Guilty verdict in "he said she said" case changes the landscape of Criminal Justice

[prwraith]

I can see the murder rate going up, I can see women bemoaning the fact men dont want to be around them any further, I can see the justice system collapsing under the weight of evidence-less allegations.

Tennisace can't seem to understand that. I'm not saying she's lying or being truthful, or that's he did or didn't do it. But you can not convict simply because she said so. Or the whole system comes crashing down.

The judge should be disbarred, it's up to her to prove she was raped, it's not up to him to prove he didn't. She made the accusation, she needs to substantiate the claim. This is how law works. (And this isn't directed at you Seranthor, but it seems to be something crucial to the way society as a whole functions that Tennisace's brain doesn't seem able to comprehend.

[Torched]

That's a one sided way to view things. What you're suggesting is that the legal system should be designed so that men can rape women and women have no recourse. It's always going to be a he said she said situation and you're advocating for rapists to be free no matter what. How is that acceptable?

He said she said is not enough for any lawful court around the world.... well except Canada now.

[Tennis]

no what we are saying is the legal system should be set up in a way that it takes more evidence then mere accusation to convict someone of any crime. yes that will lead to some rapist going free but it prevents incontinent people from going to jail.

It's too late for that. This ruling has set a precedent that if the alleged victim's testimony is more convincing then a guilty verdict is possible. Men need to adapt.

[prwraith]

It's too late for that. This ruling has set a precedent that if the alleged victim's testimony is more convincing then a guilty verdict is possible. Men need to adapt.

And you're ok with this? That justice is decided by who's the more convincing public speaker? are you serious?

[Seranthor]

It's too late for that. This ruling has set a precedent that if the alleged victim's testimony is more convincing then a guilty verdict is possible. Men need to adapt.

They will, they'll start avoiding women, or they'll start killing them... And the blood of the dead women will taint the hands of those that broke and support the breaking of the justice system.

[Canpinter]

It's too late for that. This ruling has set a precedent that if the alleged victim's testimony is more convincing then a guilty verdict is possible. Men need to adapt.

or you know we could change the law to something sensible?

[Tennis]

In Canada at least, which is reason enough for all males to vacate the state immediately. Hopefully this idiotic ruling gets overturned or overruled or whatever the Canadian equivalent is. Ruining a guy's life with zero evidence other than he said she said testimony is bad law and it sure as hell isn't justice.

So if you're a Canadian woman, and you had a nasty breakup, and you want revenge on your ex, all you have to do is accuse him of raping you the last time you had sex with him (even if you're lying through your teeth and it was consensual). You're a woman, he's a man, therefore he's guilty purely because you pointed your finger at him.

That's certainly a concern but such a case isn't really similar to this one. From the looks of things the woman claims to have withdrew consent during the night and the man didn't listen.
In a long term relationship, it's a whole different dynamic.

[Chrysia]

It's too late for that. This ruling has set a precedent that if the alleged victim's testimony is more convincing then a guilty verdict is possible. Men need to adapt.

Except legal precedent is overturned all the time, and we can only pray to whatever higher power or not we believe in that this one does, because this creates an absolutely nightmarish world where we have to constantly prove our innocence. It'll be back to the days where the richest people could do whatever the fuck they want because they had the resources to repeatedly accuse someone of crimes until the person was either convicted by an idiot judge, or broken because of the legal fees.

[xChurch]

Good thing there is an appeal process.

Stupid people can even be judges, whodda thunk it?

[Chrysia]

That's certainly a concern but such a case isn't really similar to this one. From the looks of things the woman claims to have withdrew consent during the night and the man didn't listen.
In a long term relationship, it's a whole different dynamic.

Why is it different? Can people in long-term relationships not withdraw consent?

[Flurryfang]

What the fuck! O.o How can a judge rule like this, when there is no evidence?? This should be a dead case the moment this hit the courts.... This is just... Wow.

I really feel for the guy. Hopefully he can get into higher courts, because this just seems dumb. From what the article shows, he is not proven guilty in anyway.

[Seranthor]

That's certainly a concern but such a case isn't really similar to this one. From the looks of things the woman claims to have withdrew consent during the night and the man didn't listen.
In a long term relationship, it's a whole different dynamic.

But it isn't different... the system you seem to be willingly embracing is that a woman, any woman, regardless of relationship status now can accuse any man of rape, and then it becomes a contest of can she cry enough to the judge to convict the hapless man she's targeted.

[Tennis]

And you're ok with this? That justice is decided by who's the more convincing public speaker? are you serious?

I never said I'm okay with it. I said this is what it is. People want to live in a society that is becoming more and more "progressive" don't they? This is what it looks like.

[Flurryfang]

Why is it different? Can people in long-term relationships not withdraw consent?

By going into a realionship, you have very often gone into a deal about being sexual partners. Grown people often do this, because they feel comfertable with the sex, which they recieve/get. Saying, that your partner raped you, without any evidence, is very hard to understand, since the person have approved to be in a sexual realtionship with this person in a longer period of time. Saying "Suddenly, one day, he changed out of nowhere" is not very good argument.

[Chrysia]

I never said I'm okay with it. I said this is what it is. People want to live in a society that is becoming more and more "progressive" don't they? This is what it looks like.

Except it really isn't. This is literally regression back to medieval standards where in many areas, depending on who accused you, you could be required to prove your innocence.

- - - Updated - - -

By going into a realionship, you have very often gone into a deal about being sexual partners. Grown people often do this, because they feel comfertable with the sex, which they recieve/get. Saying, that your partner raped you, without any evidence, is very hard to understand, since the person have approved to be in a sexual realtionship with this person in a longer period of time. Saying "Suddenly, one day, he changed out of nowhere" is not very good argument.

Consent to a relationship is not consent to sex at the time of your partner's choosing, and hasn't been (legally) anywhere in the US since 1991.

[Seranthor]

I never said I'm okay with it. I said this is what it is. People want to live in a society that is becoming more and more "progressive" don't they? This is what it looks like.

Saying 'it is what it is' is a cop out, and you bloody well know it.

And I see that you clearly avoided the question. Either you are okay with it or you aren't, its a really simple question. I for one think its a huge miscarriage of justice and the judge should be disbarred for this crap. And that the accused should be given a new trial with a real judge.

[Tennis]

That's the thing, how the fuck can you possibly avoid this, unless you never intend to ever have sex? It doesn't matter how much you trust the person, they can fuck your life over royally by having sex with you, then claiming after the fact it was rape.

Well first of all you make sure you are only getting "involved" with a trustworthy person of good character. That alone would increase your chances exponentially of avoiding calamity.

[Nilinor]

That person hexed me 6 months ago! He must be a witch! PUNISH THEM!

2016, and the salem witch trials are coming back..

[Chrysia]

Well first of all you make sure you are only getting "involved" with a trustworthy person of good character. That alone would increase your chances exponentially of avoiding calamity.

I'm glad you're a perfect judge of character and only involve yourself with people who never change or have lapses in judgement.

[Kallisto]

He did examine the evidence. There were lengthy testimonies.

People Lie, people have bad memories. Hell first person statements are one of the WORST forms of evidence you can have. The fact is there was nothing else to back it up means the Judge is wrong in this instance.

In a case of he says she says you have to go with not guilty. Simply due to the fact as a species we are not mind readers and the burden of proof must always be on the accuser.

This isn't about saying "Victims deserve it." because they do not. Nobody deserves to be raped ever. It is just you can't ever fall into the Guilty till proven innocent on any crime, the accuser must bring forth proof of their accusation.