attorney.

When a e-filer submits a document through the court's online portal, it is not automatically public, the clerk has to approve the submission first. However, every submission, approved or otherwise, is stamped with a disclaimer that the filing is a receipt and still subject to the clerk's approval. We got a copy of that receipt.

Here is the likely chain of events: First it is important to note that no other parties had lawyers on the record at the time of initiating this suit, so there is no chance defense attorneys received a copy (they would not anyways). Thomas Gauffia, lolwyer for Craig, filed the document in such haste, got the receipt notification, immediately leaked it to the press and media instead of waiting for the clerk to approve it for public distribution. Then, the clerk noticed the poorly redacted signature line and rejected the filing... but Craig's lawyers already had it sent to their friends in the media to spin the narrative, cry for public sympathy, and famefag for attention. After rejection he quickly made a more robust redaction of the signature (not fully redacted) and that version was approved.

Later, Craig's lolwyers lied in documents and blamed others for leaking material, however, this receipt version of the rejected document could only have originated from Craig's legal team.

Read our exclusive breaking story here:

https://lucycraig.blog/article/breaking-cornell-lawsuit-filing-raises-questions-about-redaction-failures-in-plaintiff-s-c

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

Anonymous2026-10-21 22:56 UTC

This Jane Doe (filed Monday in Chicago against a fraternity) seems more legitimate than our Train Hoe.

https://www.wbaltv.com/article/university-of-chicago-fraternity-assault-claims/74205307

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-22 16:28 UTC

https://chicagomaroon.com/flipbook/2026-alpha-delt-lawsuit/

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-23 10:40 UTC

Was anyone able to find court records/pdfs for this?

Can't find anything here: https://casesearch.cookcountyclerkofcourt.org/CivilCaseSearchAPI.aspx -> Division: Law -> case number: 2026L012486

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-22 20:07 UTC

from https://snopdf.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/105406675/54132/images/10192026JaneDoeCALpdf-page-1.png to https://snopdf.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/105406675/54132/images/10192026JaneDoeCALpdf-page-42.png

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-22 05:04 UTC

One guy with date rape drugs, shes found by a friend, finds blood... Much cleaner narrative, unlike Lucy where people gladly accepted than there was a snapchat group set up by 57 boys who routinely drug and rape girls. - unless you are in the congo, that should strike you as far fetched

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-22 01:37 UTC

Wouldn't be surprised if the media jumps off the Lucy Craig train and switches tracks...

Anonymous2026-10-21 19:30 UTC

Whoever gives drugs to others gets into prison, and whoever takes the drug goes to a long term mental facility. Just add this law and we’re done.

कौन हैजेन डोवास्तव में?

विवादास्पद मामलों में अभी भी असंतोष के लिए सबूत, प्रक्रिया और कमरे की आवश्यकता होती है।

रिपोर्टिंग जिसने सार्वजनिक प्रश्नों को तैयार करने में मदद की

लेख और विश्लेषण

जब एक JUDGE CITES एक LAW को लागू नहीं किया जा सकता है

MAGGIE GANDY: WHO is the LAWYER REPORTEDLY.

एक विशेष प्रोसेसर NEEDS एक विशेष प्रोसेसर?

व्हिटनी सील्स चाहते कॉर्नेल को "रात एक गलत" करने के लिए।

JUSTICE PHAEDRA PERRY-BOND

Prosecutor Spoke First

दस्तावेजों का निरीक्षण करने योग्य, खोजे जाने योग्य और संदर्भ में उद्धृत किया जाना चाहिए।

नई डॉकेट प्रविष्टि · पिछले 24 घंटे

प्रशासकों द्वारा नियंत्रित विषय; उनके लेखकों द्वारा नियंत्रित टिप्पणियां।

नवीनतम टिप्पणियां

Comments & replies

कौन है
जेन डो
वास्तव में?