<p>Again, I agree that the process in the Duke case was appalling. I also think in the Hofstra case, that more investigation was needed prior to making arrests. </p>
<p>Be that as it may, in all crimes, the defendants are innocent until proven guilty. Evidence is gathered. Some crimes like rape also involve the word of each party as there are no witnesses to the crime usually. But there is no way that every single crime case will only involve cases where the defendant is guilty of the crime. There will always be cases where the defendant is not guilty. That’s why we have trials and a justice system. The proof is when the case is brought to trial. The arrests certainly should have enough evidence to warrant an arrest. But an arrest is not a full trial of the case. </p>
<p>Certainly it is a travesty when an innocent person is wrongly accused and tried!!! And let’s not forget the many victims of crimes where perpetrators are still free on the streets too.</p>
<p>Lastly, for the final time…not sure why you are arguing the Duke case with me. I’m on your side as to how it was poorly handled.</p>
<p>I have a particularly jaded view of our justice system as it is a system of unequals. One of the comments that came out from the Duke case was that prosecutors are to seek justice; not wins. That’s obviously a problem when election time rolls around. The prosecution has the resources of the state to prepare a case. Defendents don’t. They have whatever resources they can cobble together. Sometimes winning a case bankrupts the defendant. Look at the 2007 “recovered memories” case in Rhode Island. </p>
<p>“We take seriously the allegations of victims, and we took this victim’s allegation seriously,” he said. “We wouldn’t have been doing our job if we didn’t present the case to a grand jury.”</p>
<p>[The accuser made a complaint to the North Kingstown Police Department on June 15, 2006. No statute of limitations applies to charges of first-degree sexual assault.</p>
<p>The case was referred to the attorney general’s office, which presented it to a grand jury on May 25 of this year. The grand jury returned an indictment for first-degree sexual assault against Allen.</p>
<p>On May 31, he pleaded not guilty to the charge after voluntarily appearing in Washington County Superior Court and was released on bail. According to court records, he was accused of raping the girl in North Kingstown between April 1 and Oct. 31, 1975.</p>
<p>Allen’s lawyer, Walter R. Stone, has said that his client and the woman grew up in the same neighborhood and that they never had sexual intercourse.</p>
<p>He was notified of the dismissal by the media yesterday, but said he would still go ahead with a motion to compel prosecutors to hand over the evidence that was presented to the grand jury. He said he has been trying to see the evidence since Allen was arraigned.]</p>
<p>There is no evidence whatsoever in the case; just “repressed memories” and the poor guy gets his life turned upside-down and has to spend money to defend himself. Given this case, any female could make any accusation against any man saying that he raped her decades ago and in Rhode Island, he could go to trial. This is the State Attorney General we’re talking about; not some local prosecutor!</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>In he-said, she-said, there often is no proof. Only testimony. The jury can convict without physical evidence.</p>
<p>Police Departments can skirt probable cause requirements with the Grand Jury system. The proceedings are usually secret. Nifong didn’t have probable cause to arrest the Duke Students so sent two police officers to the Grand Jury and they painted a picture without revealing the exculpatory evidence. It appears that this is a way to get around those inconvenient requirements. But this is a justice issue.</p>
<p>BCEagle, there will never be a system where only truly guilty people are brought to trial. An arrest is not a trial of a case. An arrest has probable cause or conditions it must meet. </p>
<p>Are there ever problems? Sure thing. Duke was a miscarriage of justice in multiple respects. </p>
<p>You are right that with he-said, she-said, there are more difficult burdens of proof. But this is what goes on in trial. A case usually is brought to trial because there is just cause to make a case but that doesn’t mean the defendant is truly guilty. Do you want the trial to take place prior to arrest? </p>
<p>Just because there are problems where innocent people are charged, doesn’t mean that there are not a vast number of cases where the defendant is guilty where justice has been served. Not to mention there are a huge number of guilty criminals walking the streets.</p>
<p>Again, you keep going back to the Duke case where I agree that justice was not served and the rogue DA was out for a “win” rather than seeking justice. One reason the case has garnered so much attention is that it was a travesty of justice. That doesn’t mean it is the norm. </p>
<p>Frankly, it is hard for a woman to press charges for rape. She must be believed for one thing. She has to worry about threats if she tells and the man actually goes free. She has to worry about her reputation (ala, “she was asking for it”). She has to relive the situation. And so on. If you are so worried about justice, be just as worried about all the rapists who are guilty and not behind bars. By the way, a huge number of rapes go unreported.</p>
