3 ms·
Nobody ever said due process shouldn't exist except the author. Again, another scarecrow the author sets up to dehumanize the opposition. The point raised was a
by Lancey 11y ago
Nobody ever said due process shouldn't exist except the author. Again, another scarecrow the author sets up to dehumanize the opposition. The point raised was about listening to rape victims, taking their accusations seriously, and not blaming the victim, but somehow this is against due process? This isn't about the accused but the accuser.
Due process is a legal situation, and it matters after an arrest and during the investigation of a crime. Listening to rape victims at face value is not a violation of due process.
- Karunamon 11y agoQuote from the article: In the Washington Post, Zerlina Maxwell argued that “we should believe, as a matter of default, what an accuser [of rape] says,” for “the costs of wrongly disbelieving a survivor far outweigh the costs of calling someone a rapist.” (Which is another quote in of itself) Is there another way to read these words that I am aware of?
- classicsnoot 11y ago>Due process is a legal situation, and it matters after an arrest and during the investigation of a crime. Listening to rape victims at face value is not a violation of due process. Listening, yes. Blanket accusation based on a single account is de facto limitation of due process. Shaming a rapist who gets off on a technicality is one thing. Shaming a person who has been accused of rape is quite another.