Punishing women for false accusation of rape

Yes it does exist...In this context I was mainly referring to the work place, where much has been greatly eliminated.
But again, the object and reason for this thread, is to highlight how sometimes, just sometimes, false accusations can and are made...and in some cases, not all cases, but some, serious consequences are the result of such false accusations.
And since when in the majority of these cases when found guilty, heavy sentences are the deserved result, what of the cases where the accuser is found lying? as rare as they probably are. Are they simply collateral damage in the efforts to end sexual assaults on women in cases where the accuser is lying?
Do we forget about them? Afterall they are only men!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Relevance???

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Innocent until proven guilty? I had this argument with a female relative during the Brett Kavanaugh hearing. She was pretty upset about the whole thing when I argued that he deserved better treatment. What shut her up was my asking her if it had been her son who was accused, would she be so quick to judge then?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It hasn't been greatly eliminated, still goes on. I've experienced it, in subtle and not so subtle ways. And there is still a fear that crosses my mind in bringing anything related to sexual harassment to HR, or someone in management. As far along as women have come in the workplace in terms of laws protecting our rights, I still fear that I won't be believed and will lose my job for speaking up. I have a friend who was ''managed out'' of her job last year, because she spoke out against her boss' flirtations. She was an amazing employee, worked hard, but since she wouldn't tolerate her boss' bs, she lost her job. It still goes on, it just might not make the news.

The media paints a picture that isn't always reality. It shows mega millionaires/celebs who have lost everything due to years of sexually harassing their female staff, and so everyone assumes that with the #metoo movement momentum, that stuff is behind us. It's not behind us.

That said, anyone who falsely accuses someone of any crime, should be arrested and face legal consequences, right up to prison time. It hurts men who are being falsely accused, and also hurts real rape victims by keeping that fear alive of not being believed.

 

Well said

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

If her son had done something like that, then I would hope she would be quick to judge - and quick to get him help. Imagine how much better off the US would be today if Kavanaugh had gotten help after the first time he assaulted a woman.

 

And should a hundred people accuse you of being a vampire without evidence, should we drive a stake through your heart?

 

Nope. But I would sure hope that someone would ask around and see if there was any evidence I was going around biting people. And if I was - then bring in the police. Saying "it's nonsense to claim I am a vampire!" is not a defense against assaulting people.

 

As long as we're not assuming guilt simply because it has been implied.

 

Nope. Guilt is determined by a court of law, not by accusers.

Still, if you had kids, and you were told by three separate people "he bit my kid for no reason!" - you probably wouldn't hire him for a babysitter, would you? Even if it was a "he said - she said" thing. And even if you don't believe in vampires.

 

Probably not. But if they were politicians trying to slander a nominee, i would be skeptical about their motivations

 

But you have no issue with parents trying to slander a hard worker?

I think you are seeing what you want to see. You wanted Kavanaugh to be a Supreme Court Justice, so you decided that anyone who said anything against him was trying to "slander" him. (Unfortunately, that approach is used to discredit a lot of assault and rape victims.)

 

Let's check in with you on other things, then: Is committing fraud, i.e., lying to someone, in order to have sex with them a felony? Should a man go to prison for years because he lied about his job, or told a woman he wasn't married, in order to get her into bed?

How about other crimes: Should the Goldmans go to prison? Why should they be allowed to sue a man found not guilty?

If a person is found guilty, what of the people who said that person wasn't? You know, the character witnesses? Should they go to prison for attempting to aid and abet crime?

Maybe where you come from the legal system is such a wreck, but in the U.S., carving out a special exception for people found not guilty of a particular range of crimes would be problematic and regressive.

Because around here, the problem we have looks like this: A woman reported a rape, but she was in transitional living, so the cops refused to believe her, dragged her back home, made her apologize to her housemates for falsely accusing anyone of rape, and at the stake of being evicted if she did not. At any rate, the suspect was eventually caught, several states away and several rapes later, and to this day the police department involved has no idea what they did wrong. But a serial rapist was allowed to accrue victims across states so a couple cops could feel better about bullying a vulnerable and disempowered victim.