<p>A proper investigation before arrest would negate the necessity of a trial. Most criminal
matters are plea-bargained anyways as the court system couldn’t withstand having to
have a trial for every case. I recall a case in Durham where someone was arrested and
thrown in jail and their court date was 8 or 16 months later. The prosecution wanted to
keep him there but really didn’t have a case. A judge eventually let him out after scolding
the prosecution. Of course that does nothing for the guy that spent a lot of time in jail.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>We had a long discussion on the Gates arrest and the topic of how police lie came up. It’s nice if you can just call up the guy in the White House for help but most of us can’t do that. There were several lawyers that flat out said that police routinely lie. Sometimes
they get caught.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>It seems to me that tilting the scales of justice isn’t the answer.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>That is a problem too. </p>
<p>Do you feel that it is better that an innocent man go free than ten guilty men go to jail?</p>
<p>BTW, what do you mean when you say that victims should be protected?</p>
<p>BCEagle…one is not better than the other. It is not an either/or situation. I hate to see any innocent person have to go to trial or worse, be in jail. Likewise, I hate to see any criminal out on the street and not behind bars. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My comments about victims is that they have rights. My concern is not ONLY to make sure that the person who is charged is truly guilty, but that the victim’s rights are taken into account. My major point is that rape is a crime about women as they are the majority of the victims, not men. Further, a huge number of rapes go unreported and are not prosecuted. Many rapists are free. And if there are wrongly charged men? That’s bad too. You speak of an imbalance of justice as if the system if all about the women. Unfortunately, the women are the victims in rape by far and many of the rapists are never reported, arrested or in jail. Yes, there are wrongly accused defendants of crimes. That’s a travesty, but there is a trial system in the US and one has to hope that usually justice is served in a trial. But there are exceptions. It is a travesty if an innocent person is charged. It is also a travesty if a guilty person is free.</p>
<p>BCEagle made a good point and i think you, soozievt, are taking his point to a level that he did not intend. </p>
<p>The word rape usually applies to a man hurting a woman. We all know this. No one is arguing against this. However, as far as I am aware, valid statistics and studies do not really exist to prove any of the assertions you brought up in your first post. We don’t know for sure how many false accusations there are. We don’t know for sure how many women keep silent about their rape.</p>
<p>BC said that feminists are responsible for the rape laws of today. The highest law says that we are innocent until proven guilty. American society says we are guilty until proven innocent. This is especially applicable in rape cases. All a woman has to do is say her consensual sex with a man was rape and he is going to jail for 25 years. Turn on the television and you’ll see that everyone has already decided the man is a criminal based on no evidence or any conviction. Something about this doesn’t sound right.</p>
<p>We all know that rape is bad and rape happens, but we cannot have women going around crying wolf because they didn’t want to appear “easy.” Real rape is a very serious and very common crime. False accusations should also be treated like a real crime, which they aren’t.</p>
<p>I agree that false accusations should be treated as a crime. I believe that criminal charges are possible in such cases.</p>
<p>I agree that all are innocent until proven guilty. The proven part often is in a court of law and can’t be fully realized at the point of arrest which is more probable cause or evidence enough to arrest. </p>
<p>I know nobody is arguing against the fact that rapes usually occur against women (though there are some rapes of males such as male to male rapes, for example). </p>
<p>While we don’t know for sure the number of unreported rapes, studies tend to show that that number is very large. </p>
<p>The number of false accusations has been reported with a very wide variation and so it is hard to pinpoint, from what I can tell. </p>
<p>All these things are troublesome…real rapes, false accusations, and unreported rapes. </p>
<p>I understand your valid concern about women crying wolf, but please understand the vast concern that there are a huge number of rapes (usually not by strangers) that are not prosecuted. That ALSO should concern you all. I was responding to the allegation that this is a feminist position. This is a real concern. That was all. It does not negate the valid concern of false accusations. But don’t put off the concern about the many real victims of rape as a “feminist position.”</p>
