Devolution
Member
Uh have you been raped? Pretty sure anyone who says I'd rather be raped than ____ should probably be a bit more sympathetic to those who have and just not generally make such an insensitive statement.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Woman admits to false rape charges against her father; father set free after 11 years
- Thread starter crimsonheadGCN
- Start date
- Status
Uh have you been raped? Pretty sure anyone who says I'd rather be raped than ____ should probably be a bit more sympathetic to those who have and just not generally make such an insensitive statement.
plagiarize
Banned
many people seem to think that the problem here is that an 11 year old girls word (with some evidence supporting it) was enough to convict an innocent man. yes?
we have the hindsight of knowing pretty much conclusively that this guy was innocent, but the people who sentanced him and deemed him guilty did not.
this man, innocent though he was, met the standard we have in place for assigning guilt. it is not perfect, and no standard is. unless we are comfortable letting a guilty person go for not meeting the same level of evidence, then the standard probably isn't broken, unless we have an innordinate number of such false convictions rather than a sporadic handful.
i'm not trying to spring a trap here, i'm trying to make people look at the evidence that was available *without* the hindsight of knowing that the guy was innocent, and i'm trying to help people see why sometimes you let highly immoral acts remain legal if making them illegal causes more harm.
like say, famous repealed laws such as prohibition and the laws that for a time rendered abortion illegal. no one likes abortion. no one thinks it is good... but anyone sane who looks at what happened when it was illegal, compared to what happens now... well... they're not very likely to want to see it made illegal again.
Foxy Fox 39
Banned
Edit: Im not saying they should be absolved of any form of punishment.
I don't think jail time is necessarily the answer. Though I'm not sure what the answer may be. I have a hard time believing a person who has lied on another individual would come forward and admit their crime of wrongful accusation - especially if they understood they were to endure the same sentence that was going to be handed down to the accused.
That is assuming that due process was not taken and an innocent man (or woman) ended up in jail for an accusation of rape.
in the US it's all-inclusive
SquiddyCracker
Banned
Wow, he must be feeling pretty damn shit after having been falsely accused of raping her daughter and then imprisoned for 11 years.
He better be getting enough money from the state to not have to worry about anything for the rest of his life. As for the daughter, I don't know if you even should do anything in her case as she did this a pretty young child.
He better be getting enough money from the state to not have to worry about anything for the rest of his life. As for the daughter, I don't know if you even should do anything in her case as she did this a pretty young child.
plagiarize
Banned
i totally agree.
that keeping innocent people locked in jail by discouraging any similar admissions, and doing something that would likely discourage rape victims from coming forwards, is reason enough to let this one go.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
Except yet again, that's not what he or anyone you quoted and were responding to was saying so... Have fun?
where the fuck are you getting this from
no offense, but have you been to prison? i am not saying one is worse than the other in your or my eyes. but to someone, the thought of what happens and DOES happen in prisons can be enough for a person to make such a statement. 10 years of what could happen in a prison can be truly worse than a one time subjection to rape according to that poster. Also, it is a known fact people who commit crimes against children are the worst off in prison with what happens to them from other inmates/guards. so there is that.
also it could have been just a partially somewhat in bad taste joke. but what i said above still stands.
plagiarize
Banned
you do know that we go easier on people that admit their guilt than don't right? i mean, you do grasp such a basic concept as that yes?
SquiddyCracker
Banned
On a sidenote, I wonder about the legal stuff of this case.
She probably couldn't be convicted for perjury at the age of 11, but is it still perjury if you don't come out with the truth after the first initial lie?
She probably couldn't be convicted for perjury at the age of 11, but is it still perjury if you don't come out with the truth after the first initial lie?
Go easier = let everyone involved (false accuser and the state) walk away without any kind of compensation for the real victim in this case?
well, I don't think she's perjured herself as an adult. At least, there is no indication from the articles that she did.
plagiarize
Banned
it's an open question. i am quite bemused as to why anyone would hesitate to answer it.
throw a girl in jail for eleven years who finally turned her life around because of something she did when she was eleven? when doing so would likely lead other people who shouldn't be in jail to remain there? when doing so would likely discourage genuine rape victims from coming forwards? just because it makes you angry what she did?
i do think the wrongfully accused should be compensated. i think it's shocking that many states offer nothing as apology for a wrongful conviction. i don't think we should throw people in jail when it's bad for society though, no.
don't forget that she let 11 years pass while an (assumingly) innocent man was sitting behind bars
Probably not, but then the investigation would be bad enough. What exactly would constitute evidence? And how much 'evidence' would constitute it being taken to trial?
