The colleges better be careful, if they overstep on someone with money they are going to get bitch slapped with civil rights abuses
The colleges better be careful, if they overstep on someone with money they are going to get bitch slapped with civil rights abuses
She wanted to seek justice without going to the justice system.... You wouldn't call the cops if someone cheated on a test so why go to a university for rape?
Last edited by dextersmith; 2017-04-24 at 06:21 PM.
PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD
I said there are more attractive women out there. I never said she shouldn't be a target for rape.
- - - Updated - - -
@GothamCity You'll give me an infraction for trolling for my post that doesn't say anything untrue, but for Tennisace flaming and calling me a rapist? That's totally fair.
Which is why I said a few posts earlier... that the victims need to stop being concerned for the perps well being. Because (typically) they know the person, they don't want them to lose their job or got to jail... they seek lesser forms of retribution. Those other sources are ill-equipped, and are actually not well suited to to handle the issue, because of their own self interests and how it effects them.
You want justice... you go to the police.
In what you just quoted. I was responding to a cynic who assumed that the victims simply want to circumvent the system and get convictions where there isn't evidence to support a claim for rape. That isn't what is going on here or what the article is talking about.
Why was this unexpected?After finding the university’s process distressing and unhelpful, Riddle, who agreed to be identified, sought advice from other sexual assault complainants
- - - Updated - - -
After such an attack, what would a forced apology do? Verbal or otherwise?“A criminal case can’t provide financial compensation, can’t provide an apology, can’t require police to do something different, can’t require training,” she said.
- - - Updated - - -
The tribunal could be sent after you for that remark, and they won't consider you innocent until proven guilty.
It makes no sense to look the other way when vigilante universities dispense their own brand of justice. As @Jotaux said, she's circumventing the law and denying his due process.
- - - Updated - - -
Campus police ... If they were the real McCoy, they'd just be the police.....jokers....
- - - Updated - - -
Gotta convict them first, and not through a university or human rights tribunal.
The criminal justice system requires a much more substantial burden of proof, and provides substantial protections for the rights of an accused.
Most administrative law "human rights" commissions require little more than an accusation, and give little if any regard to the interests of an accused.
Not hard to see the appeal.
That's the thing. Showing the civil court that he was criminally convicted would grant immediate victory.
- - - Updated - - -
That's no justice at all if the accused is denied his constitutional rights. At this point, he is not a rapist, he is simply the accused. She may be a victim, but she is not yet his victim.
What the fuck are you talking about?
Reading comprehension fail.
Cherry picking and misrepresenting a person's arguments... you trollin breh?
"Assume for a second there is sufficient evidence not only for a case but a conviction as well." Right there... in the quote.
What the article from the OP is essentially about is how the justice system makes victims (if they want justice) not only relive the incident from many angles, but also subjects them to a barrage of questions, skepticism, victim blaming, and other accusations. In essence it puts the credibility of the victim themselves on trial. No where in the article does it suggest even for a second that there isn't sufficient evidence to secure a guilty verdict and subsequent conviction. (that's not even the issue here)
The issue is that in an effort to avoid the emotional stress that comes with a court case. Victims are opting for lesser forms of justice, than what is deserved or entitled to.
When a rape case goes to trial, a victim's character comes into question. What did he/she do to provoke the attack? What was he/she wearing? Would he/she have said yes under other circumstances? What is the nature of the relationship between the victim and the accused?
Nowhere else do we do this.
No one ever asks if a murder victim "had it coming". What he or she did to provoke the attack? What he or she did to prevent the attack? No you kill someone you pay the consequences. Why do we treat rape differently?
I don't think anyone is advocating for rapists, or those who might make a false claim (which is almost worse). We also don't disagree on the fact that rapists should be punished to the full extent of the law (when guilty) and the only way to get that justice is to take it to the police. I don't think anyone should ever consider a "lesser form of a justice". But I have never been raped, so who am I to decide when/where/how they make peace with what has been taken from them?
Last edited by A dot Ham; 2017-04-24 at 08:22 PM.
Wow some of you are really obtuse.
