Woman accuses three men of rape after drunken romp

Millicent

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

By assuming here should have been convictions in many cases of acquittals, you are adding to the lack of credibility. Again, why is 'innocent until proven guilty' suspended specifically in cases of sexual assault? Legally speaking, an acquittal means the accused is not guilty. By assuming most of these are incorrect, you are just as bad as the people who assume most accusers are liars.

Um, I'm not talking entirely about acquittals. The vast, VAST majority of rape cases never make it to trial. I am not assuming anything either. I am going on very well researched statistics and studies.

Here's the RCNI study for 2010 if you're genuinely interested in the matter.

ETA: Here's another link from the Dublin Rape Crisis Centre on the low conviction rates in Ireland.

hatrickpatrick

Millicent wrote: »

Um, I'm not talking entirely about acquittals. The vast, VAST majority of rape cases never make it to trial. I am not assuming anything either. I am going on very well researched statistics and studies.

Here's the RCNI study for 2010 if you're genuinely interested in the matter.

The point is, there's no proof that all or even most of those were genuine cases. Assuming they were is exactly as bad as assuming most convictions were false allegations.

Madam_X

To say there's virtually no sympathy from women re inequalities and injustices faced by men is an utter lie. The founder of Amen is a woman and I worked with her on highlighting the issue of domestic violence against men.

Guess it's easier though to just whinge instead of getting out there and setting up a cause though. And "man up", "grow a pair", "nnnnnnnnice" - such a shame the way only women say these things. Oh wait...

Rented Mule

Agent Smith wrote: »

She should have gotten a sentence in line with what the men would have got if they were guilty

This is why I'm voting for Joe !!

Millicent

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

The point is, there's no proof that all or even most of those were genuine cases. Assuming they were is exactly as bad as assuming most convictions were false allegations.

Are you serious? Are you actually reaching so hard that you think that a sizeable percentage of people who contact rape crisis centres anonymously are making stuff up?

ahnowbrowncow

Millicent wrote: »

And how many false accusations are made a year that you think that far outweighs the impact of a reduction in genuine cases being reported?

Better to let guilty men go free than send innocent men to jail is it not?

Millicent

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

Better to let guilty men go free than send innocent men to jail is is not?

I'd rather the guilty go to jail and the innocent stay free. Is that not an option?

Ziphius

Millicent wrote: »

ETA: Here's another link from the Dublin Rape Crisis Centre on the low conviction rates in Ireland.

8% looks very low. Do you know how this compares to other crimes?

Tombi!

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

Better to let guilty men go free than send innocent men to jail is it not?

What's that got to do with taking every reported sexual assault as serious as others?

ahnowbrowncow

Millicent wrote: »

I'd rather the guilty go to jail and the innocent stay free. Is that not an option?

Undoubtedly.

But is it not better to have a deterrent that will prevent false accusations and false imprisonment even if it means some genuine victims 'might' feel they can't come forward?

ceegee

Piste wrote: »

It was an absolutely terrible accusation for the girl to make and she does deserve to be punished, but how on EARTH can anyone think that accusing someone of rape is a crime on the same level as rape? Get a sense of proportionality!

Losing friends, family, job
No possibility of any roles requiring yards vetting (goodbye career, training your kids team etc)
Spending a few years in the sex offenders wing of the prison (high possibility of rape or assault)
Any future relationships will be difficult

The only way out is to move away but you can't travel most places with a conviction.

I sometimes feel some women don't fully grasp how devastating something like this would be for a man.

hatrickpatrick

Millicent wrote: »

Are you serious? Are you actually reaching so hard that you think that a sizeable percentage of people who contact rape crisis centres anonymously are making stuff up?

Actually my honest opinion is that 'rape' is defined too broadly and that is a major problem, but I suppose that's too controversial an opinion to hold?

Millicent

Ziphius wrote: »

8% looks very low. Do you know how this compares to other crimes?

This is the best link I can find for you at the moment. The use of the word "detected" makes me think that these aren't conviction rates. However, if these are just investigation rates, they're still higher than rape and other sexual crime investigation rates in Ireland.

ahnowbrowncow

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

What's that got to do with taking every reported sexual assault as serious as others?

Please read post #174 and #179

hatrickpatrick

Millicent wrote: »

I'd rather the guilty go to jail and the innocent stay free. Is that not an option?

Miscarriages of justice happen, and wrongful acquittals are the lesser of two evils if the alternative is destroying the lives of innocent people.
The reverse opinion is eat led to Ye Guilford Four being imprisoned for such an outrageously long time.

Millicent

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Actually my honest opinion is that 'rape' is defined too broadly and that is a major problem, but I suppose that's too controversial an opinion to hold?

No, you're entitled to your opinion. I still hold that you haven't read up too much on the incidences of rape and sexual crime in Ireland and their resultant conviction rates. With respect, I would imagine we could have a more constructive conversation, if you are open to doing so, if you do decide to read more on the subject.

Tombi!

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Actually my honest opinion is that 'rape' is defined too broadly and that is a major problem, but I suppose that's too controversial an opinion to hold?

You're right, rape is often misused by people and can be used to describe me slapping a girl's ass in a club.

But still, the fact is, the rape crises center offers help and support for victims. It doesn't offer classes on how to lie to the judge and your friends about making a drunken night of sex seem like a vicious assault.

Millicent

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Miscarriages of justice happen, and wrongful acquittals are the lesser of two evils if the alternative is destroying the lives of innocent people.
The reverse opinion is eat led to Ye Guilford Four being imprisoned for such an outrageously long time.