I wouldn't want to find out.
Of course jail time should be immediately expressed to any and all people making accusations. If you're lying you could end up in Jail. They should say it often and early, before the fact, to prevent things like this. I am not sure they properly indicated to this child the seriousness of her accusations and what it would mean to do something like that to an innocent person. I can't imagine how this guy feels, especially if he encountered any violence or abuse as a result of his conviction. Part of me would be thinking about eating a gun, the other part would be so happy that it was all over and hoping life had something, anything for me to keep me moving on.
She should be punished, and normally she might have been for perjury, but I think statutes of limitations comes in to it. It was a perversion of justice, and we sure as shit don't know how to deal with those yet.
She should be punished, and normally she might have been for perjury, but I think statutes of limitations comes in to it. It was a perversion of justice, and we sure as shit don't know how to deal with those yet.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
Because there's nothing to discuss?
I explicitly stated earlier that jailing her will help no one, why don't you claim that i want her to be raped for 11 years if you're going for horrible strawman? If the state refused to compensate, she at least should be liable to pay him ?? i dunno anti-child support?
plagiarize
Banned
well, clearly there is. clearly it's not remotely off topic to discuss the standards required for a rape conviction.
if you are angry that this guy was imprisoned, and not at the legal system as it stands... that's a very different place to be coming from than being angry at how the legal system is currently.
Again, though, we wouldn't want to discourage people who aren't lying to come forward. This case should prove that the truth is sometimes as hard to detect than a lie; if a person who is telling the truth about being raped is punished further, we are moving further from our objective.
I'd rather not be raped and not be in prison.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
plagiarize
Banned
who was it who said that people in this thread were saying we shouldn't punish rape, because doing so would discourage other people from coming forwards and admitting that they raped someone?
you want to throw strawman accusations to a post responding to your own?
i agree that the state should pay him, and nothing i said inferred otherwise. sorry that i didn't understand what the hell you meant by 'Go easier = let everyone involved (false accuser and the state) walk away without any kind of compensation for the real victim in this case?'
i took you complaining about letting her walk away to mean you wanted to see her held and not walking away freely.
i'm perfectly familiar with Sagan's list of logic flaws. and i'm also well aware of the debating technique wherein you accuse someone else of reverting to them, when you are using them yourself, to take any sting out of the accusation coming back your way.
I don't think it's off topic to discuss standards for a rape conviction, but I don't think that the case brought up in the article has failings. The girl kept her story consistent, she had her fabricated journal entries, and the medical examiner said she had groin trauma. If I were a juror from that evidence, i would say it's enough to convict. I don't know how much more thorough you can be aside from demanding a confession to convict.
You're arguing for not punishing liars at all in any way. I said by that logic we should not punish anyone because that discourages confessions. Obviously eye for an eye has been out of use for like 500 years, so i don't know why people would want that, but there should be consequences for lying under oath even for those who confess, same as there are consequences for every other criminal who confesses.
I keep seeing this in this thread, but you are also encouraging an opposite effect. You are encouraging girls or women with vendettas, caught cheating, waking up from a drunk night and not liking the person they ended up with, etc etc that its ok to cry rape in a lie without any fear or reprecussions. Theres no consequence there at all opening a giant loophole.
Discotheque
Banned
plagiarize
Banned
which is how i feel too. i feel that this is an unfortunate side effect of reasonable standards. that she gets away with it, is also unfortunate. no one can give that man back his time, but by coming forwards she partially righted a wrong.
hate who she was and what she did 11 years ago. don't hate who she is now and what she did by coming clean... and while the state should offer her father some compensation, they don't deserve any blame here.
the system is, like all legal systems, imperfect. it's also the best we've been able to come up with so far. i don't know how there can ever be an easy answer to child rape cases where all we have to go on is the kids word... but i think what we have now is about as good as it's going to get.
