U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
Old 09-20-2018, 04:17 PM
Location: AZ
618 posts, read 320,726 times
Reputation: 2527


First, I can understand the OP's post when I realized he/she is posting from their space yacht.

Second, if there is a vote for the most absurd idea, please let me know where to vote.

Third, there is no third.

Old 09-20-2018, 04:46 PM
Location: Northern Virginia
221 posts, read 73,341 times
Reputation: 460
Surely, the more heinous the crime is the more certain you want to be that a person is actually guilty of it before punishing them in a way befitting such a heinous crime.
Old 09-20-2018, 04:58 PM
4,817 posts, read 2,712,821 times
Reputation: 4314
Originally Posted by Veritas Vincit View Post
Surely, the more heinous the crime is the more certain you want to be that a person is actually guilty of it before punishing them in a way befitting such a heinous crime.
The burden of proof should be the same for any crime - beyond a reasonable doubt.

In this case there are many reasonable doubts.
Old 09-20-2018, 05:35 PM
1,248 posts, read 1,017,853 times
Reputation: 813
Originally Posted by phetaroi View Post
Perhaps an odd way of saying it...but I agree.

One thing I've learned over my time in this forum is that too many posters think that life is an either/or. And as you point out...it's not. It's much more complicated than that.

I meant to say the process of finding someone guilty is as flawed as humanity, as evidence, there are countless people that are found guilty of crimes they did not commit.
Old 09-20-2018, 07:01 PM
Location: Silicon Valley
2,905 posts, read 1,279,678 times
Reputation: 5293
Originally Posted by Pogue Mahone View Post
These sorts of crimes are often he said/she said situations where it's hard to really prove if anything actually happened. Because of this they are notoriously difficult to prosecute, and guilty perpetrators are often set free. It's been said that it's better to let a thousand guilty people go free than let one innocent person be punished, but that leaves a lot of victims without justice in sex related crimes. Should the presumption of innocence apply to sex crimes, or in the interests of justice for victims should the onus be placed on the alleged perpetrator to prove their innocence?
No. People attach heinous aftereffects to a person and are easily lead. Let the court prove out it was indeed this person. I personally haven't seen an obvious open/shut case go the wrong way. I may have wanted a heavier punishment, but let the court have first stab at making sure you've got the right perp...otherwise you still have a guilty person on the street and you've let that person destroy still another life.

There is a US precedent for what you're suggesting. State Sales Tax Audits have a presumption of guilty until proven innocent. Most States balance the massive power they've been given to arrive at a fair audit. Some...like the crony filled CA BOE, use the full strength of their office on some and going lightly on others. The distinction is rarely related to taxation policies.

Personally, I'd have no problem acquitting a vigilante by hanging a jury for someone that corrected a court mistake that was open/shut, but I'd never change the institution to make that legal. Personally, I've never seen the court go wrong on an obvious case. One way or another they get there. I may not agree with the ending charge or severity of the sentence, but karma has a way of working its magic in the prison systems.
Old 09-21-2018, 01:32 AM
Location: U.S.A., Earth
4,370 posts, read 2,656,865 times
Reputation: 3824
Originally Posted by luckeeesmom View Post
My best friend just paid 25K + for an attorney to defend her nephew against a crime like this. His grandmother also had to put her home down as collateral for bail money. He was accused by a family member (stepsister) and there was plenty of evidence that demonstrated the claim was false (concrete evidence that he was not even living in the state during the timeframe the accuser specified the crime had happened, witness testimonies about certain other claims being false, etc.) but the prosecutor would not drop the case and it went to trial. My friend's nephew spent several months in Jail, got bad credit due to defaulting on an apartment recently rented, had his name in the papers and news, and then had to go through months of house arrest at his grandparent's house until the trial. I hate to think what might have happened if my friend could not afford to sponsor his attorney fees and he did not have good legal defense. He was ultimately cleared of all charges but anytime someone googles his name, this stuff will come up and that could really create doubt from employers or others in his life and affect his opportunities moving forward.

I may be in the minority but there are situations where people lie about sex based crimes and it is especially horrible because situations like that cast doubt on other people who are not lying about it and really need the protection/justice that the legal system can provide. I'm not sure what the answer is.
Another awful case where they just believed the woman...
He’d eventually been granted a new trial and at some point during that second trial, both of his daughters admitted that they’d been made to create this false story against their dad at the behest of his ex-wife, who wanted to punish him for the divorce. His sentence was ultimately vacated and he was released from prison. Not sure whatever happened to the ex-wife, but I know the prosecutor said they’d be exploring charges against her.


I wonder to this day whether he was ever able to repair his relationship with his kids, or whether he was ever able to repair his life. The guy spent some seven years in prison based on a bull**** charge that his ex-wife put their young kids up to. It’s a horrific thought and it still haunts me to this day.

Last edited by ackmondual; 09-21-2018 at 01:50 AM..
Old 09-21-2018, 04:41 AM
Location: Texas Hill Country
9,033 posts, read 4,933,503 times
Reputation: 7744
Interesting way to put it...... "heinous".

Isn't that what they say in the intro to "L&O:SVU"?

Myself, I will never watch that show unless I have to be polite company. I would never watch because I don't believe that a show totally dedicated to sexual violence should be entertainment; never because there are no special victims, all people are entitled to proper prosecution of equal intensity for the crimes committed against them; and never because I believe the L&O franchise stirs the pot of unrest.

So I ask, OP, was the word "heinous" picked because that is what they say in that intro?

As to my opinion on the topic, no, I do not believe that they should and further, I believe we are being programmed by TV, by special interest groups, to accept that they should.
Old 09-21-2018, 05:51 AM
Location: Honolulu, HI
5,022 posts, read 1,281,042 times
Reputation: 7188
Sex crimes are heinous but crimes of murder are more henoius

We see it all the time. Two people have sex, man says it was consensual and woman says it wasn’t.

The only solution is for women to sign a contract before sex, clearly consenting to it. Sure it’s not romantic but that’s what society is coming to, in a world where society expect men (and only men) to make the first move, then the ones that do get accused of sexual assault.

If only we lived in a world where women (and only women) where expected to make the first move, therefore removing all doubt on whether the act was consensual.
Old 09-21-2018, 07:42 AM
Status: "True liberal" (set 14 days ago)
3,855 posts, read 1,729,430 times
Reputation: 5267
Rape isn't as bad as murder. The jungle of other sex crimes are not as bad as rape.

In America innocence is presumed. If it's to be reversed based on a crime's heinousness murder is the place to start.
Old 09-21-2018, 09:32 AM
1,961 posts, read 1,066,241 times
Reputation: 2406
Originally Posted by Pogue Mahone View Post
This is true in a case of full rape where there is semen or blood or skin under fingernails. In the case of a sexual assault, heavy unwanted groping, attempted but not completed rape, being able to prove the two people were alone long enough for the assault to take place may be all that there is. Sometimes you don't even have that much. All you have is the woman's word, but for the sake of argument let's say the woman is to be believed. Do we just let the guy walk in those cases? Should we at least penalize them in civil family court or in the case of actors and politicians, end their careers?
And why exactly the woman should be believed over man if there is no evidence? Maybe feminists consider all women superior beings incapable of lying or exaggerating. But fortunately, they don't run the government and don't control the Judicial system.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.

Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top