4 ms·

How does the victim - the complainant - incriminate themself? They aren't the accused.

by DanBC 8y ago

dsfyu404ed 8y ago
The implication was "for non-related crimes". Basically the police don't want to spend time trying to find whoever raped you if you're unwilling to hand over your phone because the way they see it if you have something to hide it's because you're probably involved in other shady shit and are correspondingly at the bottom of the priority ladder as far as the police care. It's like when a known drug dealer gets shot they just figure it was a rival dealer and/or he had it coming so they don't spend more than the minimum time investigating it. Ditto for a hooker who gets raped. They tend to see that as just one of the risks in that business.
- saagarjha 8y ago
  > if you have something to hide Almost everyone has something to hide (for example, I may or may not have software on my computer that I didn’t quite followed the licensing terms for), and they shouldn’t be denied the right to a fair trial for something unrelated because of this.
  - tracker1 8y ago
    They could offer immunity against crimes not related to a strict list that they may find on your phone. That strict list including murder, conspiracy to commit murder, treason, embezzlement, securities fraud and a few other felony crimes. That would exclude the rest. It would also have to include verbiage about parallel construction practices.
- DanBC 8y ago
  > Ditto for a hooker who gets raped. Do you have any evidence that prostitutes who are raped do not have their crime investigated to the same extent as any other victim? https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/cps-policy-prosecuting-cases-rape https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/cps-policy-prosecuting-ca... > We are aware that there are myths and stereotypes surrounding the offence of rape. Examples of such myths include: [...] > prostitutes cannot be raped. > Prosecutors who deal with rape cases are taught about them as part of their specialist training. We will not allow these myths and stereotypes to influence our decisions and we will robustly challenge such attitudes in the courtroom. Here's an article from 2011 suggesting that changes in attitudes in police meant more prostitutes felt able to report rape: https://www.economist.com/britain/2011/01/20/in-from-the-cold https://www.economist.com/britain/2011/01/20/in-from-the-col...
  - coldtea 8y ago
    >Do you have any evidence that prostitutes who are raped do not have their crime investigated to the same extent as any other victim? Well, empirical reality is enough. Unless people live in some middle/upper middle class bubble, and have seldom or never met and talked with prostitutes, policemen, people in everyday contact with either group, etc, they know that this exactly is the case. That's a 2011 article about a change in mentality in a single country, and with still measly little statistical increase (even if positive). And it doesn't even touch on what happens afterwards, and the rates of convictions in each category. If anything, the article negates the question (it started getting somewhat better in 2011 -- which already means it wasn't anywhere near on parity as per the question).
    - DanBC 8y ago
      > in a single country The country that is the topic of discussion in this thread and the submitted article.
- ptaipale 8y ago
  Everyone has something to hide. The police will understand that. But if the police are not able to get at all the relevant evidence, it is difficult to investigate.
Veen 8y ago
Given the motivation for this -- the collapse of several high-profile rape case where evidence of false accusation was discovered on the "victim's" phone -- it would ask (not force) false accusers to incriminate themselves.
- DanBC 8y ago
  Why are people so keen to suggest that she lied to the police, but was truthful in her messages to other people? I can see several reasons why women would tell the truth to the police but not to friends; fear of reprisal being one.
  - Veen 8y ago
    I'm "keen to suggest" it because because several high-profile rape cases in the UK collapsed in the last few months because police either didn't gather phone data or failed to disclose relevant phone data they had gathered — data that exonerated the accused. Phone data is one possible source of evidence and it should be considered alongside all the other evidence to determine whether the accused person is guilty. By refusing to hand over that evidence, rape victims deny police and prosecutors evidence that may be vital to making a case, which obviously makes it less likely that a prosecution will go forward. You can't convict someone with no evidence. I can certainly understand how it would make the accuser uncomfortable, but that has to be balanced against the rights of the accused to a fair trial where all available evidence is considered.
    - DanBC 8y ago
      I don't think we disagree on any of that. Where I disagree is that her messages were proof she lied to police about the rape. She may well have been telling the truth to the police and lying to her friends -- why aren't people leaving that open as a possibility.
      - Veen 8y ago
        I’d say it’s evidence but not proof. If the phone is full of messages saying the accuser had a wonderful time with the accused, that’s evidence that should be considered alongside other evidence. She may indeed be lying about having a wonderful time, and that should be taken into account. Investigators have to make a judgement that into account.

How does the victim - the complainant - incriminate themself? They aren't the accused.

by DanBC 8y ago

How does the victim - the complainant - incriminate themself? They aren't the accused.

The implication was "for non-related crimes". Basically the police don't want to spend time trying to find whoever raped you if you're unwilling to hand over your phone because the way they see it if you have something to hide it's because you're probably involved in other shady shit and are correspondingly at the bottom of the priority ladder as far as the police care. It's like when a known drug dealer gets shot they just figure it was a rival dealer and/or he had it coming so they don't spend more than the minimum time investigating it. Ditto for a hooker who gets raped. They tend to see that as just one of the risks in that business.

saagarjha 8y ago
> if you have something to hide Almost everyone has something to hide (for example, I may or may not have software on my computer that I didn’t quite followed the licensing terms for), and they shouldn’t be denied the right to a fair trial for something unrelated because of this.
- tracker1 8y ago
  They could offer immunity against crimes not related to a strict list that they may find on your phone. That strict list including murder, conspiracy to commit murder, treason, embezzlement, securities fraud and a few other felony crimes. That would exclude the rest. It would also have to include verbiage about parallel construction practices.
DanBC 8y ago
> Ditto for a hooker who gets raped. Do you have any evidence that prostitutes who are raped do not have their crime investigated to the same extent as any other victim? https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/cps-policy-prosecuting-cases-rape https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/cps-policy-prosecuting-ca... > We are aware that there are myths and stereotypes surrounding the offence of rape. Examples of such myths include: [...] > prostitutes cannot be raped. > Prosecutors who deal with rape cases are taught about them as part of their specialist training. We will not allow these myths and stereotypes to influence our decisions and we will robustly challenge such attitudes in the courtroom. Here's an article from 2011 suggesting that changes in attitudes in police meant more prostitutes felt able to report rape: https://www.economist.com/britain/2011/01/20/in-from-the-cold https://www.economist.com/britain/2011/01/20/in-from-the-col...
- coldtea 8y ago
  >Do you have any evidence that prostitutes who are raped do not have their crime investigated to the same extent as any other victim? Well, empirical reality is enough. Unless people live in some middle/upper middle class bubble, and have seldom or never met and talked with prostitutes, policemen, people in everyday contact with either group, etc, they know that this exactly is the case. That's a 2011 article about a change in mentality in a single country, and with still measly little statistical increase (even if positive). And it doesn't even touch on what happens afterwards, and the rates of convictions in each category. If anything, the article negates the question (it started getting somewhat better in 2011 -- which already means it wasn't anywhere near on parity as per the question).
  - DanBC 8y ago
    > in a single country The country that is the topic of discussion in this thread and the submitted article.
ptaipale 8y ago
Everyone has something to hide. The police will understand that. But if the police are not able to get at all the relevant evidence, it is difficult to investigate.

Veen 8y ago

Given the motivation for this -- the collapse of several high-profile rape case where evidence of false accusation was discovered on the "victim's" phone -- it would ask (not force) false accusers to incriminate themselves.

DanBC 8y ago
Why are people so keen to suggest that she lied to the police, but was truthful in her messages to other people? I can see several reasons why women would tell the truth to the police but not to friends; fear of reprisal being one.
- Veen 8y ago
  I'm "keen to suggest" it because because several high-profile rape cases in the UK collapsed in the last few months because police either didn't gather phone data or failed to disclose relevant phone data they had gathered — data that exonerated the accused. Phone data is one possible source of evidence and it should be considered alongside all the other evidence to determine whether the accused person is guilty. By refusing to hand over that evidence, rape victims deny police and prosecutors evidence that may be vital to making a case, which obviously makes it less likely that a prosecution will go forward. You can't convict someone with no evidence. I can certainly understand how it would make the accuser uncomfortable, but that has to be balanced against the rights of the accused to a fair trial where all available evidence is considered.
  - DanBC 8y ago
    I don't think we disagree on any of that. Where I disagree is that her messages were proof she lied to police about the rape. She may well have been telling the truth to the police and lying to her friends -- why aren't people leaving that open as a possibility.
    - Veen 8y ago
      I’d say it’s evidence but not proof. If the phone is full of messages saying the accuser had a wonderful time with the accused, that’s evidence that should be considered alongside other evidence. She may indeed be lying about having a wonderful time, and that should be taken into account. Investigators have to make a judgement that into account.