<p>That’s Blackstone’s ratio which has it’s roots in a passage in Genesis. It’s tied to the presumption of innocence.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Could you enumerate what you believe to be their rights?</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>In the past, we had the presumption of innocence. We have jury trials where we require unanimity. When the judge instructs the jury that they can convict on the woman’s word alone, then I have a major, major problem. For obvious reasons.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Justice can’t be served by a trial of the innocent in our modern age because the innocent have to pay the costs of their defense, lose time from work or their normal productive lives, and have their reputations smeared in addition to the legal problems that they will face in the future.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>The legal doctrine that I mentioned has been eroded by the tilt in the scales.</p>
<p>You ask what I believe to be victims’ rights? </p>
<p>Interesting. </p>
<p>For example, you write about the innocent who are accused and have to pay costs of their defense and lose time from work, etc. Indeed, I agree. Well, same goes for victims who didn’t ask to be victims of a crime. They have costs involved such as lawyers and lost time from work, counseling, etc. </p>
<p>Victims have to worry about if and when the perpetrator of the crime will be released and their own safety concerns. The victim must be informed, for example.</p>
<p>Victims need support which may include counseling.</p>
<p>Victims can apply for Victim’s Compensation.</p>
<p>Victims may need to apply for police protection.</p>
<p>If the defendent is convicted, the victim has a right to be heard at a hearing.</p>
<p>The victim has rights to be heard at a parole hearing.</p>
<p>Victims have rights to seek restitution and civil damages. </p>
<p>I can’t list every right that victims are entitled to. I find it odd that you ask what sorts of rights that they should have! </p>
<p>Here is a basic list of Victim Rights for the State of VT (my state, your neighbor):</p>
<p>I’ll share a personal sort of story. When my kids were tots and my parents were visiting from out of state, we were to go out for the evening and hired a local adult babysitter, a young married woman we know. We could not understand why she did not show up as she was very reliable. By the way, we live in a small rural community with very little crime. Learned the next day that the night before she was to come to our house, she was out with girlfriends at a local gathering spot and when she went to drive home for the evening, a man who was stalking her followed her car but had punctured her tires ahead of time while it had been parked. So, she had to pull over and he followed and approached her and kidnapped her into his car and raped her violently and beat her very badly to kill her and left her for dead in a remote adjoining town in the mountains on a trail in the woods. She awoke the next morning with her head bashed in and worse and since she had worked as a hiking guide for tours, she was in shape and experienced and started to walk and ran into hikers in the woods and got help. She would have died otherwise given her injuries. She survived. The man went to jail. This young woman went to get a college degree and became a major advocate for victim’s rights in our state and has been a major speaker and mover and shaker. I admire her so much for turning this tragic event in her life into some good for other victims to help them not endure some things she had to after her victimization/crime. I applaud her.</p>
<p>BCEagle, have you ever known anyone who was raped? Lets rephrase. Have you ever known anyone you know was raped? The current estimate is someting unreal like 20% of all women in the US will be raped at least once in their lives. So, I am confident that you do know LOTS of women who were raped. You may just not know it. </p>
<p>I don’t really know the percentage of false accusations. I am confident though that one heck of a lot less than 50% of all rapes are NOT reported. I’m also confident that in the majority of rape cases that are reported, nobody is ever arrested, let alone convicted. The odds that someone against whom a false claim of rape has been made will actually go to prison for it are one heck of a lot less than those that a man who rapes a woman will never see the inside of a prison. </p>
<p>What happened to the Hofstra boys was wrong. I’m not denying that. But lets remember that they were not convicted. </p>
<p>The Duke boys weren’t convicted either. I’m not denying that they went through an experience that was absolutely horrific. But, they weren’t convicted. </p>
<p>So lets not get too carried away here.</p>
<p>I think you may need a more balanced reading list. Try “Lucky” by Alice Sebold.</p>
<p>And…one more reality check…</p>
<p>What actually happened here–at least, based on news accounts, what actually happened–is that an 18 year old college freshman went to a party with her boyfriend. At the party, she ditched him to go to the dorm of a guy she’d just met that night. When she got there…she had consenual sex with 5 guys, allowed them to film it…and then when back to the party and her boyfriend. </p>
<p>I mean…how many young women are there like the “victim” in this case? Do you really think the cops were bending the rules in favor of a victim because they found the alleged perps version of events a little hard to believe?</p>
<p>1) Source for your statistic.
