Perhaps we were too harsh
Why isn't it? If it's found to be demonstrable wrong I'm fine with it.
@That one lurker, because we live in a society, in some states it is a crime but hasn’t been declared nationally
@That one lurker, it's not already a crime? Wtf
@Ray213, let’s hope it never comes up at the national level. States rights, ftw.
@YourProudFather, not one typically prosecuted. They can have a person dead to rights on filing false charges, perjury, false sworn statements, lying to police, etc, and it is comparatively rarely pursued, especially with women, and moreso if the accusation is rape. A lot is political. Nobody wants the media attacking them for going after a purported rape victim even if there is 100% incontrovertible proof that the rape allegations are false and a signed confession that she lied in her accusation.
@That one lurker, the idea of not being able to be press charges for a false claim is to make it so that people are less afraid to come forward in cases where rape had actually occurred. Not saying that's how we should go about it, but wanted to explain the logic.
@ThePandaPool , it's bad logic, in the reverse. Because there is zero risk and all gain, false reports takeaway the legitimacy of real cases.
Think about like this, the RV (rape victim) gets immediate positive feedback, admiration, incouragement, and a legion of supporters on your side.
While the immediate claim castigates the offender as both a social pariah and cast as morally evil. Which if the allegations true, should be the social ramifications. This will also hit the R'est jobs opportunities, in the form of name recognition.
If we kind of think of stopping possible abuses while not penalizing victims. Then removing false allegation from the pool should help legitimate cases come out easyer.
The way I formed my opinion was over collage rape cases, where the the vast majority of them was fake, the "RV" was trying to get back at some one or the sex was just bad. This caused a lot of potential R'est to kill them selves.
A good case example is called "mattress girl".
@That one lurker, that said, someone legitimately raped by a powerful or rich individual that can win in court, then can press charges on the victim and further ruin their lives. I wasnt giving an opinion as to which way was right, just pointing out that there was a legitimate reason for it.
@ThePandaPool , its not legitimate thou. Using extreme examples for the mean rule is ridicules.
If we're in a world where only the upper echelon of people raped, then the point is valid.
But people of equal and lesser power rape people as well.
In the case I sited, if you never heard of it.
Girl(RV) accused Guy(R'est) of R. She spent an entire semester carrying around a mattress, giving speeches, and "raising awareness of RV". The guy was going in law school the accusation happened, he got dropped from all of us scholarships, he got dropped from Yale, he was made as a social pariah. As he should, but then he killed himself.
He specifically done that because of a special ruling for college campuses. The college can moderate as it sees fit legal cases, meaning you was guilty before innocent and the court favored the victim.
He put down a lot of evidence, including texts, videos, and a verifiable location where he was on the night of the incident. The college ignored all of it...
@That one lurker, sorry. Forgot who I was talking to. You do you.
@ThePandaPool , bro, its not a valid argument thou. And it gives stolen glory to evil people. Evil people exist in the world. Rather they be "rapists" or "rape victims". I was just giving you one case, and exsplain it if you never heard of it.
@YourProudFather, I think they can always get them for filing a false police report.
@That one lurker, I've heard of that one. There was also another where the girl claimed she was GR (Gang-r) by I think it was 2 guys on the football team. Their scholarships were revoked, they were kicked off their team, and expelled I believe.
When the truth came out, the school apparently accepted one of them back, But no scholarship. The school then stated that they never did any of the above. From what I know, the girl only got a year in prison, after a plea. A year, for something that would have put both guys in prison for 5 years or more (5 is the minimum I believe). And she utterly destroyed their reputations, and job prospects.
@TheGoogler, I think the specifics of that was that they were English. They have these kinds of laws.
The reason why I used a US based one specifically was because the US has Title Nine. A kind of ethics codes that was put in some time ago.
But during the Obama administration, Obamas people put out a revisement up Title Nine( or he made an executive order I can't remember). The revisement asked for the loosest interpretation of the law be applied. Allowing the schools them selves do internal investigation.
Which sadly made it into a he said she said kangaroo court.
@That one lurker, the one I mentioned took place in Connecticut. But yeah, I getcha.
@TheGoogler, there's way to many of them, and I think panda would agree.
@Hot Coffee, u don’t want it to be a crime everywhere?
@ThePandaPool , but that makes no sense since if a woman actually was raped she wouldn’t have to fear this felony since she isn’t lying
@TheGoogler, everyone has sympathy for the rape victims as they should but for some reason nobody has any sympathy at all for men who r falsely accused of rape and r even proven to be completely innocent
@That one lurker, and sadly the majority of times they usually take the woman’s side right away even when she has nothing but her word and the guy has evidence but their lives r ruined b4 they even start an investigation
@bobbylupo, not by means of the federal government.
