Quite frankly I believe that in situations where it's proven that the accuser has falsified or even made the whole thing up and an innocent man is convicted on a lie, the law should come down heavily.
That shouldn't put people off coming forward, conviction is made "beyond reasonable doubt" and the same would be said of accusing the victim of a misdemeanour. I was instantly reminded of the Brian Banks story. I completely support protection for victims of rape, but not at the cost of protecting victims of false accusation.
Where do you think a 11 year old gets the idea to blame her father for raping her (when it is not true)? I would press criminal charges on the mother, not the daughter, if she had a hand in it. I've been through the whole parents getting divorced thing, and I can tell you they'd kill each other if they could get away with it legally, so it wouldn't surprise me if her mother coached her into lying.
Shades of grey. I can see valid arguments for both sides. Plus I'm not sure what's to be gained from prosecuting someone for something they did 9 years ago when she was 11. Not to mention it will help perpetrate the myth of rampant false accusations.Alright. This chick perpetrated a crime; albeit when she was a minor BUT a crime nonetheless.
Bergtau's Law: As an online discussion grows longer, the probability that somebody will mention Godwin's Law approaches 1.
Hitler wasn't all bad, I mean, he DID kill Hitler.
An accident is something that you did not mean to do at all. A mistake is something that you regret doing.
Oh course its not right. But she was 11. You can hardly hold an 11 year old to account for the things she does like you would an adult.
---------- Post added 2012-11-23 at 06:19 AM ----------
Originally Posted by Boubouille
This is such crap. Even if there is a lawsuit against the state and against his own daughter it doesn't change the fact that this guys name just got smashed through the dirt for 9 years, lost those 9 years of his life, of his child (which I wouldn't say is a bad thing considering what she did) and that he probably lost all of his friends / families respect that he had. Seriously, garbage. Shit needs to be CRYSTAL CLEAR that the person did it without a doubt. I don't care if the guy murdered 5900 people and flayed them while they were all alive.. If there's no evidence, we shouldn't be able to jail them.
However I agree that the correlation is probably overstated. I really don't think people who are debating whether to report are really thinking about recanting. Victims very often give up on the process, but I can't think of anyone who recanted.
Well, I do know of a couple recants, but those were in long-term domestic violence type relationships, and that's a whole other can of worms...
but there are other cases where the woman was 16 at the time (still a minor but that line becomes grey. She could have been tried as an adult) where she never came forward and they had to pry the information out of her and she STILL refused to testify. Prosecutors would not press charges for this same reason.
This particular case is a small part of a larger problem.
Do you think such cases should go unpunished as well?
This is why rape convictions should require incontrovertible physical evidence or overwhelming multiple eye witness testimony for a conviction. The word of one person alone (or two people when the second is clearly capable of having an ulterior motive) should never be enough for a conviction alone.
And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him.
---------- Post added 2012-11-23 at 06:26 AM ----------
Last edited by Seezer; 2012-11-23 at 06:29 AM.
Originally Posted by Boubouille