VN Ren'Py Abandoned Fallen Roads [v0.2] [Boketto Games]

[KingWeWuz]

In a court of law here in the U.S, you are innocent until proven guilty. If the state can't prove their case with evidence, the verdict comes down as not-guilty. In this case, Ava would be found to be not guilty of cheating.

Your position seems to be that she is guilty until she can prove she is innocent.

While I agree, I still maintain she'd be found guilty of being a shitty girlfriend.

 

[v1900]

In a court of law here in the U.S, you are innocent until proven guilty. If the state can't prove their case with evidence, the verdict comes down as not-guilty. In this case, Ava would be found to be not guilty of cheating. "She must have thought this" is not evidence.

Your position seems to be that she is guilty until she can prove she is innocent.

Yes and no. Because she never cheated, instead she was raped. but the argument is not about if she cheated. Remember the argument is if she went to the party to se Bryce with the intent of cheating.

I am arguing that when she said she was going to see her other two friends it does not logically fits with this scenario. They were not leaving, only Bryce, so she can see them at any point after the party. Hence the part that she was expressly going for Bryce and she just used her friends as a buffer for her argument.

That is why I argue that she indeed had a plan of what was going to happen in the party. If you want an example grounded in law consider the charge of conspiracy to commit felony. In that case no felony needs to take place for you to get fucked over and the evidence can be minimal or non existent.

 

[clowns234]

Yes and no. Because she never cheated, instead she was raped. but the argument is not about if she cheated. Remember the argument is if she went to the party to se Bryce with the intent of cheating.

I am arguing that when she said she was going to see her other two friends it does not logically fits with this scenario. They were not leaving, only Bryce, so she can see them at any point after the party. Hence the part that she was expressly going for Bryce and she just used her friends as a buffer for her argument.

That is why I argue that she indeed had a plan of what was going to happen in the party. If you want an example grounded in law consider the charge of conspiracy to commit felony. In that case no felony needs to take place for you to get fucked over and the evidence can be minimal or non existent.

She was going to see Bryce and also, to see the other two. That is not in dispute. You're welcome to your opinion but unless you have something else, it is not evidence that she was going there to cheat.

While I agree, I still maintain she'd be found guilty of being a shitty girlfriend.

Yes - and I maintain that he is a shitty boyfriend for allowing her to go without him - if for no other reason than knowing her history with drugs and alcohol and knowing Bryce was going to be there. Not about him trusting her. It's about him not trusting them. And he should be able to convey that to her. If not, then that is a major problem in their relationship.
Recovering alcoholics and drug abusers continue to go to their meetings because they know the temptations will always be there. It's not as simply as deciding not to do it anymore.

 

[Cthulhu4Prez2020]

Even tho I decline to put in my 2 cents worth on the was she/wasn't she/did she/didn't she debate (tho I do have my opinion), I've been quite enjoying the back and forth on the subject.

However, one of the biggest issues I have with Ava is the fact that whatever did or didn't happen, she fucked up.

Addiction has been around for as long as there's been shit to get addicted to...and once an addict, always an addict. YOU DON'T PUT YOURSELF INTO A POSITION TO FALL BACK INTO YOUR ADDICTION!!!!

Alcoholics shouldn't be going to parties at a bar, those with a gambling addiction shouldn't be going to parties at a casino, and drug addicts SHOULDN'T BE GOING TO PARTIES WHERE THERE ARE GOING TO BE DRUGS AND 3 KNOWN DRUG DEALERS (of which are the 3 that got you addicted in the first place)!!!

You want a final goodbye? See him one more time b4 he leaves? Can't swear, but I thought I saw he wasn't leaving for another month...take your damn party to an Applebee's or some shit.

Not even getting into all the history w/ the bullying and anything else. Just on this basis alone, she fucked up! Period! 100%!!

 

[clowns234]

Even tho I decline to put in my 2 cents worth on the was she/wasn't she/did she/didn't she debate (tho I do have my opinion), I've been quite enjoying the back and forth on the subject.