2) Have you ever had to deal with the police and legal matters
of someone falsely accused?</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Please provide the basis for your statistics.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>But convictions of innocent people does happen. Some go to prison for
long periods of time. Some are executed.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>One of their relatives died due to the stress of the case. It cost
them about a million each. They had to put up money to avoid spending
8 months in jail. Does the average person have access to those
resources?</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Have you read Until Proven Innocent?</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Two of them claimed to not have sex with her. Felipe was adament that
he didn’t have sex with her, was not responsible for the video and was
not involved. Please get your facts straight.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Felipe walked out of his girlfriend’s apartment and was handcuffed and
arrested. No questioning, interrogation, etc. Look at the Yale case. They
brought Clark in for questioning and didn’t arrest him until they had
concrete forensic proof.</p>
<p>[For example, you write about the innocent who are accused and have to pay costs of their defense and lose time from work, etc. Indeed, I agree. Well, same goes for victims who didn’t ask to be victims of a crime. They have costs involved such as lawyers and lost time from work, counseling, etc.]</p>
<p>The reason that I asked was due to the issue of arrest and the long period of time to trial.</p>
<p>Agree with Jonri. The number of rapists who are not convicted and the number or unreported rapes which is huge and is reported to be huge is greater than the number of innocent men convicted. Both matter. But if I read your posts any longer, BCEagle, I would be led to believe that the main injustice out there is the number of innocent accused rapists sitting in jail. The injustices to victims of this violent crime is far greater. The fact that you even asked me to give you examples of victims’ rights is pretty shocking. </p>
<p>I have agreed with you over and over the disgrace of the Duke case and the crime done to the young men wrongly accused. </p>
<p>But the way you tell it, it is as if that is the norm when there are a huge number of violent crimes against women, both reported and unreported and many rapists that go free. Do you not worry about the rights of these victims? Is this a “feminist” issue as you call it? :rolleyes:</p>
<p>I argue my points strongly. That I don’t argue other points says nothing about my
positions on other points. Please don’t put words in my mouth.</p>
<p>I really think you misunderstand the Yale case and the reasons why the accused wasn’t arrested earlier. Putting that aside…</p>
<p>You can google as well as I can. </p>
<p>Among the sources for the latter point I made…</p>
<p>From Encyclopedia of Women and Gender…</p>
<p>estimates of the percentage of rapes reported range from 4 to 50%
Less than 15% of reported rapes come to trial
1% of reported rapes end in a conviction</p>
<h2>The FBI estimates that of the rapes reported in the US in 1996, 8% were unfounded, in the sense that the woman was never raped. (The FBI distinguished between women who falsely reported they were raped and women who were really raped but identified an innocent person by mistake. The FBI concluded that 92% of women who claimed to have been raped actually were.)</h2>
<p>Obviously, sexual assault is a broader category than rape, but this is from the National Institute of Justice, part of the DOJ:</p>
<p>"Nonetheless, several studies indicate that a substantial proportion of female students — between 18 and 20 percent — experience rape or some other form of sexual assault during their college years. "</p>
<p>Remember this is JUST DURING THE COLLEGE YEARS.</p>
<p>I admit that being female makes me a bit biased, but…
when the FBI thinks that 92% of women who report they have been raped really were raped and the percentage of reported rapes which result in a conviction is 1%, I really don’t think that men going to prison for rapes they didn’t commit is as big a problem as men raping women and getting away with it.</p>
<p>I’m not making the assertions of statistics.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Since I don’t have this encyclopedia, could you post the
original peer-reviewed sources?</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>We had long debates on the FBI statistics and their disagreement
with peer-reviewed research on the KC Johnson’s blog in 2006.
Suffice it to say that there is a great deal of disagreement
on the numbers.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>It wouldn’t matter. They were watching him every moment. They just hadn’t arrested him nor incarcerated him.</p>
<p>I think it’s safe to say that if Ms Le had been able to go to the police and tell them that Clark killed her, he would have been arrested as quickly as the Hofstra boys. When a woman says a particular person has raped her, you better believe they need to lock that person up ASAP. Rapists don’t tend to stop after one time. </p>
<p>What happened to all these boys was terrible, but even in the injustice, there are lessons to be learned. There were clearly lessons to be learned in the Duke case too. Duke was not only at fault for throwing the boys under the bus, but they were complicit in allowing the lacrosse hooligan culture that contributed to the entire mess. The coach’s hands were not clean in that regard either.</p>
<p>Thank you jonri for post 95. I don’t feel I have to find all the articles with statistics for you BCEagle. There are a TON of articles about the reported and unreported rapes and sexual assaults of women and how many end up ever being brought to trial or resulting in convictions. There is NO question in my mind that these numbers of real rapes that do not end up with jailed rapists are far greater than the number of incarcerated men falsely convicted of rape. </p>
<p>BCEagle…you wrote:
</p>
<p>Gee, I am REALLY glad you mention this. Those are my sentiments exactly from the first time I joined this part of the discussion today (after your remarks about feminists changing the scales of justice in rape cases). I feel that just because i have argued MY point, I have been accused of not caring about or recognizing that some men are falsely accused of rape. I have said nothing of the sort and fully recognize that that is also an unjustice. And if you read the very very very very very very long Duke Lacrosse thread on CC that was accidentally deleted by CC and eventually started again, you would know that I participated actively and condemned that injustice against those young men.</p>