The victim is essentially making the choice between taking a perceived "slam dunk" case to a court of law and taking the issue to a tribunal. The end result is likely the same that the accused will be found guilty... given the evidence.
Though I suspect you knew that, and are simply being argumentative for the sake of doing so.
The word "assume" suggests a hypothetical scenario. Given your cognitive dissonance I can see how you might have missed that, perhaps you should take care of that on your own time though.
Also "sufficient" when compared to other similar cases, would be the correct word choice whether or not the case has or hasn't been taken to court. The word "sufficient" doesn't give a minimum or maximum to the quantity or quality to evidence provided. If you are going to weigh in on issues of jurisprudence you might want to familiarize yourself with such adjectives.
Last edited by A dot Ham; 2017-04-24 at 08:33 PM.
Hmmmmmmmmmm.
Go to the proper authorities and legal channels to see that a rapist serve jail time while facing the possibility of having your story questioned OR go to the University, have them sympathize with you or face a lawsuit and then have them ruin the life of the accused with evidence that might not be enough to get a conviction in a real courtroom?
Is it any wonder why these people make a mockery of not only Universities but our justice system......
If there really isn't enough evidence for a normal conviction, the defendant could theoretically counter sue in an actual court, yeah? Not that I don't still think this whole idea is ridiculous, but it will hopefully only take a couple of cases of the accusers in these tribunals getting sued for things to return to the normal channels.
HRT's can't find people guilty, they just give victims a financial reward that our courts don't do for criminal cases. Hence why people are so quick to be critical of rape cases when the victims, rather than going to the police and allowing due process to see justice done, are instead going to HRT's in order to make a quick buck off their rapists. It's pretty criminal in it's own right actually, and is why people are starting to look down their noses at rape victims in a lot of cases. Due process and criminal courts are required for a proper verdict of guilt. Also, it seems like a lot of people don't think that sexual assault crimes aren't getting enough punishment, which is why they choose the HRT route so often. And yes, I fully support increasing the severity of the punishment for statutory rape and sexual assault, those laws seem to be a little too soft for punishment.
Where did I proclaim that? I am sorry if my profanity offends you... but again... your problem.
I have done no such thing. I repeated several times now that real justice can only come from the courts.
Whatever modicum of peace the victim gets from "mob rule" will be fleeting.
Going back to the OP though. I completely understand why they might seek "mob rule" and if you bothered to read, it has nothing to with circumventing the justice system, or finding a system that is more harsh with less evidence, as the cynics might suggest.
They seek a system that doesn't put the victim on trial, and put their own character up to be scrutinized.
In reality, (assuming [careful I know you have trouble with that word] that the accused is in fact guilty of rape) it is to their benefit to have the case taken before a "tribunal" being expelled from school, or losing one's job... I would think, would be preferable to years in prison, where convicted rapists usually get a taste of their own medicine.
Last edited by A dot Ham; 2017-04-24 at 09:12 PM.
Well, there are reputable charitable organisations that offer counsel to victims of crimes free of charge via anonymous hotlines.
Those are who one should call and they will advise you how to interact with law enforcement and offer assistance.
They will however not dole out "justice", nor "punishment", and certainly won't call themselfes "tribunals".
They won't do it to be seen either, and won't be part of some school, instead they employ professionals.
If your country doesn't have those then that is something you should work to change instead of campaining to set up a parallel system to faciliate mob rule and revenge schemes while pretending to be morally superiour.
- - - Updated - - -
You were the one cussing, I went back to see what you were on about and found this:
Which certainly looks like you were proposing mob rule.
If you do not want to be misunderstood try to maybe use normal language and people might be more inclined to give you the benefit of doubt?
When you start cussing aimlessly and insulting random readers then don't be surprised if people think you are a raving lunatic, skim your posts and take their clues from that. (And yes, you did that, we have quotes of your posts.)
- - - Updated - - -
If you bothered to read you would know what people countered with.
There were resonable propositions, the one of the OP isn't resonable.
(Since--as usual--Tenn didn't comment on his own stance regarding the article we must assume he agrees with it.)