Crying rape:

she had been drinking and her memory wasn't reliable. She then said she wouldn't testify. The prosecutor knew they had no evidence, but he still went ahead with it. That's why he got into trouble and she didn't.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I think her punishment should be that the guy she accused should get to have sex with her.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Just because they didn't assault her, doesn't mean she wasn't assaulted.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Two peanuts were walking down the road. One was assaulted...

 

The accused should get two free shots. One right away, the second should be saved as a surprised. Let her go through life worrying when the second free shot comes.

 

"Free shots"?

 

Honestly i beklieve a person who falsely accuses you of a crime and manages to get you imprison should serve exactly the same sentence you did plus pay restitutions. There is no excuse for crying rape, assault, murder or kidnapping if there wasn't one. In fact trumping up false charges like that goes beyond the harm the supposed crime causes.

 

Again: Let's execute perjurers in criminal cases.

 

She gets to just walk away because the prosecutor's office gets to decide who they prosecute and who they don't. They're under no legal obligation to prosecute someone who has committed a crime if they don't feel like it. And as a general rule, district attorneys will never prosecute someone for perjury if the perjury involved telling lies that would help convict someone that the DA wants to convict. Like I said, the only time you are ever likely to face perjury charges is if you are caught telling lies that protect someone (usually yourself) that the DA is trying to prosecute.

 

no shsnt, by the time he was freed from jail, him and his wife wanted to put it behind them, i hate women who cry rape and they ahvent been raped, it makes it more difficult for women who have been raped

 

What should happen to people who claim weopons of mass destruction and then there aren't any?
Do the families of the dead get to get 'two shots' in?
Do they have to go thruogh the same experience as the citizens of the other country or better, their own soldiers who served in battle?

 

:bravo:
I wish I'd said that.

 

actually there is nothing to stop the victom (in this case the guy who was wrongly convitcted) from hiring a lawyer and taking a criminal case against the worman her self. Under australian law (and i belive all the common law systems) ANYONE can take a criminal case against someone but the AG can refuse to alow them permission to take the case. However this power is limited to cases where the crown intends to take the case themselves (because of double jepody). If the state has no interest in procicuting then he is free to do it himself.

Also he can take a civil case against the state for false inprisionment because there case was based on a lie

 

At least the same sentence. The poor guy may well have been raped himself repeatedly while in prison. He may have contracted HIV.

 

Here is the answer you seek muhahaha http://holylemon.com/HarassedAtWork--v608.html

 

If women (or men) were to be punished with jail time for accusing someone of rape, it would even further push them away from admitting the truth. Many are ashamed of being raped. Fear of persecution due to a poor legal system, unable to close the book on certain cases, would not be a wise move.

 

So what do you propose should be done about false accusations? Or do you deny that they occur?

 

Oh, certainly false accusations occur. If you could prove that the victim made a false accusation with malicious intent, well, then maybe you'd have a case. That would be an uphill battle.

Your idea really reminds me of something I've heard of before. Maybe it was Ancient Rome or Greece, but when a man accused another man of a crime and the defendant was proven innocent, the accuser ended up going to prison. Ultimately, the system was proven ineffective because it drove people away from fingering their assailants.

 

Assuming this could be proved, then what?

 

Presumably a person would only be punished if the accusation was proven to be false (not if it was merely a case of being unable to prove that the accused was guilty).