However, one of the biggest issues I have with Ava is the fact that whatever did or didn't happen, she fucked up.

Addiction has been around for as long as there's been shit to get addicted to...and once an addict, always an addict. YOU DON'T PUT YOURSELF INTO A POSITION TO FALL BACK INTO YOUR ADDICTION!!!!

Alcoholics shouldn't be going to parties at a bar, those with a gambling addiction shouldn't be going to parties at a casino, and drug addicts SHOULDN'T BE GOING TO PARTIES WHERE THERE ARE GOING TO BE DRUGS AND 3 KNOWN DRUG DEALERS (of which are the 3 that got you addicted in the first place)!!!

If making good decisions were that simple, there would be no addicts. Hence the mental issues the Dev refers to.
More reason why her BF should have insisted that he go with her.
My mom had a brother with severe drinking problems. I don't know how many times he promised to stop drinking. He would literally start shaking just seeing someone with a beer.

 

[KingWeWuz]

Yes - and I maintain that he is a shitty boyfriend for allowing her to go without him - if for no other reason than knowing her history with drugs and alcohol and knowing Bryce was going to be there. Not about him trusting her. It's about him not trusting them. And he should be able to convey that to her. If not, then that is a major problem in their relationship.
Recovering alcoholics and drug abusers continue to go to their meetings because they know the temptations will always be there. It's not as simply as deciding not to do it anymore.

What should the mc have said? "I think you shouldn't trust your friends because I hate them? They're bullies and drug addicts?" She knows that. That doesn't need to be said. She openly expressed wanting to hang out with them which is already a shitty thing to do.

The mc has no control over her actions. He didn't know, nor expect they'd drug her, or he probably would have voiced it.

It's not his responsibility to tell her who she should and shouldn't hang out with. It's her responsibility to decide this on her own.

Also, she wasn't asking permission. She was telling him where she was going. That's all.

 

[clowns234]

What should the mc have said? "I think you shouldn't trust your friends because I hate them? They're bullies and drug addicts?" She knows that. That doesn't need to be said. She openly expressed wanting to hang out with them which is already a shitty thing to do.

The mc has no control over her actions. He didn't know, nor expect they'd drug her, or he probably would have voiced it.

It's not his responsibility to tell her who she should and shouldn't hang out with. It's her responsibility to decide this on her own.

"I don't want you to go the party without me because I don't trust them." If she still insisted on going alone, I would want to know why. 'Because they don't like you' would not be an acceptable answer if she wanted to stay in a relationship with me. Clearly, that would show she doesn't trust the MC's judgement (in my opinion).

 

[Cthulhu4Prez2020]

If making good decisions were that simple, there would be no addicts.

That's not even close to being true. How many drug addicts are there because of some medical issue where their doc prescribed them drugs and by just following directions they got hooked? Doing something once or even a few times may or may not be a good decision, but doesn't necessarily create an addict.

The issue is that this isn't the '40s or '50s where stuff like this just wasn't talked about. Talking about addiction has been happening for decades now. People KNOW what to do or not do. Whether or not they do those things is their choice, hence where the bad decisions come into play, hence the bad decision she made, hence why I said she fucked up.

It's not that the BF should have gone with her, he SHOULD have said "No, you ain't goin' to that party, you don't need to get wrapped up in that shit. You wanna see him and say goodbye? Take him to a cafe or go hit Pizza Hut, but your ass don't need to be going to that house party"

 

[KingWeWuz]

"I don't want you to go the party without me because I don't trust them." If she still insisted on going alone, I would want to know why. 'Because they don't like you' would not be an acceptable answer if she wanted to stay in a relationship with me. Clearly, that would show she doesn't trust the MC's judgement.

So basically, the mc, while keeping it secret they're dating, will show up to the party where all his bullies are waiting to greet the girl, to go through a beatdown/harassment from the crowd? Is that what you're saying? It's not that she should've gone with him. It's that she should have chosen not to go to the drug dealers farewell party to begin with if she wasn't stable enough.

