4 ms·

We should make the punishment for falsely accusing someone of rape equivalent to the punishment for rape. That's take care of the problem.

janetacarr 7y ago
This assumes the court system is infallible though when we know it is not. Plus, I can see something like this deterring actual victims from coming forward.
- AlexTWithBeard 7y ago
  something like this deterring actual victims from coming forward This is also a possibility, but it's pretty much universally accepted that it's better to let a criminal go than to punish an innocent person.
  - LurkersWillLurk 7y ago
    I don't agree. I would argue that the rise of the victims' rights movement suggests that culturally, the United States is beginning to see the few false reports/convictions as an acceptable casualty to the vast majority of truthful reports. I mean, we have Marsy's Law being added to state constitutions left and right. One of its provisions is that the victim[1] can refuse a deposition before trial. This obviously conflicts with the accused's right to access all the evidence, does it not? Another provision limits the amount of time a convicted person can seek post-conviction relief. The goal here is to remove stress from the victim, but again, we have seen many convicted people be exonerated due to DNA evidence, or other evidence that arises after the fact. Again, this is a statement of values - that the deprivation of liberty is less important than the desire of the victim to not feel anxious about the perpetrator's possible release. [1] I would argue that calling a complainant a victim undermines the presumption of innocence. If you're a victim, it follows that the accused is a perpetrator.
    - kenneth 7y ago
      Innocent until proved guilty is a fundamental principle of American values. I don't at all see why we should throw that out the window and say that "a few people falsly convicted is an acceptable casualty" just so we can catch more perpetrators.
      - LurkersWillLurk 7y ago
        I mean, I agree. I'm not in favor of "acceptable casualties", I'm just saying that the mainstream opinion is changing.
    - kian 7y ago
      This is precisely what another commenter on this thread meant when they said the presumption of innocence that underlies our system of justice is currently eroding in modern society. Assuming guilt gives too much leeway for authoritarian abuse
- kenneth 7y ago
  It doesn't. Not saying that we should throw in jail any accuser who fails to prove their case. But if it's proven they made it up, then we should. There are three outcomes, not two: proven guilty, inconclusive, proven not guilty. Either end comes with an equivalent penalty, middle comes with acquittal.
excalibur 7y ago
....provided "rape" is defined as something other than "whatever the accuser says it is".
AzuraJergen 7y ago
If they become equivalent, it just increases the odds that the accuser will take it to their graves and the name of the accuse will be tarnished forever.
ZeroGravitas 7y ago
You should watch the Netflix series "Unbelievable" or read the true story it's based on: https://www.propublica.org/article/false-rape-accusations-an-unbelievable-story https://www.propublica.org/article/false-rape-accusations-an... It's eye opening about how hard it is to be believed about even a "classic" masked stranger, home invasion rape. Having read that (and watched a couple of episodes of the Netflix adaption) I'm more likely to believe the original commenter's friend commited a rape and the victim was just compelled to deny it, possibly suffering twice.
- slimed 7y ago
  The woman admitted she lied, in private, to friends. Where is the coercion? Are you saying we should only believe women when they are accusing men of rape? And disbelieve them later?
  - ZeroGravitas 7y ago
    I think we should take statistics into account. I think there's a likelihood that someone will lie about being raped, and a likelihood of them identifying a named individual (two numbers that should be considered seperately, since young girls who fall pregnant may lie to avoid blame, while not trying to blame anyone in particular). I think that similarly, there's a percentage of retractions that will also be false, for various reasons. This is similar to the statistics question about whether someone has cancer when a test comes back positive. It depends on the accuracy of the test and the base rate. I could easily believe that there's more false retractions than false accusations (both as a percentage and an absolute number) so I'm not sure a retraction actually increases my belief in their not being a rape, particularly if a specific person is named, without taking into account other specific evidence.
    - slimed 7y ago
      This is exactly the problem. You want to determine guilt based on what you believe is generally true about the world. Not about the facts of the case at hand. The negative ramifications of this mindset for the accused are hard to overstate.

janetacarr 7y ago

This assumes the court system is infallible though when we know it is not. Plus, I can see something like this deterring actual victims from coming forward.

