this post was submitted on 16 Apr 2026
76 points (97.5% liked)
Technology
385 readers
1 users here now
Share tech news or talk about events in the technology field.
This community is an attempt to spread communities out more from lemmy.world and lemmy.ml, so its less centralized and using the advantages of the fediverse.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Article says he started when she was 3 and continued until she became a teenager. Its typical of these predators to go for very young girls and stop around teenage years.
Pretty sure you wont forget something like that even if you are just 3,4,5 years old.
These people are all epstein island types.
I have no idea if it happened or not, but one does not have reliable memories before 5. It's just a human thing. Sometimes people have a vague image but they can't place it in time, and it's usually a reconstructed memory based on a story or a photo.
Basing an accusation like this on a 3-yo's memory is dicey. It actually weakens the accusation imo. That it continued and she clearly remembers it later is very different and he should be investigated thoroughly.
It doesnt matter, she was raped between 3 and 13. Are you going to say that this is something a human being forget?
It doesn't matter because if she was raped she was raped and he should face the consequences. But yes. At 3 you don't remember stuff. She would have forgotten that. No one has real memories from that age.
Look, just because you were born too stupid to remember stuff from when you were young, let alone read actual research papers, doesn't mean the rest of us are.
This is not true.
You are trying to have a sensible discussion about early memories in a conversation about alleged rape.
Save the argument for another opportunity because it comes across as you being defensive about Altman.
It only comes across that way for idiots that don't read. It's actually important, because a case against Altman has to be very strong. If everyone refuses to talk about the flaky part of the accusation because of feelings, then the whole case is likely to fail when it hits any kind of judicial or media pushback.
Misunderstandings at a broad scale are the fault of the communicator, not the receiver.
In the case where people respond without reading based on a kneejerk reaction to a couple of key words, I'd say it is the fault of the reader. Communication takes two parties.
Seeing as i have clear memories of when i was two, I'm gonna need some big ol sources on your claims.
Clear as in just like a picture you've seen? Or a story you've been told many times?
Like, an actual memory that I remember happening to me.
So, no source besides your ass.
Such surprise.
3 yr olds memory?
Fixated much?
What about when she was 4?
5?
6?
7?
8?
9?
10, 11, 12, 13?
You stupid fuck. Pick your battles.
You're the ignorant one here and you need to check your knee-jerk reaction and actually try reading before you respond. I indicated that using a 3 or 4 year old's memory is dicey, but that she was clearly raped when older and reliably remembers that, and so he should be investigated/prosecuted. But it damages the case against him using unnecessarily flakey memories.
Still false.