Bogus Rape Accusation

[Boxlicker101]

Here is a real nut on the subject: http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/24/k...ned-for-reporting-a-rape-that-never-happened/

Think about this: The fact that it didn't happen shouldn't prevent people with reporting it. She's a Democrat, wouldn'tcha know it.

 

[phrodeau]

What do Republicans have to say about rape? I think I can find a few quotes...

 

[Boxlicker101]

What do Republicans have to say about rape? I think I can find a few quotes...

This isn't about rape. This is about a false accusation.

If I look hard enough, I can probably find all sorts of things said about rape by Dems.

ETA: Here's a good example: http://eaglerising.com/12731/democrat-makes-rape-joke-media-silent/

 

[1sickbastard]

Here is a real nut on the subject: http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/24/k...ned-for-reporting-a-rape-that-never-happened/

Think about this: The fact that it didn't happen shouldn't prevent people with reporting it. She's a Democrat, wouldn'tcha know it.

So basically, if one thinks a violent crime is happening, but doesn't know for sure, the responsible thing is to do nothing.

Is that what you're saying?

 

[Boxlicker101]

So basically, if one thinks a violent crime is happening, but doesn't know for sure, the responsible thing is to do nothing.

Is that what you're saying?

A woman certainly knows when she is being or has been raped.

http://eaglerising.com/12731/democrat-makes-rape-joke-media-silent/

 

[sr71plt]

OK, this is in my town. Saying the accusation is bogus or that it was debunked is going too far. The bottom line is that the woman now won't testify to it--she hasn't recanted, though--and the friends she confided in at the time don't fully support what the Rolling Stones article claimed her story was. And that's what the final report released and reported ad nauseam in Charlottesville on 23 March says--that they can't put together evidence that it happened; the alleged victim won't cooperate. Not being able to evidence that it happened doesn't go as far as to say it has been proved to be bogus or has been debunked.

As a sidebar, psychologists in various women's support organizations in the region are saying that, in this environment, it is common practice that the woman just shuts down and won't talk further about it.

 

[Sean Renaud]

What percent of accusations are actually fake and how would we effectively draw the line between genuine fake cases of rape and not cases where there was insufficient evidence for whatever reason.

I assume for the moment we're talking about violent rape and not people in positions of power forcing women to do things they don't want to do because if she doesn't he'll find an excuse to fire her, not hire her, ship her off to the store in Siberia or anything else. Sure you can file a lawsuit but you're not going to win. And that's assuming you actually can file a lawsuit. If I for example lost my job I wouldn't have the money to hire a lawyer, nor the time to be stuck in court instead of getting a new damn job and then being at said new damn job for example and I would assume more Americans than not are in that same situation. I would assume it's next to impossible to prove some of those cases in a court of law and probably happens a lot more frequently than anybody really wants to admit. But unless you just walk around with a recording device on you, or are so shit awesome at your job that just pulling out your work history and being able to say prove via records and documents that 90% of the company should have been fired, shipped off to Hell or what not before you and it's undeniable that someone was pissed at you for some reason.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Here is part of what she said:

Gillibrand said it would be wrong for some to call on the female student in the UVA scandal to face criminal charges.

“I think it’s inappropriate,” she said.

Punishing false accusations of rape would only discourage actual rape victims from stepping forward, you see. We must protect women, even if they’re lying. They’re victims because they say so, and we must not be swayed by mere evidence to the contrary.

Those frat bros probably had it coming anyway. If you think those guys are innocent until proven guilty, you hate women. Go ahead, deny it. That just serves as further proof of your misogyny, misogynist.

And this is a person who is trusted to make laws for Americans.

 

[Sean Renaud]

I read it, and I'm not certain she's wrong about the important part which is that we already have a problem with rapes not being reported and I have no idea how you would successfully separate out truly fake rape accusations from ones where you couldn't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Rape is obviously an uncomfortable subject for conservatives.

Rape is basically about asserting control over another person's body, as is much of social conservatism.

That's why they react so strongly to rape accusations, it's an affront to their way of life.

False rape accusations are a godsend to conservatives, it allows them to play the victim.

 

[Busybody]

Rape is obviously an uncomfortable subject for conservatives.

Rape is basically about asserting control over another person's body, as is much of social conservatism.

That's why they react so strongly to rape accusations, it's an affront to their way of life.

False rape accusations are a godsend to conservatives, it allows them to play the victim.

no, we have a problem with LIES that attempt to HURT people

 

[Busybody]

Kirsten Gillibrand is the Ben Tillman of the feminist lynching culture. She happily victimizes innocents for political gain, and she does it without shame. Of course, Tillman was a Democratic Senator too.

 

[Busybody]

she is the LYING PARANOID CUNT that accused a Sen of sexual harrassment

 

[phrodeau]

A woman certainly knows when she is being or has been raped.

http://eaglerising.com/12731/democrat-makes-rape-joke-media-silent/

Not if she's been drugged, dumbass.

 

[Wrong Element]

Here is part of what she said:

Gillibrand said it would be wrong for some to call on the female student in the UVA scandal to face criminal charges.

“I think it’s inappropriate,” she said.

Punishing false accusations of rape would only discourage actual rape victims from stepping forward, you see. We must protect women, even if they’re lying. They’re victims because they say so, and we must not be swayed by mere evidence to the contrary.

Those frat bros probably had it coming anyway. If you think those guys are innocent until proven guilty, you hate women. Go ahead, deny it. That just serves as further proof of your misogyny, misogynist.

And this is a person who is trusted to make laws for Americans.

Why would she be charged with a crime? The story was pushed by the magazine, not by the accuser. And the police didn't say that the incident didn't happen -- they said they couldn't prove anything happened, which is not at all the same thing.

