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.
Being assaulted like you describe is not the same as sexual assault. That's the issue here. I'm sure what you are talking about was plenty traumatic.
It's way worse. Someone of your sexual orientation trying to unbutton your pants is a cake walk in comparison. At least on an emotional basis you can rationalize you were desirable, but how do rationalize the hate of just wanting to physical injure someone? I personally think kids in school or the like who are bullied are as big as victims as any sex offense victim.
We need a timely reporting law so that people's lives can no longer be disrupted and democracy hijacked by ancient allegations which cannot be proven or disproven due to the lapse of time, eroding memories, and generally making it impossible to ascertain factual events from fictional allegations.
We can all agree that sexual assaults are more impactful on society than property crimes, right?
So, in CA and NY/RI, you have 5 days and 24 hours, respectively, to notify law enforcement of the theft of any firearm.
Surely for something even more emergent than a missing piece of property, we can impose the same reporting requirements on a far more serious offense, to ensure that investigations are contemporaneously initiated, that evidence is preserved, and so that the system ensures equal justice in the form of sufficient due process, for both victim and accused.
I agree, unless the offense occurred to anyone under 16 at the time.
I also would favor reporting a sexual assault found not to have any basis (consensual sex one wishes to hide) should be met with a minimum penalty of 10 years, no parole.
They could have the trial 5 minutes after the rape happened, and still not be able to prove or disprove what happened. Time doesn't change that. Any sexual assualt can turn into a he says/she says because typically there isn't any witnesses to what happened. She says it was rape... He says it was consensual... Unless she was also phsyically assualted there isn't a whole lot of proof no matter when it took place.
Taking the recent show that just happened - she would have known exactly where the house was located. They could have gone in and dusted for prints, footprints, hair, anything to prove that he was there. They could have taken her clothing and examined it. They could have talked to people at the time, even possible neighbors who might have seen her running out of the house...something. With decades in between the alleged incident and the accusation, you don't have that.
What is that even supposed to mean? Do you think rape victims were just "on the fence" as to whether to have sex with their rapist?!
They very well could be in some cases. Went on date, went to a party and socializing or flirting together, went home together, both were intoxicated etc. Some feminist claim just about anything and everything can constitute a sexual offense, and act as if they are all equivalent to a random assault where force and resistance happened.
As I said in my first comment on this thread, just above yours, I know. I've seen what it has done to my sister.
I still stand by what I said that we need a statute of limitations. Coming out 20, 30, 40 years later, it's not "easy to prove", it's almost impossible to prove.
Bill Cosby is facing 3-10 years.... some of his assaults date back to the 60s. There are numerous cases in which a rape has been proven decades later.
Taking the recent show that just happened - she would have known exactly where the house was located. They could have gone in and dusted for prints, footprints, hair, anything to prove that he was there. They could have taken her clothing and examined it. They could have talked to people at the time, even possible neighbors who might have seen her running out of the house...something. With decades in between the alleged incident and the accusation, you don't have that.
And how would fingerprints or hair prove that she was sexually assaulted? All he would have to do is say "yeah... I was at that party" and that would explain away his dna being in the house.
They very well could be in some cases. Went on date, went to a party and socializing or flirting together, went home together, both were intoxicated etc. Some feminist claim just about anything and everything can constitute a sexual offense, and act as if they are all equivalent to a random assault where force and resistance happened.
I never understood this... If both parties are intoxicated, technically neither are really in a position to consent. So why is it assumed the man gave his consent while the woman did not....
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.
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.
All those Catholic Priests can now go free.
