Dismissed because she wouldn't submit to invasive examination decades after the fact.

He's a predator.

Sam Altman has never given the public any reason to believe a word he says. He’s a disingenuous liar, and is known for acting like whomever he’s currently talking to. He’s a sociopath. I have no trouble believing he was capable of these allegations.

I also don’t understand why a judge thinks a medical exam would find anything useful so many years after the alleged crimes. It makes no sense for that to be the reason this was dismissed unless the judge was just looking for an excuse. And whether or not his sister has issues doesn’t seem relevant either. If she was repeatedly assaulted by her brother, it’s not at all surprising that she would have lasting trauma.

I think this comes down to the fact that he is a well-known figure with an insane amount of money and influence. He is above the law, like everyone else in his class

Maybe I'm weird, but if I was filthy fucking rich, and a sibling or parent needed money, I would just...you know...give it to them.

The problem is you’re trying to insert empathy into the mind of sociopath

Yeah...i know. But yet it somehow still never ceases to amaze and horrify me just how messed up these people are.

Never seemed credible? He engaged in all the exact tactics of a DARVO abuser. Here you're doing the work for him. The reason has nothing to do with credibility yet you're here attacking her credibility. And for what.. you claim people with mental health issues can't be victims. Do you know how sick and pro-rapist your ideology is?

Rape and sexual abuse victims always have to be perfect with zero mental health issues in order to be believed. Got it. /s

Who are you to determine the legitimacy of a victim's claim?

They're called the Epstein class for a reason.

You haven't met my sister. Voted fro Trump 3 times, home schooled her kids, and soaked my parents for money to try to get sole custody of her kids who she couldn't be bothered to vaccinate for whooping cough....

Evidence suggests such behavior is mutually exclusive with being filthy fucking rich.

You're right, you were really wronged here.

...wait a second.

Mental health issues are what you get from the trauma of being raped.

WTF? How are people so trauma UNinformed.

My mother was raped by her brother many times during their childhood.

She is the one most fucked up persons I’ve ever met.

Your reasoning is beyond flawed.

His sister has some mental health issues

She was raped by her brother. No fucking shit she has mental health issues, dumbass.

The judge probably revealed something blackmailable to chatgpt...

That's fair, but this thread is also full of people questioning the courts. If regular citizens can't be trusted to judge, and courts also can't be trusted to judge, who is to judge? (If we trusted all victims of any crime, you can see how that could be easily abused.)

We don't know either way so why speculate?

And the judge is a conservative.

A conservative certainly cannot be trusted to judge, and the overtly unreasonable judge in this case is a conservative.

Gotta make sure other rape and sexual abuse victims always second guess reporting.

Make it always visible how victims are disbelieved and must be perfect. Make it clear that victims will be judged by things that are no fault of their own.

Comments like that are so incredibly despicable to me. They’re not talking to the sister with that comment. They’re speaking to every victim that comes across that comment.

Do you believe that was the intention behind the comment or do you believe that are the consequences of that comment?

It's the consequences.

Ok.

I also don’t understand why a judge thinks a medical exam would find anything useful so many years after the alleged crimes. It makes no sense for that to be the reason this was dismissed unless the judge was just looking for an excuse.

the word you're looking for is excuse -- as in the judge used the exam as an excuse to dismiss the charges.

I scanned 8 articles and they're almost identical. Every one said "an independent medical examination". Ann's claiming mental health issues, so it's safe to assume that would be the examination. Nobody's trying to check her vagina after 20+ years unless she was claiming physical damage.

She refused three times, after the judge told her continued refusal would torpedo her case. We'll never really know more now that the case is trashed. And rich or poor, it's damned difficult to prosecute a sexual assault case of any sort after two decades.

You said invasive. I scanned 8 articles and they used the exact phrase, "an independent medical examination". She's claiming the rapes caused mental issues, so it's a fair bet the examination would focus on mental health.

If you're going to claim mental illness, part of discovery is bringing receipts, ya know, like the kind "an independent medical examination" would reveal. She refused 3 times despite the judge's clear warnings. Case closed.

Right, but it was the entire family that claimed she's essentially abusive cockroach that just constantly wants money without working. Shitty people like that exist and don't feel guilt in blackmailing others.

I don't know where the truth lies, but from the very beginning this whole case looked weak.

You aren't supposed to be objective here, your task is to hate without questioning anything.

Literally everyone speculates here that he indeed raped her with zero proof while her entire family being against her. Get a grip

Whatever happened to innoncent until proven guilty? Can I just now go around claiming rape, provide no proof, refuse examination, refuse psychology test while claiming mental health issues, and you will believe me just because I targeted someone richer or a white male?

I'm not saying it's true or not true, but what exactly would she need to show to prove it's credible? Like what would be the credible version of this if a similar situation occurred and it was completely true? How would it seem different?

It makes sense the case was dismissed if she wouldn't do the examination.

But plenty of people would avoid a psychiatric exam just because of fear of psychiatry. In order to commit someone or give them a new diagnosis, a psychiatrist has to meet with someone. It's also possible that the independent examiner could also request all her private psychiatric records and that those could include personal things she didn't want disclosed. She could have told a therapist she didn't like a parent or told a therapist one of her friends is a kleptomaniac and didn't want people to know.

She also, based on her online posts, clearly is afraid of being killed and someone making it look like she was just unstable. And this is in the shadow of that open AI whistleblower mysteriously "committing suicide" when everyone who knows him thinks he wouldn't do that. I am just saying she may have valid fears, like such an examination being used to try to commit her when that isn't appropriate. Keep in mind, psychiatry was awarded the Nobel Prize for lobotomies less than 100 years ago ago (or technically a psychiatrist was, but lobotomies were widely praised and embraced by the profession for decades). It's not exactly a profession that is a paragon of ethics that admits to being wrong when it is.

I don't know what her experiences have been, I just think we can't know her reasons for not doing this exam.

This happened so long ago. What clear proof should she have from back then that she doesn't? It also seems like her family was helping her financially and she was in a position to get a lot of financial help and filing suit might make that less likely. You're also saying this is about a pay day, but given the length of time, it's not like she could file criminal charges that could get prosecuted. A civil suit was all she had.

Innocent until proven guilty is a criminal standard. This was a civil case and was just about what was more believable. Some people found her credible, apparently.

I think if you made up a rape claim that had no basis in reality to target someone rich and white, you probably wouldn't have credible details about what happened, a history with that person that seemed credible, or a history of being an honest person. But yes, it is sometimes hard to know who is telling the truth.

Not every claim is true. Personally, I don't know enough to know if it's true or not.

What is ironic is even when a victim is "perfect," by the time they realize they want to report what happened, that perfection may be gone.

I generally see a lot of criticism for the length of time it can take victims to report.

It's infuriating. Like they can't wrap their head around how difficult it is to report rape and sexual assault. No empathy at all from these types of people.

It's very easy to believe "oh, if I were raped I would fight back and if it still happened I would report it." It's only after something like that happens that a person thinks (possible trigger warning)

I’m going to lean that the guy who had a whistleblower murdered also abused his sister because he’s a piece of shit.