 

[RobDownSouth]

no, we have a problem with LIES that attempt to HURT people

YOU lecturing ANYONE about LIES is the absolute HEIGHT of IRONY.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Why would she be charged with a crime? The story was pushed by the magazine, not by the accuser. And the police didn't say that the incident didn't happen -- they said they couldn't prove anything happened, which is not at all the same thing.

What part of "Felonious Conservative Butthurt" do you not understand?

 

[Busybody]

YOU lecturing ANYONE about LIES is the absolute HEIGHT of IRONY.

stfu lunatic

 

[Busybody]

After Police Review: UVA Should Expel Rape-Hoaxer Jackie. “This is it, you see? Jackie is a serial liar. She was a freshman having trouble in school, and so she lies. She tells the dean a vague story about being a rape victim. The dean asks police to investigate, but the liar won’t cooperate with the police because she knows her story is a lie. Jackie’s rape tale in May 2013, however, didn’t match the rape tale she told Rolling Stone in fall 2014. Why is this? The vague story she told the UVA dean was utilitarian, a deception meant to explain her problems in school, to depict herself as deserving of sympathy.

 

[sr71plt]

Here is part of what she said:

Gillibrand said it would be wrong for some to call on the female student in the UVA scandal to face criminal charges.

“I think it’s inappropriate,” she said.

Punishing false accusations of rape would only discourage actual rape victims from stepping forward, you see. We must protect women, even if they’re lying. They’re victims because they say so, and we must not be swayed by mere evidence to the contrary.

Those frat bros probably had it coming anyway. If you think those guys are innocent until proven guilty, you hate women. Go ahead, deny it. That just serves as further proof of your misogyny, misogynist.

And this is a person who is trusted to make laws for Americans.

What part of the final report on the UVa student investigation doesn't find or accuse the alleged rape victim of lying don't you want to even try to understand? The finding is that she now won't cooperate, not that she lied. The Rolling Stone article has been charged with fabrication, but unless evidence comes forward that it was the alleged victim who provided that fabrication, not the writer of the article, there's no legal basis for charging the woman with anything. (Which may be why she isn't cooperating now, of course.)

There has been no finding of false accusation as of now. Got that through your noggin yet? You are running well ahead of any investigation conclusion because of what you want to believe, not because of what the investigation concluded.

 

[RjThoughts]

The accuser can't be charged since she never went to the police. She does, however, face major civil suits, including one from Rolling Stone magazine.

 

[Busybody]

The accuser can't be charged since she never went to the police. She does, however, face major civil suits, including one from Rolling Stone magazine.

well that wont happen and we know why

 

[sr71plt]

She does, however, face major civil suits, including one from Rolling Stone magazine.

Sorry, it doesn't work that way. It's the paper's responsibility to stay within the libel laws for what it prints sticks to it, not it anyone who gives it data. And Rolling Stone is just going to thank its lucky stars if the fraternity (which is contemplating doing so) and the University of Virginia (which has said it won't do so. It's playing this as "there's a problem with this going on even if this isn't a proven instance of it") don't sue it for the botched-up story. There's a Rolling Stones-commissioned independent review of the article going on, which Rolling Stone says it will publish when there's a final report, on the extent of the Rolling Stone culpability, and this will determine whether the fraternity will sue--and for how much.

The fraternity and university could, of course, sue the alleged victim, with the expectation of return on that being gauged by how conclusively she could be pinned down for lying. I don't think the university would do so in a million years, though. They recognize this as a legitimate problem and they wouldn't want to be any more in the position of being accused of stifling rape investigations and alleged victims coming forward than universities across the country already are being put under that gun. UVa just wants it all to go away from UVa. And if the fraternity sues the woman, they are going to be put under added scrutiny on past behavior that they very likely don't want to have happen.

 

[RjThoughts]

Sorry, it doesn't work that way. It's the paper's responsibility to stay within the libel laws for what it prints sticks to it, not it anyone who gives it data. And Rolling Stone is just going to thank its lucky stars if the fraternity (which is contemplating doing so) and the University of Virginia (which has said it won't do so. It's playing this as "there's a problem with this going on even if this isn't a proven instance of it") don't sue it for the botched-up story. There's a Rolling Stones-commissioned independent review of the article going on, which Rolling Stone says it will publish when there's a final report, on the extent of the Rolling Stone culpability, and this will determine whether the fraternity will sue--and for how much.

The fraternity and university could, of course, sue the alleged victim, with the expectation of return on that being gauged by how conclusively she could be pinned down for lying. I don't think the university would do so in a million years, though. They recognize this as a legitimate problem and they wouldn't want to be any more in the position of being accused of stifling rape investigations and alleged victims coming forward than universities across the country already are being put under that gun. UVa just wants it all to go away from UVa. And if the fraternity sues the woman, they are going to be put under added scrutiny on past behavior that they very likely don't want to have happen.

The paper used good faith in reporting this. Yes, they were burned, but they can still sue her. Most likely to happen, the frat and UVa will sue the paper for libel, with out-of-court settlements.

And yes, it CAN happen this way. This is the US, where you can sue for ANYTHING and EVERYTHING.

 

[sr71plt]

The paper used good faith in reporting this. Yes, they were burned, but they can still sue her. Most likely to happen, the frat and UVa will sue the paper for libel, with out-of-court settlements.

And yes, it CAN happen this way. This is the US, where you can sue for ANYTHING and EVERYTHING.

Well, yes, on the anyone can sue for anything. Which means when we discuss suing we're really talking about doing so with a likely expectation of success.

But I don't believe you on a newspaper being able to successfully sue anyone it gets bogus information from for an article it then publishes. We'll just have to see, I guess.