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

[Seranthor]

hell you dont even have to have sex with them, never be alone in the same room with someone cause they can jsut say you raped them a few months later after any evidence of sex would have disappeared.

Cry enough for the right judge and poor TA goes away for rape.... that would be tragic.

[Stelio Kontos]

Cry enough for the right judge and poor TA goes away for rape.... that would be tragic.

That would be legally groundbreaking; a man charged with rape, by his own hand.

[Tennis]

I certainly hope you never have to have the privilege of seeing how it is to be found guilty based solely on the word of someone else.

I hope nobody ever gets wrongly accused. The best we can do is avoid such situations where this possibility could arise.

[Canpinter]

I hope nobody ever gets wrongly accused. The best we can do is avoid such situations where this possibility could arise.

like maybe by not convicting someone based only on the testimony of the accuser?

[Chrysia]

I hope nobody ever gets wrongly accused. The best we can do is avoid such situations where this possibility could arise.

How is this in any way dissimilar from telling women to not put themselves in situations where they might get raped?

[Aehl]

hell you dont even have to have sex with them, never be alone in the same room with someone cause they can jsut say you raped them a few months later after any evidence of sex would have disappeared.

And this is the crux of it.

Whilst I am absolutely for any rapist being sent to jail forever...the issue here is there was no physical evidence and no solid proof.

"Reasonable doubt" is what I am thinking...this case flies in that fact and may very well be the grounds for immediate appeal and I believe, overturning of the verdict.

Where do we draw the line?

[Canpinter]

I hope nobody ever gets wrongly accused. The best we can do is avoid such situations where this possibility could arise.

yes or no, do you think the new standard of evidence set by this case will result in more false convictions of innocent people?

[Tennis]

How is this in any way dissimilar from telling women to not put themselves in situations where they might get raped?

That's what women are told though. To be careful. Why shouldn't men be taught the same thing?

[Stelio Kontos]

Tennisace is a great champion of women.

Tell us again what you think about fat women, Tennis.

[Chrysia]

That's what women are told though. To be careful. Why shouldn't men be taught the same thing?

Because we should be careful, but it shouldn't be the sole option available to us. There should be recourse to seek justice, and there is for rape victims. If this precedent stands, there'll be no recourse for men accused of rape to seek justice. They will have no way to prove their innocence, something they should not have to prove in the first place.

[prwraith]

So you think it's only rape if the woman is beaten up? That's crazy talk. Go ask your sisters, female coworkers what they think about this.

Ok Tennisace I know you have trouble understanding what people are writing. You've demonstrated that very clearly..repeatedly.

But that is not in fact what I said. What I AM saying is. You can NOT convict someone without any evidence one way or the other. Or the whole system falls apart. If this stands, it sets precedents for all sorts of awful things.

[Seranthor]

How is this in any way dissimilar from telling women to not put themselves in situations where they might get raped?

It's not dissimilar at all, I'd venture to say it is identical. Perhaps maybe the world should move toward separate cities for each gender maybe? but how will that work for those that dont have a gender? will they be cityless? What becomes of someone that choses one city then decides they want to change genders? Do they then have to move? I dont rightly know... Things that make someone go hmmm...

[Tennis]

Ok Tennisace I know you have trouble understanding what people are writing. You've demonstrated that very clearly..repeatedly.

But that is not in fact what I said. What I AM saying is. You can NOT convict someone without any evidence one way or the other. Or the whole system falls apart. If this stands, it sets precedents for all sorts of awful things.

“She was vulnerable. She was scared. He pounced. Forget the condom. I am in power. I am in command. (Ururyar) said to (Gray) and I agree, ‘this is the last time I’m going to f— you, this is the last time… and you’re going to like it.’ Power, power, power. He was the boss and he loved it,” Zuker said.

He added that he was convinced that Ururyar took advantage of Gray.

“I felt that I had to just comply because I was really scared,” Gray testified. “I thought that him having sex with me — raping me — would be easier than him beating me up.”

So aren't you essentially blaming her for not getting herself assaulted? Like wasn't it enough that she allegedly got raped?

[prwraith]

So aren't you essentially blaming her for not getting herself assaulted? Like wasn't it enough that she allegedly got raped?

Did you see me write that it's her fault she get raped? Or is this another thing you think I said?

[Tennis]

Because we should be careful, but it shouldn't be the sole option available to us. There should be recourse to seek justice, and there is for rape victims. If this precedent stands, there'll be no recourse for men accused of rape to seek justice. They will have no way to prove their innocence, something they should not have to prove in the first place.

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?

[Seranthor]

Ok Tennisace I know you have trouble understanding what people are writing. You've demonstrated that very clearly..repeatedly.

But that is not in fact what I said. What I AM saying is. You can NOT convict someone without any evidence one way or the other. Or the whole system falls apart. If this stands, it sets precedents for all sorts of awful things.

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.

[Chrysia]

So aren't you essentially blaming her for not getting herself assaulted? Like wasn't it enough that she allegedly got raped?

No, once again, that's not what he said. There is no evidence of force and there is a text that clearly indicates she intended to have sex with him that night. Whether that intent persisted through the night (because consent can be withdrawn) is unknown and neither party has evidence one way or the other. Therefore, all we know is they had sex, one claims it was consensual, the other claims it was not. Who do we believe? Neither, which means he is not guilty of rape because you have to prove a crime.

- - - Updated - - -

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?

That is absolutely not what I'm saying. Rape cases are not always "he said she said" type situations at all. This is a straight up lie.

[Seranthor]

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?

Do you want innocent people in prison? is that your goal?

[Canpinter]

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?

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.

[Torched]

Getting convicted for rape without any evidence? well that´s Canada for you, good luck men that will be wrongfully accused there now, you will need it.