You're an idiot. Now that that statement would be considered both a fact and, technically, a smear.You just got snookered into participating in Fran's smear.
Note, Blake apparently hasn't been convicted. And if he had been, wouldn't you want to hear the whole story before you decided on the sentence?
However, there is no smear when you are posting a story from snopes.com that clears up the facts. The story cleared up his criminal history. Many believed he was charged with raping a 14 year old; that is incorrect. He is charged with raping his ex girlfriend.
And here's more proof how dumb you are. You state "Note, Blake apparently hasn't been convicted." Well, it's pretty clear from the story that he hasn't been convicted.