MOD:
See, I am trying to uncover
consistency or lack of it, though.
Of all the bullshit he presented,
what makes this one thing true?
@ the edit
I think he likely is a rapist, however he's going to skew any grey line he comes across to make himself seem more outrageous. Of course this is all conjecture, but he seems to me to stretch the truth but not outright lie.
Near as I can piece together, what happened is there was a girl who was dating another guy but living with him. She knew how to wind him up verbally, and did, and he would respond by being violent - I don't know how much physical damage he did, but he would chase her around with knives and buried one in a door. One night she was supposed to meet her boyfriend, and he stopped her from going for two or three hours, and forced intercourse, then he let her go.
I don't know how much implied consent there was, but she remained living with him even after seeing him be violent.
My tentative armchair-psych picture is that she was probably a victim of previous abuse, trying to come to terms with it by recreating it under more "controlled" circumstances - ie. provoking him emotionally, with predictable results.