Re: Bad idea: Punishing false rape accusers

"Sir Jessy of Anti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Rauni" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 05:16:39 GMT, "MMET572" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >"Magic Nose Goblin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dee Fish out of Korea) wrote in message
> > >news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Magic Nose Goblin) wrote in message
> > >news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > >> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kate Orman) wrote in message
> > >news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > >> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rich) wrote in message
> > >news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > >> > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kate Orman) wrote in message
> > >news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > >> >
> > >> > > > > > If it's not against the law to make a false report to the
> > >police, then
> > >> > > > > > how are these charges being laid?
> > >> >
> > >> > > > > When such charges are laid, they are for crimes against the
> state
> > >> > > > > (just ask Laurie). Specifically things like perjury, or in
the
> > >> > > > > UK either 'wasting police time' or 'perverting the course of
> > >justice'.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > The accused man is not in any way a part of the proceedings,
> much
> > >> > > > > less as the victim of a crime, and the charges are for a
> > >misdemeanor,
> > >> > > > > not a felony.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I see what you (and Daran) are getting at - false
*accusations*,
> in
> > >> > > > which a specific person is maliciously identified as the
> > >perpetrator,
> > >> > > > as opposed to false *allegations*, in which a specific
> perpetrator
> > >may
> > >> > > > or may not be identified (as in the cases posted). It's an
> extremely
> > >> > > > important distinction, and I ought to have spotted it myself.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I suspect whether making a false report is a misdemeanour or a
> > >felony
> > >> > > > varies, perhaps from state to state; the liars in Kanin's study
> were
> > >> > > > told they would be charged with a felony. It'd be interesting
to
> > >learn
> > >> > > > whether maliciously accusing someone of (for example) theft
> attracts
> > >> > > > criminal charges.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > While I'm far from an expert on law, I'd have little objection
to
> a
> > >> > > > specific crime of false accusation, as long as rape was not the
> only
> > >> > > > crime it applied to. Not only is a false accusation a vicious
> > >> > > > injustice, but it hands woman-haters and rapists more
ammunition
> > >> > > > for their quest to smear all rape victims as "lying bitches".
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > However, I've seen no good evidence that false reports are a
> large
> > >> > > > proportion of reports, and false accusations are only a
> proportion
> > >> > > > of false reports. When women do lie, it's not usually out of
> malice:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > According to a FEMALE spokeswoman for the NYC DA's office,
> > >> > > 40% of their rape accusations are subsequently recanted.
> > >> > > and
> > >> > > 40% of their rape accusations are DISPROVEN upon investigation.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > No mention was made of how many recantings take place after
> > >> > > the police disprove the accusation.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > And of course, there will always be the false accusation which
> > >> > > is neither recanted, nor disproven...which means there are EVEN
> > >> > > MORE false accusations then what these figures show.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > So, at least in NYC, the DA's statistics show that AT LEAST
> > >> > > 40% to 80% of all rape accusations are false False FALSE!
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Not necessarily. Rape accusations may be recanted, but still arise
> > >> > from a bona-fide rape.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> If the police have any evidence that the rape DID take place, then
> > >> the DA's will prosecute despite her, and put her on the stand as a
> > >> hostile witness.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> > The same as domestic violence accusations may
> > >> > be recanted, but still arise from a real situation of abuse.
> > >>
> > >> Let's not forget that over 50% of domestic abuse is committed by
women.
> > >>
> > >
> > >Do tell. And are the 50% of these "abuse victims" who happen to be male
> > >hospitalized or embalmed in the same proportions as the 50% who happen
to
> be
> > >women?
> > >
> > >
> > Typical soc.men twisting of the facts, data collected from the
> > National Crime Victimization Survey (Bureau of Justice Statistics)
> > consistently find that no matter what the rate of violence or who
> > initiates the violence, women are 7 to 10 times more likely to be
> > injured in acts of intimate violence than are men.
>
> Still peddling the same ol' shtick here, eh Rauni?
>
> Men are bigger and stronger than women for the most part.  It stands to
> reason
> when you start a fight with a Mac truck, you lose, and lose badly.  I've
> asked you
> before to give us some insight into what this might mean other than the
> obvious.
> But no, you just keep throwing this out there - kind of like the soc.men
you
> accuse of doing
> the exact same thing.  Women are hurt more!  This proves everything!  Well
> in fact it
> does little to prove who initiated what, and it simply reaffirms the
> obvious:  most men are physically
> stronger than most women.
>

Okay - using your analogy.

You have a Mac truck and  a subcompact. Which would you think would be more
risky and potentially damaging to use if you planned to weave in and out of
traffic?

Rules of the road (as in all things) apply equally, but practical allowance
is made for capability (ya don't see too many Coopers at weigh in stations -
even though highway weight codes technically apply to them as well).

If you're driving a Mac, its a given that you're expected to keep that fact
in mind. If you're capable of putting another person in the hospital with
your greater upper body strength keep that in mind as well.

DFooK
> >
> > "The pure and simple truth is rarely pure
> >  and never simple." -- Oscar Wilde
>
> BTW:  Why don't you actually READ your .sig.  Maybe then we wouldn't be
> having this conversation.
>
>
>