 

[clowns234]

So basically, the mc, while keeping it secret they're dating, will show up to the party where all his bullies are waiting to greet the girl, to go through a beatdown/harassment from the crowd? Is that what you're saying? It's not that she should've gone with him. It's that she should have chosen not to go to the drug dealers farewell party to begin with if she wasn't stable enough.

If he came with her, there would be no reason to keep it a secret that they're dating.
They're adults now, right? As far as I know, they haven't tried to beat him up since they were kids and when he kicked their asses. Right or wrong, the MC is the one who threw the first punch in a fit of rage without waiting for an explanation.

 

[UncleFredo]

That's not even close to being true. How many drug addicts are there because of some medical issue where their doc prescribed them drugs and by just following directions they got hooked?

Far fewer than you might expect. A significant part of the problem relates to federal guidelines about prescribing narcotics. Everyone reacts to narcotics differently. Yes the the response tends to fall into bell curves, but those curves have very little relation to any given individual. Prior to the "drug crisis" doctors were free to treat their individual patents as individuals. Did some abuse that trust? Of course they did. Doctors are no more or less saintly that any other demographic.

Problem now is that the narrative has conflated legitimate prescription drug use with criminally produced drugs, Chinese produced fentanyl, being most notable. So doctors are afraid to prescribe drugs based on the response of their individual patients, who end up in pain and seek other alternatives. Self medication with powerful narcotics is a roadmap to disaster.

If your doctor is competent, and carefully monitors your use of narcotics, prescribing varying levels as you work through recovering from your injury or medical procedure, the odds of addiction are extremely low. Now factor that statement into a medical system where the government wants your doctor to spend no more than 15 minutes at most in a consultation.

One more point. The federal guidelines on prescribing narcotics are utterly absurd for long term chronic pain suffers. And maybe over the very long haul those suffers do develop an addiction. So what? Which is worse a dependency on a prescription drug, or a life of continual pain? Sometime we have to accept the least bad choice.

 

[KingWeWuz]

If he came with her, there would be no reason to keep it a secret that they're dating.
They're adults now, right? As far as I know, they haven't tried to beat him up since they were kids and when he kicked their asses. Right or wrong, the MC is the one who threw the first punch in a fit of rage without waiting for an explanation.

So?

She wanted to keep it secret, I assume, because her friends hate him.

Anyway, it's completely not his fault for not telling her what to do. How would the mc have known? They treated her well, not the mc. The mc has a bias against them. She knows all that.

If she killed someone at the party would a normal person say, "boy, it's my fault this happened because I let her go?" No, that's irrational. She knows the mc doesn't like them, she went to party with them anyway. She didn't ask for the mc permission did she? She informed him about a decision she made, and he just asked her, knowing it stung him, to not get fucked up.

Again, as I've said before, a relationship will die if one party can't trust the other party to make decisions and think for themselves. She made the wrong decisions, not the boyfriend. She knew he didn't want her to go and hang out with her bullies, that went without saying.

 

[v1900]

She was going to see Bryce and also, to see the other two. That is not in dispute. You're welcome to your opinion but unless you have something else, it is not evidence that she was going there to cheat.

Well that is the point of the example of conspiracy to commit felony. If we are strict about it, we can not know what a person thinks nor his/her intent. Nevertheless the person is judged based in the sequence of events and the joke about, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, applies. Consider this:

"It is not necessary to prove that the criminal plan actually was accomplished or that the conspirator was involved in all stages of the planning or knew all of the details involved. The main elements that need to be proven are a voluntary agreement to participate and some overt act by one of the conspirators in furtherance of the criminal plan. If a person has an understanding of the unlawful nature of a plan and knowingly and willfully joins in that plan on one occasion, that is sufficient to convict him for conspiracy even though he had not participated before and even though he played only a minor part."

You must be registered to see the links

Remember that when we talk about law examples we are referencing a whole body of academic study and effort to tackle moral dilemmas in an ethical way. It is recognized that we as human beings do not just react to the cues of the situation but we indeed plan ahead. That is why we can say that all the acts she committed up to when she grabbed Bryce's hand she was plotting, starting from the dialogue she had with Leo/MC, even though we do not actually know what she was thinking. It is an exercise in weighing responsibility of an offender. She has to burden the responsibility as if she did in fact had planned since the beginning.