Chiggs
Gold Member
False rape charges are one of those topics that people don't like to discuss to because it's such an awful thing to think about, and of course there are going to be the women-haters that try to fly under the radar when a discussion like this comes up; however, speaking as someone with numerous friends in law enforcement (and those that practice law), false rape allegations are far more common than people might think.
That's why I loathe one night stands. You really have to watch your ass in this day and age. Too many damaged people looking to destroy the lives of others.
plagiarize
Banned
for an eleven year old child though? i am not saying perjury shouldn't be illegal for an adult, as i think it should... but should we punish an adult for lying in court when they were a child?
rape is such a tricky thing, as the evidence for it is very transient. that's why we have to take the word of child as gospel, if like this the evidence doesn't contradict it, and the testimony is detailed and consistant. that allows for kids to abuse the system and have bad things done to their parents. yes.
i've seen no evidence that false rape convictions is a problem coming close in scope to child rape.
i'm not saying 'all perjury should go unpunished'. i'm saying perjury should go unpunished under these specific circumstances when punishing it would, i believe, cause more social harm. if a glut of pre pubescents start accusing their parents of raping them and we see a bunch of false convictions, i'll happily admit i was wrong. as it is, cases like this are thankfully very rare. no child rape is excusable, but the world would be a much better place if child rape cases were as rare as cases such as this.
Why would it discourage people who are telling the truth from coming forward to know that if they're lying they would be accountable? If they want to hold a rapist accountable and the guy was found not guilty that wouldn't mean they were lying. But if you bring false allegations and it comes out that they're false then you will face scrutiny and may end up in court. This is how it is already done if they detect the charges are false, but to make it known to the claimant should also be done. It shouldn't prevent anything but people making false claims.
Because what if you can't prove the truth? The man who was imprisoned for 11 years knows this feeling. If you can't prove the truth and are assumed to be lying, you open yourself up for further injustice. I would rather all rapists be tried, even if they aren't necessarily found guilty.
plagiarize
Banned
if the court finds that the victims testimony is untrue, and that the rapist is innocent (when they aren't) what would prevent someone pressing for perjury charges?
and again, we are talking about prepubescent children being sternly told all the bad things that could happen if the person who raped them gets off?
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
.
Dude Abides
Banned
He's really raping the opposition.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
Devolution
Member
:lol I think that was my first ever mispost.
It's even better when you make a thread in a thread.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
hostility.
Justice should be blind and should not care about 'social harm'. At various points in time, social harm was being atheist, being jew, being gay, having money, e.g. Turing was sentenced because him being gay would do social harm. Once justice starts looking for some other reasons except what the case is, justice is no more. IF there are laws for underage perjury, there should be some consequences, slap on the wrist, public disapproval, instead, they continue to call her victim.
If you're arguing justice should be social engineering scheme instead, well, that's whole different topic. There are plenty of countries who adhere to this point of view, United States was not supposed to be among them...
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
I'm confused now.
Devolution
Member
Oh when you make a thread as a post inside of another thread instead of in the OT, is what I meant. Try that one, I've done it, and felt really dumb. Too many tabs not pay attention, bad idea.
i took her saying that your misquote didn't belong in here as it was something entirely separate from the conversation and unrelated, thus something for a new thread versus this one.
though since it was a mispost, it's not like you did it deliberately to be some kind of rebel.
Devolution
Member
I didn't want to be insulting at all, just that I've done what he just did with threads, and it's even more of a "wow i'm dumb" moment.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
Haha, ah gotcha. I'm usually super paranoid so it hasn't happened yet but apparently all good things must end.
Even worse when someone quotes you. I thought I was able to delete it in time. :/
you can't erase the internet!
plagiarize
Banned
i'm not arguing for social engineering. the laws Turing was sentenced by were forged on religious morality, not on social good. that there is no evidence at all that any of the things you listed cause any social harm is argument against any laws that try to limit them.
at no point in time was being atheist, jewish, or gay, demonstrated as being bad for society.
statutes of limitations, different rules for minors, we can argue whether they should or shouldn't exist, but they do right? a courts application of the rules should be blind, but drafting of them should not... and they should be reassessed regularly to see if any changes to the rules made things better or worse. choosing whether or not to press charges should not be blind.
- Status