Rape shield laws.

I think we do more than enough to protect the rights of the accused.

i dont know about that. consider: two college kids are at a party. they are both a little drunk, and they are into each other. the two of them go back somewhere, and have sex. in the morning, the girl regrets it, even though she knows at the time she consented, but both were a little too drunk to really think clearly. she really was into him, but hadnt been ready to go that far yet, and now is worried about a reputation. he really liked her too, and wasnt some sleazebag who wanted ass. he remembered the whole thing being completely consensual. she doesnt want a reputation, and regrets what happened, so she accuses him of date rape. instantly, his whole world is changed. the way college campuses are now about rape cases, its like the witch hunts. an accusation will be enough to prove his guilt to most people, and probably the administration. whether or not he is eventually found guilty, wont matter. his accusation will brand him for life, he wont be able to show his face around that school anymore. he will have to transfer, and just hope that nobody from his old school knew where he was going, and knew someone there, because word will travel fast. this happens all too often, because the opinon now is to err on the side of caution. how do you remedy this? i dont know

@Soon_U_Die:

It is not a question of blame.    Your post is irrelevant because you are fighting something that cannot be won re: a principle of justice.  There is no justice in the law.  The law is not designed to be just.  It is designed to be applied relatively equally, and in that sense alone, fairly.

Consequently, your argument misses the most elementary fact:  survival in the real world relies on common sense, not on principles.

Just re-read what you wrote above.  It’s the girl’s fault.  She should go to jail.  Blah…blah…blah.  And there should be no evil either!!!

Sorry, but it is the guy’s fault.  He is an idiot.  He has violated a very basic common sense rule:  don’t bang the floozy in the back of the dorm room, unless you are prepared to live with the possibilities.  You see, unless he lives on another planet…the boy should be able to envision this exact set of circumstances in his mind.  What, surprise, oh my god, she lied…wow, never saw that coming.  Get real.  The boy is guilty as charged:  of stupidity.

Solution: keep it zipped up.  Or do you think he was really thinking about marrying said young sweetheart? LMAO.  I think not.

So it is real simple…justice system 1…idiot boy 0.

Not so hard to predict and entirely undeserving of sympathy.  You see, he didn’t have to bang the floozy did he?  He wasn’t compelled to do so by anyone was he?  He didn’t forfeit something material to his life by not banging her did he?

In point of fact…he and he alone without anyone else had the power to avoid the whole thing, didn’t he?

Therefore, he needs no sympathy.

SUD

I’ve agreed with SUD before, but you’re off your trolley on this one. Falsely accusing someone of anything is a big no-no, especially when those false accusations could result in decades in jail. Had the boy video-taped the whole thing, and had proof, wouldn’t she be in hot water? I should think so! This sounds a lot like the proverbial “If you didn’t want to be raped, you shoulnd’t have been wearing those clothes!” I thought we moved past that way of thinking.

If I start a business with some woman, and she falsely accuses me of tax evasion later on, is that just par for the course? Your solution would be don’t go into business with people?  :?

SUD, you make the same mistake as the pro-abstinence people. its fine if you support abstinence, but you said yourself, you cant stand on principle in the real world. people are GOING to have sex. casual sex. drunken sex. unprotected sex. anonymous sex. its GOING to happen. you can choose to ignore that, say “keep it in your pants”, and watch as the kid’s life is ruined because he and some girl both got a little drunk, had consensual sex, and then she decided she didnt want a reputation, and called it rape, or you can say that there needs to be some kind of mechanism to handle this. i cant say what it should be, because i honestly dont know. the system is the way it is now to protect the victim. but the situation i described is much more common than you might think. you know i err on the side of caution, for instance, wrt to the death penalty. but in that case, there is a trial at least. we can go back and forth in debate about the effectiveness of these trials in doing justice, and how there is bias, etc. but the fact remains that with the rape scenario, the accusation is enough to condemn the kid, whether or not he is ever found guilty

Ah, but she would still have to prove the accusation. Just saying it will hurt the man of course. What can I say? Personally I believe that many men get off with the same defence you just stated. A woman has a couple beers and she’s fair game? That does not sound fair to me either. This is why we have courts. To put people through so much crap that only the genuinly hurt will go to the trouble.

Not a lawyer, but you hear objections about relavance all the time. If it does not reflect on the case at hand it’s not suppose to matter. Course this is where Justice is not blind. It see’s shades of green above all else. OJ can get off dipped in blood, but a poor sod with no physical evidence gets the chair. Whoever can afford the best mouth piece wins, but that’s just the way it is. I still say our system is the best one going.

“The problem is that people want to have casual sex with no accountability.”

I thought the problem was a woman falsely accusing a man of rape? And how is consensual sex any different than going into business with someone who eventually accuses you of some crime? Again, you’re very close to saying, “If you didn’t want to be raped, you shouldn’t have walked down the dark alley in a mini-skirt”. Casual sex isn’t immoral and it isn’t a crime. Falsely accusing a person is.

You miss the point though, that someone’s entire life can be ruined because of a drunken hook-up. Both parties were consensual, both “dug” each other, there was no rape. But the girl, who was not as outgoing when sober, and really embarrassed about having sex right away with a guy, lies. Maybe she lies on her own, or maybe she tells her version (non-consensual) to others, and they encourage her to bring charges. The point is, whether an accusation is made, or not, whether charges are brought, or not, and whether the man is convicted, or not, does not matter. The girl’s friends will often “crusade” for her, since she wont tell her “rape” story to the police, they will make it their job to make his life miserable. If he is falsely convicted, obviously, his life is ruined, and now he is labeled as a sex-offender. But even if merely the charges, or accusation are brought, his life can still be ruined. Say you go to school. Suddenly, some girl says you raped her. Try going to classes, anywhere on campus, your dorm, etc. without getting a hard-time from people. Try going to class and having the professor not regard you differently. Try and have this not impact your grades, and overall college performance. Try to lead a normal life. Even if the charges are proven false, people form impressions that are hard to break. So now, after some girl decided she didnt want a reputation, this guy’s life is ruined.