Important This is not intended to declare in absolute terms her guilt. This is intended to illustrate how in my way of thinking and maybe others here, I jump to the conclusion that she indeed planed to cheat. I used the law example just to illustrate that my opinion is based on actual logical grounds.

If you will humor me. Suppose that Ava and Leo were actually married and live in a state that considers infidelity a felony. Lets keep all other details the same. Now lets paint three different outcomes:

• Everything happened as it is portrayed.
• She actually cheated.
• She was actually raped.

Even though the third erases any possibility to accusing her of felony, all three of them are grounds for divorce. You will look like an asshole if you do but it is ground for divorce. That is because it will be considered as a plan of her own all the events leading to the rape, starting with the misleading argument of her wanting to see her friends.

 

[clowns234]

Well that is the point of the example of conspiracy to commit felony. If we are strict about it, we can not know what a person thinks nor his/her intent. Nevertheless the person is judged based in the sequence of events and the joke about, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, applies. Consider this:

"It is not necessary to prove that the criminal plan actually was accomplished or that the conspirator was involved in all stages of the planning or knew all of the details involved. The main elements that need to be proven are a voluntary agreement to participate and some overt act by one of the conspirators in furtherance of the criminal plan. If a person has an understanding of the unlawful nature of a plan and knowingly and willfully joins in that plan on one occasion, that is sufficient to convict him for conspiracy even though he had not participated before and even though he played only a minor part."

You must be registered to see the links

Remember that when we talk about law examples we are referencing a whole body of academic study and effort to tackle moral dilemmas in an ethical way. It is recognized that we as human beings do not just react to the cues of the situation but we indeed plan ahead. That is why we can say that all the acts she committed up to when she grabbed Bryce's hand she was plotting, starting from the dialogue she had with Leo/MC, even though we do not actually know what she was thinking. It is an exercise in weighing responsibility of an offender. She has to burden the responsibility as if she did in fact had planned since the beginning.

Important This is not intended to declare in absolute terms her guilt. This is intended to illustrate how in my way of thinking and maybe others here, I jump to the conclusion that she indeed planed to cheat. I used the law example just to illustrate that my opinion is based on actual logical grounds.

If you will humor me. Suppose that Ava and Leo were actually married and live in a state that considers infidelity a felony. Lets keep all other details the same. Now lets paint three different outcomes:

• Everything happened as it is portrayed.
• She actually cheated.
• She was actually raped.

Even though the third erases any possibility to accusing her of felony, all three of them are grounds for divorce. You will look like an asshole if you do but it is ground for divorce. That is because it will be considered as a plan of her own all the events leading to the rape, starting with the misleading argument of her wanting to see her friends.

Once again, your theory only holds up if we assume the conclusion that she must have went there to cheat. Guilty until proven innocent. But conspiracy law doesn't apply here. You have to have grounds of a conspiracy beyond "I think one exists" otherwise any crazy conspiracy would have to be seen as true unless otherwise disproven - which is not how the law works. Unless you live in some theocracy where logic goes out the window.

 

[Acardia02]

Funny thing is that I actually find similar real life story in reddit.
The difference is her friends are not his bully, but the guy is just not on friendly term with them, he doesn't like druggies.
He already voicing his opinion on them many times to the girl to stay away from them but she said they are her real friend and she is strong enough not to fall to temptation again.
She end up getting rape by one of her friend there and pregnant. The rapist run away and the guy end up with pregnant raped girlfriend, the girl also become PTSD and afraid of man except him.
I think the guy said he will stay with her but only as a friend but all her family and and their friend condemn his decision to broke up and not to married her calling him names, etc. So he end up cut them off.

