thomas979 Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 8 minutes ago, happyone said: Seems like the thread is getting somewhat confusing because there were at least 3 separate girls we are discussing-2 from last night and 1-Marketta from the first night she was in her room 1. The blond who was completely intoxicated-even to the point of puking---this was obviously sexual assault. 2. The brunette with black tatoos down her spine--this was maybe was sexual assault or rape, Since she was not inebriated, her consent has not been determined. 3. Marketta definitely either said no or her physical action of resisting indicated a no--this was sexual assault and rape. ur making it sound like u know for sure there were assaults that's the not the case these are questionable acts but it's not 100 pct an assault 1. the girl was very very drunk she was also talking moving around changed positions wasn't hitting the guy pushing him away screaming she made a phone call afterwards she was walking afterwards this one is very questionable can't say 100 pct either way on this one 2. she had sex twice the first time guy lasted 1 min the 2nd time lasted longer she was willingly each time no sign of any struggle the incident with her happened after the sex when the guys came in the room 3. marketa started with a massage the guy was fingering her then he pulled his dick out and she grabbed it with her hand then he started to have sex with her she wasn't feeling it she stopped it and she left, was this assault i don't think it was, i think it was a female who didn't want it she stopped it and left so i think u are quite wrong in ur claims that all were assaults Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ze81 Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 12 minutes ago, happyone said: Seems like the thread is getting somewhat confusing because there were at least 3 separate girls we are discussing-2 from last night and 1-Marketta from the first night she was in her room 1. The blond who was completely intoxicated-even to the point of puking---this was obviously sexual assault. 2. The brunette with black tatoos down her spine--this was maybe was sexual assault or rape, Since she was not inebriated, her consent has not been determined. 3. Marketta definitely either said no or her physical action of resisting indicated a no--this was sexual assault and rape. Hep..and it's been this way in this apartment sinse it started,your post resumes well the mess this house it's from start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyone Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 2 minutes ago, thomas979 said: ur making it sound like u know for sure there were assaults that's the not the case these are questionable acts but it's not 100 pct an assault 1. the girl was very very drunk she was also talking moving around changed positions wasn't hitting the guy pushing him away screaming she made a phone call afterwards she was walking afterwards this one is very questionable can't say 100 pct either way on this one 2. she had sex twice the first time guy lasted 1 min the 2nd time lasted longer she was willingly each time no sign of any struggle the incident with her happened after the sex when the guys came in the room 3. marketa started with a massage the guy was fingering her then he pulled his dick out and she grabbed it with her hand then he started to have sex with her she wasn't feeling it she stopped it and she left, was this assault i don't think it was, i think it was a female who didn't want it she stopped it and left so i think u are quite wrong in ur claims that all were assaults ok I see you can be the defense attorney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ze81 Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 2 minutes ago, thomas979 said: ur making it sound like u know for sure there were assaults that's the not the case these are questionable acts but it's not 100 pct an assault 1. the girl was very very drunk she was also talking moving around changed positions wasn't hitting the guy pushing him away screaming she made a phone call afterwards she was walking afterwards this one is very questionable can't say 100 pct either way on this one 2. she had sex twice the first time guy lasted 1 min the 2nd time lasted longer she was willingly each time no sign of any struggle the incident with her happened after the sex when the guys came in the room 3. marketa started with a massage the guy was fingering her then he pulled his dick out and she grabbed it with her hand then he started to have sex with her she wasn't feeling it she stopped it and she left, was this assault i don't think it was, i think it was a female who didn't want it she stopped it and left so i think u are quite wrong in ur claims that all were assaults Exactly the same I seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas979 Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 Just now, happyone said: ok I see you can be the defense attorney no but not going to convict somebody like u have when it's not 100 pct certain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clivebb2 Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 how much hours it's in maintenance now? if it was for noise nuisance for example the house would be already come back online Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyone Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 (edited) Well, I am done here-- I am going to leave it up to RLC to determine whether this is a suitable apartment or house for their business model and leave it up to the police or the authorities to determine whether or not a crime was committed. Since RLC indicated that it was only a short term house until June --no need IMHO to bring it back online Edited May 21, 2017 by happyone 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bean1111 Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 Does anyone have pic or video of the police. PM me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas979 Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 Just now, happyone said: Well, I am done here-- I am going to leave it up to RLC to determine whether this is a suitable apartment for their business model and leave it up to the police or the authorities to determine whether or not a crime was committed. Since RLC indicated that it was only a short term apartment until June --no need IMHO to bring it back online that's ur opinion everybody is allowed one in free speaking countries, some people on here actually really like marketa and vanessa and would like to see them stay without the group of thugs 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyone Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 Just now, thomas979 said: that's ur opinion everybody is allowed one in free speaking countries, some people on here actually really like marketa and vanessa and would like to see them stay without the group of thugs And how in the hell do you expect RLC to keep out the group of thugs???? Post security guards at the entrances to vet anyone that wants to enter the premises and the same inside to control the activities. It is obvious that Vanessa cannot or is unwilling to police the thugs, and neither was Marketa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas979 Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 simply tell vanessa and marketa these guys are not allowed in if u break the rules ur gone no more money for them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
euromike69 Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 4 minutes ago, happyone said: Well, I am done here-- I am going to leave it up to RLC to determine whether this is a suitable apartment for their business model and leave it up to the police or the authorities to determine whether or not a crime was committed. Since RLC indicated that it was only a short term apartment until June --no need IMHO to bring it back online Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts