• Rape lie Antrim woman named.
    71 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Zeke129;42291141]So someone who falsely claims that someone else is a murderer should be executed?[/QUOTE] twice
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;42291106] wait what? you're saying that when people try to scrutinize a rape victim they get branded misogynistic, when i'm saying it's the other way around, that it's the rape victim that faces bullshit rather than the scrutinizer[/QUOTE] I'm referring to anyone which scrutinizes a claimed rape victim is considered misogynistic, and you proved my point while saying it was false. [QUOTE][B]that's not true at all. in fact from what i've seen it's generally the inverse, the women are thought to either be liars, or they were asking for it, or they totally wanted it and changed their mind afterwards.[/B][/QUOTE] Based on this scrutinizing the victim means you are likely making an assumption which is misogynistic.
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;42291106]what a stupid idea. if i falsely accused someone of murder i should get 2 life sentences? [/QUOTE] Well, let´s start with why you even would do such a thing. It is not like you just walk along a street and just accidently tell a policeman that someone murdered another person.
[QUOTE=SuddenImpact;42291166]Well, let´s start with why you even would do such a thing. It is not like you just walk along a street and just accidently tell a policeman that someone murdered another person.[/QUOTE] Blamed the wrong person for a family members death?
[QUOTE=deadoon;42291154]I'm referring to anyone which scrutinizes a claimed rape victim is considered misogynistic, and you proved my point while saying it was false. Based on this scrutinizing the victim means you are likely making an assumption which is misogynistic.[/QUOTE] ah okay i get what you mean now. and well, i don't think law enforcement (who should be the ones doing the scrutinizing) should be trying to use any of that reasoning
[QUOTE=deadoon;42291091]And what happens if the court determines that the accuser was not the victim of a crime, when they were, but had insufficient evidence of it? Punish them anyways, because there is a chance that they were lying? Well if you do that, less people will report crime overall unless they have a solid case, thus getting no support for any mental or physical problems caused by the crime. Also by putting a punishment, if there was a false claim, it makes it less likely they would tell the truth for fear of punishment.[/QUOTE] If there wasn't enough evidence then it's too bad, why would you want to put strip anyone of their rights with baseless accusations? [B]Also, there's a difference between making up bullshit and the possibility identifying the wrong guy. [/B] [I]For example, you accuse someone of stealing something, and a security was in the perfect position to capture the crime: You falsely accuse - The security camera shows nothing of the crime and there's no other evidence that supports it, you get double time of what you would normally get for stealing. You wrongly accuse - The security camera shows someone of similar figure, skin colour, clothing to the wrongly accused but evidence/alibi say otherwise, no one is punished.[/I] [QUOTE=Lachz0r;42291106]what a stupid idea. if i falsely accused someone of murder i should get 2 life sentences?[/QUOTE] Yes you should because you could have potentially put someone in jail while knowing they didn't do it. You deserve time he could have gotten plus your time. [CODE][I][B]My ideal[/B][/I] justice system would like kind of like gambling, you bet a sum (charging the accused) then you win, you get your payout (putting away the accused in prison for x amount of time), if you lose (total false accusations), you loose what you bet upfront and you must pay the same amount again ( 2(x) amount of time). Now if you realized you betted on the wrong table right before the game starts (accused the wrong guy), at the end just get everyone a drink and give the supervisor a tip (you pay the court fees) before you leave. However if you're forced to stay in the game (in a higher court - evidence that somehow points to an innocent person), that's another story. You might end up losing (most likely - guy gets freed based on whatever evidence plus you pay more the bigger and longer the case gets) or you win by luck (unlikely - the wrongly accusedly get sentenced for x amount of time). Even if the wrongly accused overturns the case in the future, it will not be the accuser but the court/evidence that's to be blamed of.[/CODE]
[QUOTE=Alyx;42291244][I][B]My ideal[/B][/I] justice system would like kind of like gambling, you bet a sum (charging the accused) then you win, you get your payout (putting away the accused in prison for x amount of time), if you lose (total false accusations), you loose what you bet upfront and you must pay the same amount again ( 2(x) amount of time). Now if you realized you betted on the wrong table right before the game starts (accused the wrong guy), at the end just get everyone a drink and give the supervisor a tip (you pay the court fees) before you leave. However if you're forced to stay in the game (in a higher court - evidence that somehow points to an innocent person), that's another story. You might end up losing (most likely - guy gets freed based on whatever evidence plus you pay more the bigger and longer the case gets) or you win by luck (unlikely - the wrongly accusedly get sentenced for x amount of time). Even if the wrongly accused overturns the case in the future, it will not be the accuser but the court/evidence that's to be blamed of.[/QUOTE] i think you're stretching this metaphor a bit too far
[QUOTE=Alyx;42291244][I][B]My ideal[/B][/I] justice system would like kind of like gambling, you bet a sum (charging the accused) then you win, you get your payout (putting away the accused in prison for x amount of time), if you lose (total false accusations), you loose what you bet upfront and you must pay the same amount again ( 2(x) amount of time). Now if you realized you betted on the wrong table right before the game starts (accused the wrong guy), at the end just get everyone a drink and give the supervisor a tip (you pay the court fees) before you leave. However if you're forced to stay in the game (in a higher court - evidence that somehow points to an innocent person), that's another story. You might end up losing (most likely - guy gets freed based on whatever evidence plus you pay more the bigger and longer the case gets) or you win by luck (unlikely - the wrongly accusedly get sentenced for x amount of time). Even if the wrongly accused overturns the case in the future, it will not be the accuser but the court/evidence that's to be blamed of.[/QUOTE] What if we let the defendant pick a card from a standard card deck? If it's diamonds, the defendant pays a sum of money (decided by the jury) to the victim. The number on the card serving as a multiplier (jack, queen and king count as a ten, an ace counts as a twenty). If it's spades, the defendant serves an amount of time in jail (time in months, and the amount is again, decided by the jury). The number on the card also serving as a multiplier. If it's hearts, the defendant walks away as a free man and gets a sum of money from the victim, again decided by the jury with the number on the card working as a multiplier. If it's clubs, the defendant gets beaten to death by the victim. The number on the card indicating the amount of people that are allowed to help the victim. If it's a joker, the audience decides what happens. All of it is broadcasted live on TV.
Why don't medical officials physically check the purported rape victim to confirm the rape happened instead of relying on the victims words only?
'My ideal justice system would like kind of like gambling' lol
[QUOTE=Tibbolax;42291358]Why don't medical officials physically check the purported rape victim to confirm the rape happened instead of relying on the victims words only?[/QUOTE] But they do? And what is preventing rapists just from using condoms and lube for their crime? There are rapists that dont rape because of sexual urges, but to establish a dominance of power over someone.
[QUOTE=Tibbolax;42291358]Why don't medical officials physically check the purported rape victim to confirm the rape happened instead of relying on the victims words only?[/QUOTE] That still cannot prove the victim didn't consent. Falsely accusing someone you had consensual (rough) sex with is a realistic possibility.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.