 

[Cthulhu4Prez2020]

Far fewer than you might expect. A significant part of the problem relates to federal guidelines about prescribing narcotics. Everyone reacts to narcotics differently. Yes the the response tends to fall into bell curves, but those curves have very little relation to any given individual. Prior to the "drug crisis" doctors were free to treat their individual patents as individuals. Did some abuse that trust? Of course they did. Doctors are no more or less saintly that any other demographic.

Problem now is that the narrative has conflated legitimate prescription drug use with criminally produced drugs, Chinese produced fentanyl, being most notable. So doctors are afraid to prescribe drugs based on the response of their individual patients, who end up in pain and seek other alternatives. Self medication with powerful narcotics is a roadmap to disaster.

If your doctor is competent, and carefully monitors your use of narcotics, prescribing varying levels as you work through recovering from your injury or medical procedure, the odds of addiction are extremely low. Now factor that statement into a medical system where the government wants your doctor to spend no more than 15 minutes at most in a consultation.

One more point. The federal guidelines on prescribing narcotics are utterly absurd for long term chronic pain suffers. And maybe over the very long haul those suffers do develop an addiction. So what? Which is worse a dependency on a prescription drug, or a life of continual pain? Sometime we have to accept the least bad choice.

Absolutely nothing you said was wrong. The problem tho is that the initial comment made it sound like addicts were created only through the addicts bad choices, which was false. Whether the number of addicts created through prescription medication is a lot or a few, it's not necessarily the addicts fault or bad choice. Not all bad decisions lead to addiction, and sometimes even "good" choices CAN lead to addiction was primarily what I was trying to say.

 

[v1900]

Once again, your theory only holds up if we assume the conclusion that she must have went there to cheat. Guilty until proven innocent. But conspiracy law doesn't apply here. You have to have grounds of a conspiracy beyond "I think one exists" otherwise any crazy conspiracy would have to be seen as true unless otherwise disproven - which is not how the law works. Unless you live in some theocracy where logic goes out the window.

Not quite, consider that a social media message to determine a place and time to have sex is admissible evidence. While the court has no real way of telling if they actually had sex it will be considered as if it really happened. While you won't find on your favorite search engine divorce and conspiracy to cheat all in one, the same logic of the conspiracy applies. Otherwise you would only have grounds for divorce [Edit] in an infidelity argument with a video of the act. While it is the best evidence to put forward it is not the only one.

Returning to the VN, the testimony of the attendants would be enough (I saw them grinding and went upstairs to have sex). It is not important if after that they actually have sex. Remember that most times such arguments are made after any evidence like semen can be retrieved so the case is decided by what you consider non existent evidence. When Ava agrees to go upstairs she herself gives all the evidence and that can be chronicled by the party attendants. So we have to do the mental exercise, because going by the dev's posts and what we see in the VN we can't be certain if there was sex, of considering how much guilt each party has. If at the end of the day she ends up being innocent it does not matter because there is no trust left. That is the rationale of someone that arrives home to find their partner naked just before the act. Imagine that the MC arrived to see the scene where Ava takes Bryce's hand and the are going upstairs. There would not be more to discuss after that. But because he didn't we as any court of law have to make a judgement with bits and pieces.

"You have to have grounds of a conspiracy beyond "I think one exists""

That is the fucked up part mate and actually a lot to think about. The authorities need just hear you say in an anger moment to your friend that you both should harm someone and boom you are now hoping that person out lives you. One person is ok but now say you are planning of blowing an important target and it does not matter what your defense is:

You must be registered to see the links

"otherwise any crazy conspiracy would have to be seen as true unless otherwise disproven - which is not how the law works."

Remember that you as defendant have rights but also the accuser has them, so they have to be disproven.

You must be registered to see the links

[Edit] You need surprisingly little to take a crazy conspiracy to court and win. What a conspiracy is, is to far reaching. I too think it is fucked up.

That is what we have been arguing since the beginning, you have to be mindful of everything you do or you might get in trouble and a defense of ignorance is not valid, that is why you should not go though life merely reacting to the social ques of the situation.

In a perfect world where we were able to see back in time we would not need courts and judges.

 

[clowns234]

If making good decisions were that simple, there would be no addicts.