AlexTWithBeard 7y ago
something like this deterring actual victims from coming forward This is also a possibility, but it's pretty much universally accepted that it's better to let a criminal go than to punish an innocent person.
- LurkersWillLurk 7y ago
  I don't agree. I would argue that the rise of the victims' rights movement suggests that culturally, the United States is beginning to see the few false reports/convictions as an acceptable casualty to the vast majority of truthful reports. I mean, we have Marsy's Law being added to state constitutions left and right. One of its provisions is that the victim[1] can refuse a deposition before trial. This obviously conflicts with the accused's right to access all the evidence, does it not? Another provision limits the amount of time a convicted person can seek post-conviction relief. The goal here is to remove stress from the victim, but again, we have seen many convicted people be exonerated due to DNA evidence, or other evidence that arises after the fact. Again, this is a statement of values - that the deprivation of liberty is less important than the desire of the victim to not feel anxious about the perpetrator's possible release. [1] I would argue that calling a complainant a victim undermines the presumption of innocence. If you're a victim, it follows that the accused is a perpetrator.
  - kenneth 7y ago
    Innocent until proved guilty is a fundamental principle of American values. I don't at all see why we should throw that out the window and say that "a few people falsly convicted is an acceptable casualty" just so we can catch more perpetrators.
    - LurkersWillLurk 7y ago
      I mean, I agree. I'm not in favor of "acceptable casualties", I'm just saying that the mainstream opinion is changing.
  - kian 7y ago
    This is precisely what another commenter on this thread meant when they said the presumption of innocence that underlies our system of justice is currently eroding in modern society. Assuming guilt gives too much leeway for authoritarian abuse
kenneth 7y ago
It doesn't. Not saying that we should throw in jail any accuser who fails to prove their case. But if it's proven they made it up, then we should. There are three outcomes, not two: proven guilty, inconclusive, proven not guilty. Either end comes with an equivalent penalty, middle comes with acquittal.

excalibur 7y ago

....provided "rape" is defined as something other than "whatever the accuser says it is".

AzuraJergen 7y ago

If they become equivalent, it just increases the odds that the accuser will take it to their graves and the name of the accuse will be tarnished forever.

ZeroGravitas 7y ago

You should watch the Netflix series "Unbelievable" or read the true story it's based on: https://www.propublica.org/article/false-rape-accusations-an-unbelievable-story https://www.propublica.org/article/false-rape-accusations-an... It's eye opening about how hard it is to be believed about even a "classic" masked stranger, home invasion rape. Having read that (and watched a couple of episodes of the Netflix adaption) I'm more likely to believe the original commenter's friend commited a rape and the victim was just compelled to deny it, possibly suffering twice.

slimed 7y ago
The woman admitted she lied, in private, to friends. Where is the coercion? Are you saying we should only believe women when they are accusing men of rape? And disbelieve them later?
- ZeroGravitas 7y ago
  I think we should take statistics into account. I think there's a likelihood that someone will lie about being raped, and a likelihood of them identifying a named individual (two numbers that should be considered seperately, since young girls who fall pregnant may lie to avoid blame, while not trying to blame anyone in particular). I think that similarly, there's a percentage of retractions that will also be false, for various reasons. This is similar to the statistics question about whether someone has cancer when a test comes back positive. It depends on the accuracy of the test and the base rate. I could easily believe that there's more false retractions than false accusations (both as a percentage and an absolute number) so I'm not sure a retraction actually increases my belief in their not being a rape, particularly if a specific person is named, without taking into account other specific evidence.
  - slimed 7y ago
    This is exactly the problem. You want to determine guilt based on what you believe is generally true about the world. Not about the facts of the case at hand. The negative ramifications of this mindset for the accused are hard to overstate.