Case getting weaker by the day 

YesDo you consider the guy a sex trafficker and a mob boss?
What's crazy is a know a guy who moves just like this. I know it's crazy.
Basically long story short, guy is extremely emotionally and psychologically manipulative.
He was dealing with this chick who had a baby and a baby father that she lived with, and she worshipped the ground this man walked on.
She would do anything for him. And at one point he had her on a dog leash, butt naked eating dog food. I know what happened because I saw the video. He showed it to me.
He had several other women too, but nothing like her. He would do shyt like have anal sex with her and then send the pictures to her baby's father.
The whole situation was weird and they have been dealing with each other for quite some time.
So by personally witnessing a relationship like this, a relationship where the woman wanted to be there and endured extremely inhumane treatment i think I have more insight into this than most.
And would I say the chick in the situation i'm describing is a victim?
My answer would be definitely yes because I personally witnessed the psychological and manipulative abuse that he would enact on her on a regular, and continues basis to break down, not only her confidence, but herself worth.
I think it's hard to understand if you've never seen or experienced anything like that, but I can say what complete confidence that this is wrong, and she was abused.
Not to say there isn't a level of accountability she should have but the ability humans have to break down one another is quite real.
So, the man is guilty because he opened up her sexuality with her consent and she fell in love. Wow! That’s mad.Yes
The mob thing is something seperate though that has nothing to do with her.
In specific regards to her, I would say yes to the sex trafficking because he wanted her to have sexual relations with other men and she did.
With the dog collar incident he actually did take her over state lines and it was done in front of a group on men.
Don’t bother. Her stance is women are unable to be sexually liberated so everything is against their will.I think you’re overlooking what some women would willingly accept to be with a billionaire.
Can you give a concrete example
Nobody on mines talking about this shyt like that nowBroads on my timeline is loving the cuck CAC husband today cause of a statement he issued "oh he's a real man" type shytlogic be damned
No, I'm not.I think you’re overlooking what some women would willingly accept to be with a billionaire.
That’s not coercion which the prosecution is trying to paint.Say you have a girl and she’s been having regular sex in her previous relationships. Then you introduce her to threesomes and public sex. You give her that edge where something is always at risk.
She’d be embarrassed to tell her friends she’s having 3somes and she actually enjoys it.
However you know that and you seen her in action, you make her pick the girls and you deadass ask her “which one you like and why”. She is then forced to tell you what she likes about the other woman’s body.
You know that but nobody else does. She starts having regular orgasms when she’s being touched by women and she’s used to it now. Regular sex feels like levels below.
She then has that appreciation and respect for you because you know her taboo and you don’t judge her for it.
This only makes her love you more and she can’t go back.
I already explained my line of thinking in the post before the one you quoted and it wasn't what you typed.So, the man is guilty because he opened up her sexuality with her consent and she fell in love. Wow! That’s mad.
Him wanting it doesn‘t mean coercion. The scary part for anyone is even if consent is voiced, a person can later say they didn’t really consent because they were afraid under an instance where there’s conveniently no concrete evidence.
Don't speak for me. You don't know me.Don’t bother. Her stance is women are unable to be sexually liberated so everything is against their will.