I already pointed out that i support erring on the side of caution, that includes erring on the side of victims rights (in criminal cases, not civil, mind you). But this also applies to the justice system, not society. If the accusation is made, the procedure should be followed, and justice sought, and if the evidence points to rape, he should be convicted (following the procedures of the justice system), but it doesnt even have to get that far, for the guy’s life to be ruined. Society will be his judge, jury and executioner for the allegation. I also made the point that I dont know what can be done to prevent this, I dont know what kind of law, or procedure should be adopted to prevent this. Not realistically. You can say “keep it in your pants”, but thats not going to happen. People get drunk, people hook up. Casual sex is not wrong. Drunken sex is not wrong. Neither is necessarily a smart descision, but the parties involved should not be punished for consensually engaging in either (or both). You can blame the guy if you want, for engaging in casual, drunken sex, but like Mary said, thats too close to blaming the girl who wore a short skirt for getting raped. I dont know what to do to prevent this. Im merely pointing out that the system should be reconsidered, even if it is eventually left alone.

Janus,

I don’t deny that your case does happen on occasion.  But I think it more likely the girl will instead claim nothing happened on the date rather than that she was raped.  She could say many things as to why she didn’t come back to the dorm that night … I was too drunk to drive home …or I passed out on his couch…as examples.  This would result in the girl both keeping her reputation and avoiding the stigma/problems on her for being raped.  It also results in the guy not having to deal with this issue, and possible retaliations on her from his friends which also happens.

The more likely reason women claim false rape, IMO, is not on a one night stand but when there are problems in the relationship, such as when he breaks up with her or she finds he has been cheating on her.  And sometimes it is because the woman is nuts   :wink: .

Of course sometimes the guy is a rapist too :x .

Even though most rapes involve a man violating a woman, it can happen the other way around (I know, it was mentioned and isn’t likely, but it’s happened).  Don’t forget that rape can occur between two or more people, even of the same sex.  Furthermore, rape is a subjective crime.  That makes it difficult to prove, which, if proceeded through regular judicial channels, provides inherent protection of the accused.  I’m sure there’s plently of prosecuting and defense strategy that we are all unfamiliar with when it comes to these cases - probably something involving the assessment of trauma in the accuser, since a true rape would cause trauma.

Another thing is that someone can accuse you of rape without ever having sexual, or for that matter, physical, contact.  Of course, this should wash out and flounder in the court room, but the stigma of being identified as a possible rapist isn’t wiped out from an appropriate ruling.  In this case, zipping it does jack squat.  I understand that SUD speaks generally (in terms of sex) when he says to zip it, which is fine advice.  However, rape isn’t just about sex, so no amount of zipping can save you from false accusations.  You may be saved legally through sound judicial practices, but damage comes in many flavors.  I think something that may help is to make penalties for false accusations more strict - give people a reason NOT to falsely accuse.  Maybe make it as tough as being convicted of rape, maybe not.

I’d have to add that the analogy with money out in a bad neighborhood does not compare to rape.  It just doesn’t.  Rape is an entirely different crime from robbery, murder, etc.  It’s a whole other ballgame.

SUD - you’re well versed.  What’s your background on this?  And I am not instigating anything - feel free to ignore my next question - have you had some experience with this?  Based on your posts, I perceive something underlying your tight argument.  Maybe I’m just crazy, or putting too much into a meaningless observation.  Either way, I’m curious.

I understand what you’re saying, SUD, but what struck me as odd was you would have no sympathy for a man falsely accused of rape (after enaging in consensual casual sex). That would be a horrible thing. Just as horrible as a man robbed of his life savings because he withdrew it from an ATM and was counting it on the street. Both actions display a lack of common sense, but neither person deserves to be victimized over it.

By saying you had no sympathy, I took that to mean you thought the man was just as guility as the woman who made the false accusations.

Strange that just about all of you refer to the collegiate party crowd.

Nobody mentioned race.
Remember reading or watching “To Kill a Mockingbird” ?

There are always complexities to judgement.  The consequence back then of getting accused was death before trial if you were were not white.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056592/

http://www.cnn.com/US/9807/13/brawley.verdict.02/

race is a seperate issue entirely. we are talking about false accusations, which, regardless of race of anyone involved, will fuck over the guy

http://www.rapex.co.za/x/
interesting…

In the segregationist deep south that is the setting for “To Kill a Mockingbird”,

If a white man raped a black girl, he would be tried and found not guilty by the court system run by the white man for the white man.

The times have changed since, but some places like to keep it the way it was.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0117913/

In the segregationist deep south that is the setting for “To Kill a Mockingbird”,

If a white man raped a black girl, he would be tried and found not guilty by the court system run by the white man for the white man.

The times have changed since, but some places like to keep it the way it was.

again, seperate issue entirely. race means nothing if the accusation is false to begin with. remember, im not even discussing the cases that go to trial, but the stigma attached to someone for merely being accused of rape.

@Janus1:

http://www.rapex.co.za/x/
interesting…

It’s a shame the world has come to this…
Can’t say I’d blame anyone for using it, though.