The American legal system is devised to be hard to convict a crime; law enforcement has been working for years to erode this, but one part reamaining intact is that one need not be innocent to be not guilty.

Maybe in Her Majesty's dominions, it's different.

Oh, hey, there's that one high court in Italy that found a woman can't be raped if she was wearing tight jeans, on the grounds that rapists aren't competent enough to remove the jeans without her willing assistance. Does that mean she should go to prison for having accused rape?

What I don't understand about your complaint on behalf of the falsely accused is why it is so typal about its blurring of innocence, to the one, and lack of guilt according to particular rules and constraints, to the other.

Also, your syntax, "But in recent times ...", manages to land precisely on an abstract line in which you can be read as suggesting the question of inaccurate or unproven accusatins are somehow novel.

This is nothing new. And along the lines of a point known as, ¿Could You Please Not? or, ¿Could You Please Fail To? we once again find the complaint (ahem!) accidentally hitting typal marks.

This is how it always goes, and there is nothing new about your topic post.

Meanwhile, which complications do we really need to dive into in order to satisfy you? That, too, is something absent from rote masculinist complaint. Sometimes I wonder if this just sounds good to some dude, out there, so he ends up cornering himself at the outset and bricking in his beliefs as a shield; or if maybe he just believed it from the outset and thinks he's making some sort of real point.

Also, in re your sister, I can genuinely tell you about an American woman I know who is extraordinarily weary of the #MeToo moment; your posts suggest you would not understand what this actually means. Do you really know what your sister means?

Like I said, though, I'm thinking of the American version, which might not be formally applicable in what passes for justice under the Crown's supervision. However, charging a vast majority of the clutch of inaccurate accusations that do occur would test our system in ways no prosecutor generally wishes to, and the thing about that is the proverbial question currently buzzed as choosing this hill to die on. That is to say, if this is the priority by which we are going to test E & O as presumed calculated lies, we're probably doing it wrong. Maybe a position looks defensible, and maybe it even is, but if we look at what goes into it, these are the crimes we will prosecute in order to defend that arrangement of principles of justice? Compared to the statistical reality of who lies when, and what are the stakes? Compared to the number of traumatized memories and neurotic confusions of circumstance, the actual number of prosecutable lies remains, at least in my society, rather quite low. So, it's true, most people, including your sister, will agree the lies should be prosecuted. But compared to your blurring of lines, and the implications in my society, the whole discussion reeks of a particular masculinist politic that often frames itself as a reaction against something recent; as to the difference, there is a question depending on the details of our different legal systems, but it is also true that certain affecting prejudices swirling in each of our societies are not entirely dissimilar, and even have common historical heritage.

 

Well said wegs and rightly focused on the reason for the thread.


Some other dumb arse comments and predicted rantings by one or two others, should take note.

 

​

You don't like that terminology? How about "real arseholes"? What would you call them Bells?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

*shock* *horror* My feelings about you Bells?? I have none either way and prefer to focus on the emotional topic avoidance crap you have posted.

Nuh, let's not

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

.....not worth my time or my effort, except perhaps to say that you really need to take a page out of wegs book, and learn to focus on the issues, rather then your own totally blinkered immovable position...Similar in many ways to that position often taken by Trump.

Wait, just one more, sorry. No I don't have a problem with women Bells, and never have. Even with the time many years ago, when I wore a younger man's clothes, and got slapped on the arse by some Blonde

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

. And the couple of times I was happily seduced by sheilas that I fancied anyway. And have never really had any problem with the woman I have been married to for 42 years, despite her being very religious. Other relationships with women over the years have been non consequential as has been my relationship with many blokes also. But then, I'm a really nice bloke Bells, who actually makes friends very easily, but who despises bullies of all persuasions, both male and female.Thankfully, I don't know you at all, except you seem to fit into that female bullying category, going on your posts of course.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Would you convict on what was presented?

 

No; the statute of limitations has expired so he could not legally be convicted of the assault. (In 1982 in Maryland that sort of sexual assault was considered a misdemeanor, and thus has a limit on the amount of time that can pass before the person can be prosecuted.)

 

But we can still convict him in a public trial, as did congress?

 

I see morality as a fallen angel of light...