Top Stories

The story of Eric Frimpong

EricFrimpong (

If you have never heard the name Eric Frimpong (pictured in blue), then chances are you aren't familiar with his story. It is a sad story of a soccer player who seemingly had the world at his feet before a series of events changed his life forever.

ESPN the Magazine's Sam Alipour has written about Frimpong's story, and it is a must-read.


  1. The race of the accuser is actually important since that has a lot to do with cultural bias. If the victim was Asian, that means that there is a terrible stigma about black folk in general, especially when Asian women have sex, or any intimate contact, with them. Therefore, even though she can say that she is progressive, not racist, etc., it’s something that is inculcated subconsciously through the parents. (Although I am surprised that she was able to down so many drinks and not either barf or go into a coma, as Asians have notoriously bad alcohol tolerance.)

  2. fine. the article may be slanted in his favor. but maybe this was necessary because there is no other article slanted in his favor. there’s not even another article slanted against him. no other article exists. i mean hes not michael jackson, no iran or honduras controversy but a little soundbite any one…anderson, o’reilly, olbermann, nancy? just a little 5 minutes. i mean once you stack up the evidence (which isnt slanted, fact is fact) it shouldnt take more than 5 minutes for a viewer’s red flags to start going up. “what dna evidence from a completely different guy found in her underwear? and that guy had no charges pressed against him?” its absolutely ridiculous and embarrassing and hurtful. it makes me so angry i wanna cry! i just wish i could do something. and to whoever up there was talking about the shady aspects of frimpongs story….oh im sorry…is it a crime for a male college student to hang out with an 18 year old girl? is it a crime to consider cheating on your girlfriend? and its not like he tried to hide any of this. as i understand from the article he didnt with hold any of this information. so right…hed rape a girl and then lie about it by freely insinuating that he wanted to cheat on his girlfriend with the same girl.

    “it would be like being a jury and hearing the defense without the prosecution side, and then adjourning to decide the verdict.” if you read the article thats kind of exactly what did happen. just the opposite way. the jury never got to hear frimpong’s interview like they requested but the girls testimony was read in its entirety, uninterrupted.

    the only thing that matters inside a court of law is did frimpong rape this girl? not is frimpong a perfect boyfriend who never cheated or his girlfriend. the evidence they gathered was to prove rape or not rape not faithful or not faithful, good boyfriend or manwhore. thats irrelevant. he could be the biggst douche in the world – a lack of frimpongs dna, dna belonging tp another man that, again, is not frimpong combined with the testimony of someone who was so inebriated she was going in and out of consciousness indicates that they need to be looking for some one else out there that is capable of raping a woman, not frimpong. no bias in any article can slant the facts and there they are. we’ve been down this road, convicting people with poor evidence and exonerating them decades later based on dna evidence. we know memory can be a tricky thing, lol, i can imagine it is not improved by a near toxic bac. we actually have the facts ahead of time folks, not 20 years later. lets utilize them shall we?

  3. aristotle, face it, almost everyone in this thread thinks you’re retarded. You’ve been wrong at every turn, and have to resort to denigrating others. Did everyone pick on you in grade school? Is that why you’re so bitter? lol.

    Like someone else said, only Frimpong knows whether he raped the alleged victim–she surely can’t–she admitted to the whole night being foggy. Perhaps her boyfriend knows, too. But the whole point is that there is more than a reasonable doubt that Frimpong is guilty, based on the evidence–or lack thereof regarding lack of his DNA on her. How do you rape someone and not leave a trace of DNA on the alleged victim. And how are you convicted of a crime without the DNA evidence? And what about the dentist that the detectives forgot to mention–a material event? “Let’s just to on down the line until we find a dentist that will give us the answer we want”. And oh, btw, even that dentist said he absolutely charges for his services, which means the prosecution team committed perjury. At the end of the day, the SB justice system is incompetent and crooked, and aristotle is still an idiot.

  4. So I have had some ask about Frimpong’s address in jail. For those that want to send Eric letters about how his story has affected you, how you are behind him, or anything motivational…please let me know and I will get it to you somehow. I don’t want to post it publicly due to the fact that I am worried that some might send negative letters his way. He needs positive letters right now, not negative. So if you truly intend to send him a positive letter, let me know what you will talk to him about and I will give you his address at the jail somehow. He normally responds to all letters. He is a good young man and deserves our support.

  5. Nick (and others in general) –

    I read the article and did a fair amount of research into transcripts, info, etc., about the trial, including reading the comments on that link you posted. And the ex-boyfriend’s DNA was most definitely on the victim – in fact, it was his semen that was in her underwear; none of Eric Frimpong’s was found. His nails were never tested for DNA, so it cannot be determined whether or not he could have made the scratches on the victim, because he was never prosecuted. The victim and her ex-boyfriend couldn’t even agree over when they had most recently had sex, which in itself should cast doubt over the credibility of the two of their stories.

    I’m not able to be the judge here; only Eric Frimpong knows whether or not he is truly guilty. But from the facts, there is clearly doubt in this case; in fact, I can’t see any way he has been proven guilty beyong a reasonable doubt, especially since the ex-boyfriend wasn’t even questioned, and since the lack of DNA evidence makes the entire case circumstantial.

    Just my two cents.

  6. Chase:

    Your honesty is refreshing. Thanks for admitting up front that you are a liar and stupid, and you are welcome for the assistance in seeing the error of your ways.

    Is your problem with me that I use the name Aristotle or with what I say? Maybe you really are stupid. I only used personal attacks, as you call them, when talking to people who were clearly not interested in discussion other than to resort to name calling and lying. When in Rome, or Athens, as the case may be.

    I find it funny that the so-called Chase, in the first sentence of his post, seems to mock the idea of logic and thinks it’s wrong to say anything against logical fallacy. Could it be that logical fallacy is your forte and that I offended you by finding fault with it?

  7. I find it funny that the so-called Aristotle, extolling the virtues of logical debate and damning those that would engage in logical fallacy in the face of his own brilliant arguments, would resort to utilizing personal attacks. Socrates would be so disappointed in you…

    And for the record. I am a liar and really stupid. Oh and my reading comprehension is really, really poor. I am glad that you enabled me to see the error of my ways Aristotle.

  8. Greg:

    It’s slowly become very obvious that you are probably some twelve year old video game addict. Go back to your fragging and “owning”, and let the grown ups have a discussion. Good boy.

  9. Greg:

    Since you made yourself look stupid and are now just using name calling and lies as your main tactics, there’s not too much point in talking to you further is there, putz?

    NO ONE here has stated for sure what the girlfriend’s race is. Now we have someone saying it might be Asian. Your argument about me calling the race card is so stupid it’s enough to make the eyes roll right out of my head. I didn’t call the race card. I was talking about other people calling the race card all of the time. As for my so called flip flopping, that’s just another lie of yours. You know perfectly well what that sentence means. Yes, you could misinterpret it if you read it a certain way, but only if you wanted to for your own purpose, which is what you are doing. I must have stated about ten times that I have not taken any side, and that’s the whole point. We would all have to have a lot more facts and probably a correction to some of the so called facts we do have. If we are all going to just go by this story then Frimpong is likely innocent and there has likely been a gross miscarriage of justice. That’s what the author wants you to do. Now why don’t you play some more of your childish little games and just lift out the part where I say “Frimpong is likely innnocent”. Sh*t head.


Leave a Comment