You're setting up an opinion here that I don't hold. I would like to see convictions for genuine rape cases rise here and for false accusations to drop. I fail to see the issue in that opinion and it is nowhere near the opinion you're painting in this post.

Tombi!

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

.

I saw what you said. But I still don't understand how it matters?
Unless you made a mistake in which case you could just delete your post by editing it, picking to delete and then deleting it

ahnowbrowncow

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

I saw what you said. But I still don't understand how it matters?
Unless you made a mistake in which case you could just delete your post by editing it, picking to delete and then deleting it

Edited

Madam_X

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Actually my honest opinion is that 'rape' is defined too broadly and that is a major problem, but I suppose that's too controversial an opinion to hold?

Forced intercourse/intercourse with someone who is not in a position to give consent (e.g. passed out) - don't see it as too broad myself.

Tombi!

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

Edited

My point was that each crime should be taken as serious as the next.
Regardless of if the woman is lying or not, it should be treated as serious. One thing that Ireland does have problems with is a big feck up in rape cases. Both actual cases of rape and false claims.

But by refusing to take every rape case seriously, you already make it order for the actual victims.

Not to mention men have a Hell of a difficult time with sexual assault cases themselves. It'll just make it too hard.

ahnowbrowncow

Madam_X wrote: »

Forced intercourse/intercourse with someone who is not in a position to give consent (e.g. passed out) - don't see it as too broad myself.

But it's a bit ridiculous that there isn't different degrees of rape like murder, premeditated rape should not carry the same punishment as drunken sex where she was too drunk to be able to give consent

hatrickpatrick

Millicent wrote: »

No, you're entitled to your opinion. I still hold that you haven't read up too much on the incidences of rape and sexual crime in Ireland and their resultant conviction rates. With respect, I would imagine we could have a more constructive conversation, if you are open to doing so, if you do decide to read more on the subject.

I will, if someone can did some rape statistics which exclude cases of consensual acts between underage parties (male is automatically the aggressor in insane Irish law) and consensual acts between drunken parties (again the male is presumed to be the aggressor regardless of who initiated, etc).

It is the above two ludicrous legal scenarios which fire me up about this subject, to be honest. Both are absolutely horrific instances of discrimination which almost nobody seems to be doing anything about.

Quorum

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Actually my honest opinion is that 'rape' is defined too broadly and that is a major problem, but I suppose that's too controversial an opinion to hold?

Actually, the definition of rape in Ireland is much less broad than a lot of other developed countries.

hatrickpatrick

Millicent wrote: »

You're setting up an opinion here that I don't hold. I would like to see convictions for genuine rape cases rise here and for false accusations to drop. I fail to see the issue in that opinion and it is nowhere near the opinion you're painting in this post.

My issue is simply that you seem to be assuming the courts regularly let guilty men off, yet you (rightly) criticise those who feel the courts regularly punish innocent men.
You are automatically assigning truthfulness to the accuser and not to the accused, which is the type of viewpoint which leads to acquitted men retaining the stigma of the allegation long afterwards.

If a man is not convicted in court, there is absolutely no excuse whatsoever for continuing to assume he is guilty, which is essentially what you are indirectly doing by alleging that many cases which dd not end in conviction, should have.

dark crystal

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

But it's a bit ridiculous that there isn't different degrees of rape like murder, premeditated rape should not carry the same punishment as drunken sex where she was too drunk to be able to give consent

Not really. One should never have sex with someone without their consent, no matter what the circumstances. It's a pretty simple rule to live by.

hatrickpatrick

Madam_X wrote: »

Forced intercourse/intercourse with someone who is not in a position to give consent (e.g. passed out) - don't see it as too broad myself.

Passed out is not the same as being drunk enough to knowingly make a bad decision, which is defined as rape in the law.
If the man is also drunk, surely if the woman is not responsible for her decision, the man is also not responsible for his?

If we say that someone can consent, but be too drunk to give real consent, shouldn't that apply to both genders? Why is it assumed that the man is the "aggressor" in such cases?

Piste

Gauss wrote: »

The crime she committed was on a par with rape interns of how evil it is.

Except it wasn't, she most likely did it out of desperation and self-preservation because she was drunk and didn't want to be seen as a "slapper" for sleeping with 3 men, she panicked and accused them of rape, which she later confessed to when pressed. You're contrasting this to rape, in which one person takes utter control of anothers body, violates them in the most intimate way possible and leaves them with the very real possibility of an STI or pregnancy. The two are not comparable in the slightest.

ceegee wrote: »

Losing friends, family, job
No possibility of any roles requiring yards vetting (goodbye career, training your kids team etc)
Spending a few years in the sex offenders wing of the prison (high possibility of rape or assault)
Any future relationships will be difficult

The only way out is to move away but you can't travel most places with a conviction.

I sometimes feel some women don't fully grasp how devastating something like this would be for a man.

Don't be disingenuous, that is not what happened and you know it. The men were never sent to prison, their names have been publically cleared. Of course it would have been different had they been convicted and served time, and she should have been punished more severely, but still should not have been given the same sentence as a rapist. She slandered the men in a most reprehensible way, yes she should be punished, but when you punish a crime the same as you would for rape, you acknowledge the severity of that crime is on a par with rape.

Madam_X

Madam_X wrote: »

Forced intercourse/intercourse with someone who is not in a position to give consent (e.g. passed out) - don't see it as too broad myself.

You say "e.g." but that's the one "e.g." we'll all accept as fair enough. If saying nothing means it's rape then there's less than 5% of either gender or haven't been "raped".