• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you give the rapist an alibi for a cime he didn't commit?

Do you give the rapist an alibi for a cime he didn't commit?

  • Yes, you tell the truth and he goes free.

    Votes: 11 64.7%

  • No, you let him be wrongfully convicted because he should have been convicted of the other crime.

    Votes: 6 35.3%
  • Total voters
    17
Camlon said:
He is not innocent, and even if he was you can not compare it to rape.

It really saddens me that people like you exists.
Click to expand...

Yeah, people who are honest and resist the urge for revenge and bloodlust are what is wrong with the world.

:roll:
 
I tell the truth, granted, I say that now but I couldn't be certain to say it then. The reason you tell the truth because revenge is no reason to damn yourself (even if you aren't religious guilt is damnation)
 
Molotok said:
So, a choice between being honourable and being just?

Honour's useless, it is the death of otherwise good men.
Click to expand...

Honor and justice would be on the side of telling the truth. If justice is not honorable then what is the value in it?

The choice is between justice and revenge.
 
RStringfield said:
Yeah, people who are honest and resist the urge for revenge and bloodlust are what is wrong with the world.

:roll:
Click to expand...

No, please don't put words in my mouth.

We are talking about people who have gotten their daughter raped and the rapist didn't get sent to prison for his actions. He believes that if you don't help the rapist to not end up in prison, then you are just as bad as a child rapist. That's why I get pissed off.
 
RStringfield said:
Honor and justice would be on the side of telling the truth. If justice is not honorable then what is the value in it?

The choice is between justice and revenge.
Click to expand...

Eh, I don't think so. I think Justice, as a metaphysical entity (as it were), cares not about the evidence or lack thereof, nor the truths or falsehoods of a case. She only cares for giving everyone their due, and for the rapist who goes free of one crime only to be booked for another he didn't commit -- well, to me, that would satisfy Justice, even if it weren't honourable (truthful).
 
MistressNomad said:
I am assuming simply for the purpose of the hypothetical that all situations presented are known to be true (i.e. that he is the rapist, that he was wrongly either never tried or dismissed, etc).

Of course, if these aren't known truths, that changes everything. But I'm allowing it to be true simply in the spirit of the hypothetical, which I'm assuming it only meant to deal with the end scenario: you know he wasn't at the murder scene.
Click to expand...

Depends on the type of murder. If it was premeditated, prolly not. Reason being is that if someone kills another in a premeditated way then it is quite possible that they will kill again the same way. As such I would have the blood of the second person on MY hands...not to mention the second murder would inevitably exonerate that bastard that raped my daughter. So keeping my mouth shut would ultimately do no good.

If however it was the type of murder that only happens once in that persons life time..such as a crime of passion (such as when a husband comes home to find his wife boinking the mail man) then yeah, I'd keep my mouth shut. Yeah, I might feel a bit guilty. But not enough to open my mouth and give the bastard that raped my daughter an alibi.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
He should be able to find evidence that doesn't include said individual for his alibi.

If he was at a restaurant then he should have a receipt - other witnesses - **** - a life that doesn't require that the individual who was once wronged to be expected to be their friend, now, and defend them in court.

But I'm lost: how can there be not enough evidence to convict a rapist of a crime that was committed - but not enough evidence to not convict a man of a crime that wasn't committed? Someone see something totally ****ed up with that? . . . That sounds like a failed justice system, to me.

With the way this is going it sounds like there wouldn't be enough evidence to convict him of a crime he didn't commit anyway.

And what makes her the one doing wrong by doing nothing? What about this other individual - where is his wrong and right sphere and why isnt' that being questioned?
Click to expand...

It is not unheard of that a criminal get off on charges of which they were obviously guilty. Remember OJ? Criminals can get off scott free due to a technicality.
 
Taking into account that my family[me and my daughter] were positive this person raped my daughter...and for whatever reason[I dont really know what that could be....] the rapist could not be charged and tried for the rape; the rapist would not be sitting in the restaurant and I most likely would have been hearing the news of the murder investagation from prison...
 
Last edited:
I'd bluff and try to pressure the rapist into confessing for the rape in return for giving him the murder alibi. If he calls my bluff, I'd still testify in order to prevent the real murderer from going free. Afterwards, I would work out a plan to frame the guy for a crime carrying a similar sentence to rape.

Its a very poor hypothetical for about a dozen reasons though.
 
Molotok said:
Eh, I don't think so. I think Justice, as a metaphysical entity (as it were), cares not about the evidence or lack thereof, nor the truths or falsehoods of a case. She only cares for giving everyone their due, and for the rapist who goes free of one crime only to be booked for another he didn't commit -- well, to me, that would satisfy Justice, even if it weren't honourable (truthful).
Click to expand...

Why is justice of value? "Giving everyone their due" is a normative statement. If honor is of no value then neither is the concept of justice as both are dependent on their being a right and wrong.

The rapist is not due a rape charge, though. What you are advocating is revenge.
 
Truthfully if he raped my 13 year old daughter, and did not go to jail for it, it would be nearly impossible for him to kill someone six months later. Being an invalid would do that to a person
 
Kal'Stang said:
Depends on the type of murder. If it was premeditated, prolly not. Reason being is that if someone kills another in a premeditated way then it is quite possible that they will kill again the same way. As such I would have the blood of the second person on MY hands...not to mention the second murder would inevitably exonerate that bastard that raped my daughter. So keeping my mouth shut would ultimately do no good.

If however it was the type of murder that only happens once in that persons life time..such as a crime of passion (such as when a husband comes home to find his wife boinking the mail man) then yeah, I'd keep my mouth shut. Yeah, I might feel a bit guilty. But not enough to open my mouth and give the bastard that raped my daughter an alibi.
Click to expand...