@Ray213, forgive me for i may be stupid but isnt filing a false police report a crime everywhere? Wouldnt this fall under tht?
@Sleeper, i get tht just look at what happened to the old lady who sued mcdonalds over the temp of her coffee. It has been shown so many times tht she was right to sue yet ppl still demonize her
Of course it's sensationalized as "war on women" like bruh, no. It's war on liars
@AlyciaFear, so…. A war on women
@AlyciaFear, every time women are held accountable for their actions it's called a war on women
@BigJohnson86, shots fired! Shots fired!
Wasting police time and causing harm to an innocent person should probably have already been a crime
@Medic135, True. The second an allegation is even MADE on a dude, his life is basically over whether he’s guilty or not, why should a woman using this fact as a weapon to hurt an innocent man get to walk away scott free?
@DesignatedElfWhipper, you’re supposed to be innocent until proven guilty but in the court of popular opinion you’re basically guilty as soon as you’re accused
@DesignatedElfWhipper, Gone Girl fvcked me uuuuuuuuuup.
The only downside to this is now women are less likely to recant. I still think the law should be on the books, but no one ever talks about the possible downsides.
I still can’t believe that it wasn’t already a crime everywhere. I always said that if u accuse someone of rape and then it’s proven that it wasn’t true the accuser should get sentenced to as much time as the person woulda gotten if he was found guilty
The problem is prooving that theyre false.
*innocent dude being rude*
Random woman: “uh.. he raped me. ..yeah.”
*innocent dude, now confused af, goes to jail*
Finally brothers being protected from sisters.
One of the biggest, and from my perspective, most logical reasons not to do this, is that it is a greater incentive for someone who is lying about this to not recant. Because unfortunately it is often the only way to prove that it didn’t happen, and with crimes like this, you tend to be guilty until proven innocent
This stat is completely incorrect- only about 7-10% of rape allegations by a woman against a man are false. The issue is that criminal courts are notoriously bad at convicting rapists, and the way that this law works is that if a person was found “not guilty” in a court of law, their accuser would then be charged with a crime. Obviously falsifying evidence of any crime is against the law, but no other crime penalizes the plaintiff in a jury trial if a defendant is found guilty.
@Shjthony Postano, no, that’s now how it is. An accuser would not automatically be charged with a crime, rather it would be a whole other process of bringing charges with the same assumption “innocent until proven guilty” and the same standard of evidence “beyond a reasonable doubt” applied to the accuser. It would have to then be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the accuser fabricated their accusation and willfully pursued it knowing it was false, that is a high standard of evidence to meet. And yes, actually, someone who fabricates any criminal charge against someone else can be held criminally liable if it can be proven they fabricated it, it’s not unique to rape.
False allegations should have consequences.
What if the rapist can prove its a false allegation?
I hope there isn't a loophole.
Cause there is proof, but if the victim showers due to trauma. A lot of evidence is out the window.
And if you do get the DNA, in some areas there is a backlog. Hence. My question?
@TurtleBlink, I think it should be just as hard to prove malicious intent as it is to prove a rape though to balance it out.
@TurtleBlink, there is a difference between being unable to prove the allegations of rape true and having demonstrable proof that the allegations are false (and I don’t even mean specifically under false allegation cases where she was raped, but for some reason other than malicious intent fingered the wrong person for the crime).
Last time I looked at the stats, slightly more than twice as many rape allegations were proven false as proven true, with slightly more than 90% unable to be proven either way. A law like this should only penalize those proven false, not the over 90% unable to prove either way in court/law.
Wait I thought falsely accusing someone of a crime and lying in court was already illegal.
No, no. I still demand more from them. You're free to take the lowest hanging branch, though. This is a start.
That's fine but yall need to understand that she wouldn't be automatically considered guilty if she doesn't win. She would need to be tried separately for her crime and the burden of proof would be to prove she did lie, which might be a lot harder. Not that I'm against that, I just think people don't understand what all this entails here.
@TomPholio, that’s the point. Making anything prosecutable brings with it the “innocent until proven guilty” assumption and the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard of evidence. But there are cases where there is solid proof that an accusation is fabricated. Take a case where person A claims person B raped them on such and such a date and such and such a time, but there is video evidence, eyewitness evidence and whatnot that proves person B was at work at that exact time, and was in fact at work all day. That would be a pretty strong piece of evidence that Person A’s accusation against person B is fabricated because it can be proven false beyond a reasonable doubt.
@Block1187, #BelieveAllWomen *insert confused pound of feathers vs pound of bricks face*