That's not even close to being true. How many drug addicts are there because of some medical issue where their doc prescribed them drugs and by just following directions they got hooked? Doing something once or even a few times may or may not be a good decision, but doesn't necessarily create an addict.

The issue is that this isn't the '40s or '50s where stuff like this just wasn't talked about. Talking about addiction has been happening for decades now. People KNOW what to do or not do. Whether or not they do those things is their choice, hence where the bad decisions come into play, hence the bad decision she made, hence why I said she fucked up.

It's not that the BF should have gone with her, he SHOULD have said "No, you ain't goin' to that party, you don't need to get wrapped up in that shit. You wanna see him and say goodbye? Take him to a cafe or go hit Pizza Hut, but your ass don't need to be going to that house party"

So you believe that Nancy Reagan's, 'Just say no' program actually worked? Good luck finding credible stats to show that campaign worked.
Alcoholics drink for the same reasons non-alcoholics drink. It makes them feel good.
"Addiction is a complex condition, a brain disease that is manifested by compulsive substance use despite harmful consequence. Learn more at psychiatry.org."
A brain disease for which there is no cure - one can only learn to manage it. That's why alcoholics keep going to their meetings - so they don't get tempted and fall off the wagon.

 

[clowns234]

Not quite, consider that a social media message to determine a place and time to have sex is admissible evidence. While the court has no real way of telling if they actually had sex it will be considered as if it really happened. While you won't find on your favorite search engine divorce and conspiracy to cheat all in one, the same logic of the conspiracy applies. Otherwise you would only have grounds for divorce with a video of the act. While it is the best evidence to put forward it is not the only one.

Returning to the VN, the testimony of the attendants would be enough (I saw them grinding and went upstairs to have sex). It is not important if after that they actually have sex. Remember that most times such arguments are made after any evidence like semen can be retrieved so the case is decided by what you consider non existent evidence. When Ava agrees to go upstairs she herself gives all the evidence and that can be chronicled by the party attendants. So we have to do the mental exercise, because going by the dev's posts and what we see in the VN we can't be certain if there was sex, of considering how much guilt each party has. If at the end of the day she ends up being innocent it does not matter because there is no trust left. That is the rationale of someone that arrives home to find their partner naked just before the act. Imagine that the MC arrived to see the scene where Ava takes Bryce's hand and the are going upstairs. There would not be more to discuss after that. But because he didn't we as any court of law have to make a judgement with bits and pieces.

"You have to have grounds of a conspiracy beyond "I think one exists""

That is the fucked up part mate and actually a lot to think about. The authorities need just hear you say in an anger moment to your friend that you both should harm someone and boom you are now hoping that person out lives you. One person is ok but now say you are planning of blowing an important target and it does not matter what your defense is:

You must be registered to see the links

"otherwise any crazy conspiracy would have to be seen as true unless otherwise disproven - which is not how the law works."

Remember that you as defendant have rights but also the accuser has them, so they have to be disproven.

You must be registered to see the links

[Edit] You need surprisingly little to take a crazy conspiracy to court and win. What a conspiracy is, is to far reaching. I too think it is fucked up.

That is what we have been arguing since the beginning, you have to be mindful of everything you do or you might get in trouble and a defense of ignorance is not valid, that is why you should not go though life merely reacting to the social ques of the situation.

In a perfect world where we were able to see back in time we would not need courts and judges.

Even if they were humping on the dance floor, that would not be proof that she went there with the intention of cheating. I'm sorry but everything else is deflection. Unless you found a recorded message or something similar where she states "I am going to this party to cheat", you can't possibly know what she was thinking. You're conclusion that she went there to cheat is based solely on your assumption that she went there to cheat.

 

[v1900]

clowns234 Anyway mate I enjoyed the back and forth but I am going to bed mate.
I tried to explain my rational for judging without having all the facts as if I were Leo/MC. I would have interpreted it as she having planed for it.
If you feel like explaining yours to decide she did not wanted to cheat I would love to hear it but it would be for another day.