Precisely. I've been mulling over the problem Your Star presented, and was just about to say where I got to with it.

The average profile for a rapist is considerably worse and more violent than the average profile for a murderer.

That may sound contradictory at first, but like you said, there are crimes of passion, accidental homocides, etc. Anyone can murder under the right circumstances. Rape is not subject to such passions. It's an exercise in power, and it is calculated the overwhelming majority of the time. Rape is usually performed either coldly, or with delight. It is not typically performed in rage, sexual lust, etc.

The odds of a rapist re-offending on average are higher than those of a murderer on average, due to the kind of person it takes to be a rapist. Anyone can't be a rapist.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
He should be able to find evidence that doesn't include said individual for his alibi.

If he was at a restaurant then he should have a receipt - other witnesses - **** - a life that doesn't require that the individual who was once wronged to be expected to be their friend, now, and defend them in court.

But I'm lost: how can there be not enough evidence to convict a rapist of a crime that was committed - but not enough evidence to not convict a man of a crime that wasn't committed? Someone see something totally ****ed up with that? . . . That sounds like a failed justice system, to me.

With the way this is going it sounds like there wouldn't be enough evidence to convict him of a crime he didn't commit anyway.

And what makes her the one doing wrong by doing nothing? What about this other individual - where is his wrong and right sphere and why isnt' that being questioned?
Click to expand...


That's a cop out....its like all the people in New York City that saw the woman getting raped in the street and not one of the called 911. They were the same as you...."well, someone else will do it".
 
Camlon said:
He is not innocent, and even if he was you can not compare it to rape.

It really saddens me that people like you exists.
Click to expand...

Oh please.....what is even more sad is that there are people such as yourself that will sit back and do nothing.
 
Camlon said:
I do know he raped my daughter,
Click to expand...

Other than your daughter's word, How would you know this?



I just didn't have the evidence to convict him. It says so in the first post.
Click to expand...

So in other words you do not know since you have no evidence.

I know that the moral right thing to do is to give the rapist an alibi, but if that happened to me in real life I would not give him an alibi. I would want to see him behind bars.
Click to expand...

Even at the expense of someone else being denied their justice and the possibility of more innocent people being killed?




RStringfield said:
Yeah, people who are honest and resist the urge for revenge and bloodlust are what is wrong with the world.

:roll:
Click to expand...

I am all for revenge and bloodlust. I am however not for doing that at the expense of the possibility of more innocent people being killed by the real murderer and other people being denied their justice. That murderer's victims and that victim's loved ones have just as much as a right to justice as you do.
 
I come forward and prove he is not the murderer so that the case is not closed and the murderer does not get off.

And why am I more interested in the TV show than in confronting the man who raped my daughter and forced me to move away?
 
There have been a lot of great replies to this thread. Thanks. My first instinct was to keep my mouth shut. However, the fact that a murderer would go free was what changed my view. I would have to speak up. I would probably talk to the guy and tell him I would provide him his alibi if he owned up to the rape. That would be a bluff that I would hope would make him come clean. If it didn't, however, I would still come forward.

I also disagree that a person who keeps quiet is just as bad as a rapist. I think keeping quiet is a very human thing to do.
 
Luna Tick said:
There have been a lot of great replies to this thread. Thanks. My first instinct was to keep my mouth shut. However, the fact that a murderer would go free was what changed my view. I would have to speak up. I would probably talk to the guy and tell him I would provide him his alibi if he owned up to the rape. That would be a bluff that I would hope would make him come clean. If it didn't, however, I would still come forward.

I also disagree that a person who keeps quiet is just as bad as a rapist. I think keeping quiet is a very human thing to do.
Click to expand...

Nice move! I didn't think it that far through. Yes - that's the plan.
 
jamesrage said:
Other than your daughter's word, How would you know this?
Click to expand...

Dude, this whole thread is based upon a hypothetical situation. Just assume that the rapist got off on a technicality. For example: Miranda rights not being read to the guy when he was arrested. Or evidence being lost or some such.
 
LuckyDan said:
I come forward and prove he is not the murderer so that the case is not closed and the murderer does not get off.

And why am I more interested in the TV show than in confronting the man who raped my daughter and forced me to move away?
Click to expand...

Yeah, that was where I got hung up. I mighta taken the opportunity to get a little justice, leaving the original murder open as dead people can't commit murder.
 
I'm sure this has already been said, but if I happened to run into my daughter's rapist, I'm the one who would need an alibi or a sympathetic jury.
 
disneydude said:
Easy....you are sitting back doing nothing and letting an innocent person get convicted. That is just as disgusting of an act as the person who rapes a child.
Click to expand...

Someone not getting involves in the legal process that's screwed them is the same as rape? Seriously?
 
And why am I more interested in the TV show than in confronting the man who raped my daughter and forced me to move away?
Click to expand...

It's not that you're more interested in the show. It's more like you focus on it in order to avoid a confrontation. Granted not everyone would do that. Some people would scream at him. Some would beat him up. Some would even kill him. It depends on the person. I would avoid even letting him know I was there. I'm a 110 pound woman. If I were aggressive toward a man who's known to be violent, it could get me killed.
 
disneydude said:
Oh please.....what is even more sad is that there are people such as yourself that will sit back and do nothing.
Click to expand...
Go **** yourself!

jamesrage said:
Other than your daughter's word, How would you know this?
Click to expand...
In this theoretical example you know that she raped her. Let's pretend you saw it with your own eyes.


Even at the expense of someone else being denied their justice and the possibility of more innocent people being killed?
Click to expand...
I clearly said the moral right thing to do is to give him an alibi. I just told what I would do in that situation. It's a very natural response.

Most murders are either family related or gang related anyway. I might change my mind if this was a serial murder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom