U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez
(D) George Stern
(R) Sheri Davis
50%↑
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%
30%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
October 15, 2010 10:00 PM UTC
56 Comments
experience, starting with the fact that he actually prosecuted Corban’s case. The other rape victim’s case was not.
Ms. Corban was raped by a stranger; the other victim by someone she knew.
“Apples to oranges” seems an apt comparison. I don’t see a lack of sensitivity from Pols here–I see two completely different cases, handled two completely differently ways.
Ms. Corban’s story is different, so ignore her opinion!
There is a major difference on why one got filed and one did not. The case with the unnamed alleged victim lacked proof beyond a reasonable doubt and was not a winnable case! Just ask Mary Lacy and Chief Jerry Garner. Or do you know more than them?
Middle of what road dude? Anybody could come up with misleading name just like you in a desperate attempt to give their comments perceived credibility as a moderate or an independent.
what you think it does, which I have explained time and again over the years I have been here and have no desire to explain to you.
No one is ignoring her opinion. Her situation is completely different than the one that is being discussed. Apparently, you have more proof than the newspapers, the victim, why dare I say everyone, with your assertions that her case was not winnable.
And are you really as ignorant as you sound here? Do you really not understand this is as much about Buck’s approach to this victim and the way he treated her, as it is about his choice in refusing to prosecute?
If this is the best defense you can offer for Buck and his actions, then his campaign must be scrambling over this.
Then again, I don’t need you to validate that one–I’ve been phonebanking Unaffiliateds Women all week and I bet you can guess, without me telling you, how they are voting based on Buck’s stance on abortion, even in cases of rape and incest, and his lack of consideration with the rape victim that came to light this week.
So will you then identify yourself as a proud supporter of liberal democrats and not moderate or independent or middle of the road.
all 15 whopping days you’ve been here, I might add.
is a welcome addition. You libs need a little competition, though I don’t know if anyone reads you.
Quit following me around and go back to stalking Ralphie.
I’m just not that into you.
Not sure if it’s love or that African skin disease.
Libs are in favor of woman’s rights only so long as it fits their narative. The second the viewpoint of the victim changes the libs suddenly abandon their “we support women” agenda and begin to either ignore or even demonize the lady in question.
Bottom line, unless the story advances their idealogical purpose, it’s marginalized.
And the difference between the two stories highlights exactly what is wrong with Ken Buck.
Selective and inconsistent application of justice is worse than no justice at all.
Guilty people get prosecuted and convicted. Cases that lack the evidence necessary to get a conviction are not prosecuted. Ralphie why are you so sure that the suspect in the case is guilty? Oh that’s right because you say he is! Everybody just listen to the all knowing Ralphie! Let’s just eat up everything he tells us because apparently he knows everything about everything.
Also catch up with the new liberal talking points regarding this subject. Everybody concedes he made the right charging decision, but it is now how he talked to the victim. You know explaining why her case was not proveable.
Jesus, even Beej is preferable to this asshole.
In the 2005 case, the attacker admitted to the victim that he knew he committed rape. Colorado Independent provided an image of the transcript of the recorded phone call from the Greeley Police station in which this admission occurred.
Ken Buck still hasn’t explained how that admission factored into the decision not to prosecute. Everyone here may have a theory; Ken Buck knows the fact that the admission occurred but has not yet addressed it. All he has provided is response to the allegations of how he treated the victim and the assessment of his and the Boulder County DA’s office that it was an unprosecutable case.
If Ken Buck came out and said the DA’s office and the police did not believe — despite the attacker’s admission of guilt — that they had probable cause to arrest the attacker, question him in pursuit of an admissible confession and charge him, Ken Buck needs to come out and say so, essentially explaining why a man he knew had confessed to rape was allowed to walk.
Ingredients
* 1 (8-ounce) package cream cheese, softened
* 2 cups canned pumpkin, mashed
* 1 cup sugar
* 1/4 teaspoon salt
* 1 egg plus 2 egg yolks, slightly beaten
* 1 cup half-and-half
* 1/4 cup (1/2 stick) melted butter
* 1 teaspoon vanilla extract
* 1/2 teaspoon ground cinnamon
* 1/4 teaspoon ground ginger, optional
* 1 piece pre-made pie dough
* Whipped cream, for topping
Directions
Preheat the oven to 350 degrees F.
Place 1 piece of pre-made pie dough down into a (9-inch) pie pan and press down along the bottom and all sides. Pinch and crimp the edges together to make a pretty pattern. Put the pie shell back into the freezer for 1 hour to firm up. Fit a piece of aluminum foil to cover the inside of the shell completely. Fill the shell up to the edges with pie weights or dried beans (about 2 pounds) and place it in the oven. Bake for 10 minutes, remove the foil and pie weights and bake for another 10 minutes or until the crust is dried out and beginning to color.
For the filling, in a large mixing bowl, beat the cream cheese with a hand mixer. Add the pumpkin and beat until combined. Add the sugar and salt, and beat until combined. Add the eggs mixed with the yolks, half-and-half, and melted butter, and beat until combined. Finally, add the vanilla, cinnamon, and ginger, if using, and beat until incorporated.
Pour the filling into the warm prepared pie crust and bake for 50 minutes, or until the center is set. Place the pie on a wire rack and cool to room temperature. Cut into slices and top each piece with a generous amount of whipped cream.
There are no guilty people until they’re charged and tried That’s the point.
when there is not even enough evidence to arrest let alone get a conviction?
By your standards every rape case should be charged whether it has merit or not?
So anytime any person makes allegations of a sex assault why even do an investigation? Why not just arrest them and consider them guilty?
Are you okay with charging innocent people and ruining lives of all involved? How would you feel if you were the suspect and had unprovable allegations made about you?
You libs are losing this argument about the charging decision. Pay attention to the moderator and switch to the alleged insensitive comment attack, before you look even more ridiculous.
This thing you keep doing is called converse accident. It argues from the special case (this particular rape case) to the general case. Also it’s a poor use of sarcasm (see below).
You might want to stop doing this, just so you stop sounding like a 10-year-old at debate club.
“Guilty” is a verdict.
I don’t care if you think I’m “losing” the charging decision argument or not. That’s Pols’ opinion vs. mine. The decision shows how arbitrary Buck is, which is also well supported by his flip-flopping and Buckpedaling.
What won’t change, regardless of the charging decision, is how insensitive and bullying Buck was to the victim.
This is not a good issue for Buck, no matter how you try to spin it.
And as far as calling me ridiculous, if your intent is to insult me, don’t bother. I can only be insulted by people I respect, and you don’t come close.
cannot face the truth when it hits you smack between the eyes.
For God’s sake, Mary Lacy, the most aggressive rape prosecutor in Colorado, said there was no case. Selective and inconsistent justice? You have no idea what justice is. I’m just glad this young woman was not at the mercy of you libs.
can you read? How does Mary Lacy, the most aggressive rape prosecutor in Colorado, figure into this?
She’s she’s never verified Buck’s
liestory.The Ken Buck rape case story is not about whether he was right or wrong in not prosecuting the case. The reason this has gotten national media coverage is because of the insensitive remarks that Buck made to the alleged victim. If Buck hadn’t made comments about “buyer’s remorse,” this wouldn’t be a story.
You can list every sexual assault case that Buck ever prosecuted if it makes you feel better, but that doesn’t change what he said in this case.
Were made to Ms. Corban and yet she has quite a different opinion regarding those statements. Please forgive me for not quoting the statement in the article, but please look at it. So why do you not value her opinion regarding the similarstatements made by Buck?
And if this issue is truely not about the filing decision then come out and say that Colorado Pols along with Mary Lacy, and Chief Jerry Garner all agree that Buck made the tough but right decision in not filing charges against a potentially innocent man.
Another issue that Ms. Corban and the Post bring to further attention is that Buck is not anti-woman, or especially not pro-rapist. Will you guys echo that sentiment like you echo the sentiment of others who claim he is?
Thanks for engaging in this conversation with me. I think this topic does merit discussion and appreciate your feedback.
to bear their attacker’s child. Yeah, I think that kind of makes Buck pro-rapist, at least in that arena.
The 2005 attacker admitted his guilt in a recorded phone call. If you can find a statement somewhere from Ken Buck acknowledging that admission and how it factored into his decision not to prosecute, please provide it here.
Ms. Corban’s attacker apparently did not confess, given he was convicted in a jury trial.
Let’s just ignore Ms. Corban’s opinion! It doesn’t matter because the cases are different! We only pay attention to unnamed alledged victims of alledged date rape, not a strong supportive survivor of a stranger sex assault. And why is this? Because the dems say so! Ms. Corban’s attacker was a stranger is all they can say for their reason.
Have you read any of these articles about her?
A pretext phone call is not a confession! I thought you guys were over the filing decision?
I think he should have filed.
Not all liberals think the exact same thing at any given time. You seem to be having trouble with this fact.
When your assumptions turn out to be wrong, you can either change your assumptions or lash out and start whining. Most intelligent people do the former. Why do you keep doing the latter?
Some understand complex issues better than others. Look at the post below.
You’re trying to do whatever you can to defend your guy. We get it. But you’ve long since lost credibility on this by saying that one positive action should cancel out a different negative action.
Trying to explain away Buck’s comments to one alleged rape victim by saying he did do a good job prosecuting a different rape case is not at all relevant. This is like saying “I’m not anti-gay because I have a gay cousin,” or “I’m not racist because one of my friends in high school was black.” One thing doesn’t have anything to do with the other.
Buck said some really awful things to the alleged rape victim in the case that’s getting a lot of publicity. Whether or not he was nice to another rape victim doesn’t excuse his prior behavior, and it certainly doesn’t negate it. If you make a gay joke and then make a straight joke, do they cancel each other out? Of course not.
We’ll say it again here: If Buck would have just come out and apologized, and said, “You know, I made a bad choice of words and I see how those remarks came off as being insensitive,” then this story would probably have ended long ago. But the harder that Buck and supporters (like yourself) try to justify his remarks, the more desperate and unbelievable they sound.
As I posted a few days ago, I was to be called as a witness in a date-rape case a few years ago. The defense wanted my testimony. Not because I knew any details of the case, or had ever been sexually involved with the accuser, but because the accuser had stolen from me. The case was eventually dismissed a few days before trial. Why? I don’t know. But I can tell you this… the defense in a date rape case will pull out all the stops in an attempt to discredit the accuser. When the physical act of sex is not in question, it comes down to who does the jury believe. I can imagine that a responsible DA would inform the accuser about what would be said about her and about how the defense would try to attack her character.
In a murder (for example), there is an obvious victim, and it is usually obvious that a crime has been committed. But in a case where no violent attack has occurred, and where both defendant and accuser admit that sex occurred, it becomes a question of circumstance. If the accuser can’t convince the DA that a crime has occurred, how can the DA hope to convince a jury?
Read the transcript of Buck’s conversation with the woman.
In it, he says it looks to people, “including myself,” that she invited him to her house for sex.
Buck is not simply warning the woman what others will say about her (which is perfectly reasonable for a DA to do). Buck tells the woman he does not believe she was raped.
That’s why he told the newspaper “buyer’s remorse.” He didn’t believe there was a rape. And his evidence in support of that, when pressed, was that she had been pregnant before and had gotten an abortion.
Talk about assumptions! According to sxp in the transcripts and on the audio recording Ken Buck tells the alleged victim that she was not raped. I am pretty
sure he was giving a personal opinion on what he suspected was the likely conclusion of a jury.
I mean you must be right though because you say so. Should we all just take your word for it? I mean you obviously have all the facts!
Buck got the information about the supposed abortion from the rapist.
After she corrected Buck to inform him that she had been pregnant (months before) but had had a miscarriage, Buck didn’t so much as blink, let alone apologize for taking the word of a rapist about what he sees as infanticide.
The Boulder DA, and the most aggressive rape prosecutor in the state, said there was no case. How about you libs start attacking her?
Can you find any quote in any article ever written about this from Lacy?
No you can’t. It’s Buck’s word against everyone else on what he asked or heard. And I don’t trust him.
Take your meds, you’ll feel better.
Sorry I was referring to your desperate claim above? Thats right everything is a conspiracy and Buck lies about everything. The only thing that is true is whatever a liberal says.
I think Bush derangement syndrome is transferring to Buck derangement syndrome. Well nothing six years of having a strong conservative senator won’t fix!
Seriously, all due respect. You just don’t do it very well (which is noticeable because you keep trying to do it).
Maybe take a class or something. Or listen to Fouad:
To prove critics like me wrong! Here is a chance to prove you are not just a mouth piece and all you do is call me silly?
I will bring this up again because I feel like you overlooked it. Is it possible that the unnamed alleged victim only feels that the statements were insensitive because she was/is angry with Buck? Why does Ms. Corban’s opinion of similar statements made to her not matter?
I hope this post is not as silly!
You ain’t one of them.
Where is my logic wrong? Why do you want to ignore an opinion of a sex assault survivor like Kimberly Corban? Is it because it proves the clames that Buck is anti-woman and pro-rapist wrong. Would such a strong victim advocate support somebody like that?
It is no fun arguing with you so feel free to leave
my diary if you don’t want me to answer you.
on different threads and then creating your own diary can be called an argument.
Try this:
Why do you want to ignore Buck’s insensitive “buyer’s remorse” remarks? Why do you keep trying to use the lame demonstrably wrong wrong rationalization that he was referring to what the jury might infer? Since he injecting himself into the comment it’s clear this was his opinion.
Why do you keep bring up the fact that the case wasn’t winnable? Why do you think the case’s viability has anything to do with how Buck spoke to a rape victim?
Why do you keep using the horrific experience of one woman to bludgeon and belittle another woman who went through a similar horrific experience? Why do you think Buck doing one good deed automatically excuses him from his previous insensitive acts? Why do you keep making an issue of the rape victim protecting her identity? Are you aware that most sexual assault victims’ identities are generally not published out of respect and security reasons?
Your logic, if that’s what you want to call it, has some serious holes in it. You seem to think that if you just act super condescending, repeat the same shit over and over, be really aggressive, and deflect with insult and sarcasm you’ll win some sort of prize. You’ve failed to back any of your “facts” up with a single link other than to an opinion blog. Nothing from the Boulder DA, nothing from Buck himself, nothing from Mary Lacy? I would think you’d be pissing yourself to get those links to us. Or do they just not exist, other than in your fevered imagination?
What do you want me to link to from Buck and Lacy?
he says, “selective and inconsistent application of justice is worse than no justice at all.”
Ralphie is not right. Ralphie is left; about as left as one can be without become right.
So you don’t know shit about his politics.
Lay off the cooking wine.
OK so in regards to these two cases of rape Buck did half his Job As Weld county DA.
Got it tea bag republicans. Buck is not a total Fuck Up, he is Half assed.
Thank you for pointing this out.