View Poll Results: Should there be sex offense convictions based on accusers word without corroboration?

Voters
33. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes -- more then now.

    2 6.06%
  • Yes -- keep current system.

    1 3.03%
  • Yes -- in very rare cases.

    2 6.06%
  • No.

    28 84.85%
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 65

Thread: Should those accused os sex offences be convicted on "he said she said" evidence?

  1. #31
    Sayonara!
    Maenad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    By the water.
    Last Seen
    07-09-14 @ 10:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,259

    Re: Should those accused os sex offences be convicted on "he said she said" evidence?

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    How many men/women get convicted of date rape? If all the evidence available is she said/he said, the guy isn't going to be convicted. It's the totality of the circumstances. Did she report it to the police immediately? Was she drugged? Was she drunk? Did anyone see her same? Were they on a first date? Did she spurn him? Without some back-up evidence or testimony or circumstances, no one's even going to be charged.
    Did you read or see The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo? I know of a couple of cases where men have complained that 2 or 3 woman got together, tied them up and perpetrated them. So far, none have made it to court, though.
    Redneck, hillbilly, fundie, Bible thumper, cracker, split tails, geezer, loon, xenophobe, islamaphobe, and homophobe are not words of tolerance.

  2. #32
    Sayonara!
    Maenad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    By the water.
    Last Seen
    07-09-14 @ 10:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,259

    Re: Should those accused os sex offences be convicted on "he said she said" evidence?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    If someone is accused of anything, let alone a sex crime, without proof and they plead guilty - they're idiots. The system is designed to give benefit of the doubt, so even people who actually did do it are often better to go to trial than plead out.
    Not true. Many, many times a person offered a plea deal with probation will go to trial to clear their name and get convicted. Juries are crazy. And Juries LOVE to convict.
    Redneck, hillbilly, fundie, Bible thumper, cracker, split tails, geezer, loon, xenophobe, islamaphobe, and homophobe are not words of tolerance.

  3. #33
    Sayonara!
    Maenad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    By the water.
    Last Seen
    07-09-14 @ 10:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,259

    Re: Should those accused os sex offences be convicted on "he said she said" evidence?

    Quote Originally Posted by d0gbreath View Post
    I had a lawyer once that referred to the two people situation as a "liar's war".
    There is a lie in every trial.
    Redneck, hillbilly, fundie, Bible thumper, cracker, split tails, geezer, loon, xenophobe, islamaphobe, and homophobe are not words of tolerance.

  4. #34
    Sayonara!
    Maenad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    By the water.
    Last Seen
    07-09-14 @ 10:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,259

    Re: Should those accused os sex offences be convicted on "he said she said" evidence?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    In the absence of physical evidence proving the matter with certainty, the testimony of two witnesses should be required minimally to convict someone.

    Unfortunately, out modern system considers the testimony if a single witness sufficient to beat a sufficiency of the evidence challenge.
    You think a rapist engages witnesses? Really? You think that?
    Redneck, hillbilly, fundie, Bible thumper, cracker, split tails, geezer, loon, xenophobe, islamaphobe, and homophobe are not words of tolerance.

  5. #35
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    06-30-16 @ 07:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,309
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Should those accused os sex offences be convicted on "he said she said" evidence?

    Quote Originally Posted by Maenad View Post
    And do tell us how a crime which is planned by the perp to occur where there are no witnesses is going to have a witness?
    It is possible for someone to catch the person.

    If there is not proof, then the person should not be punished. Not all criminals will get caught.

  6. #36
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    06-30-16 @ 07:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,309
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Should those accused os sex offences be convicted on "he said she said" evidence?

    Quote Originally Posted by Maenad View Post
    You think a rapist engages witnesses? Really? You think that?
    What?

  7. #37
    Sayonara!
    Maenad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    By the water.
    Last Seen
    07-09-14 @ 10:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,259

    Re: Should those accused os sex offences be convicted on "he said she said" evidence?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    It is possible for someone to catch the person.

    If there is not proof, then the person should not be punished. Not all criminals will get caught.
    So, sex offenses should only be prosecuted on the off chance that the perp will be 'caught in the act.' Not going to happen. The act is planned in such a way as to have no witnesses. To require a witness would be a serious miscarriage of justice for the victim.
    Redneck, hillbilly, fundie, Bible thumper, cracker, split tails, geezer, loon, xenophobe, islamaphobe, and homophobe are not words of tolerance.

  8. #38
    Sayonara!
    Maenad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    By the water.
    Last Seen
    07-09-14 @ 10:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,259

    Re: Should those accused os sex offences be convicted on "he said she said" evidence?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    What?
    I think my question was clear. Do you really think a rapist is going to go out and get witnesses? LOL.
    Redneck, hillbilly, fundie, Bible thumper, cracker, split tails, geezer, loon, xenophobe, islamaphobe, and homophobe are not words of tolerance.

  9. #39
    Sayonara!
    Maenad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    By the water.
    Last Seen
    07-09-14 @ 10:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,259

    Re: Should those accused os sex offences be convicted on "he said she said" evidence?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    It is possible for someone to catch the person.

    If there is not proof, then the person should not be punished. Not all criminals will get caught.
    And how many times has that happened? Most children are molested while in the care of a trusted adult, friend, or family member, and they are generally alone. Having a witness does not constitute proof anyway because witnesses can lie.
    Redneck, hillbilly, fundie, Bible thumper, cracker, split tails, geezer, loon, xenophobe, islamaphobe, and homophobe are not words of tolerance.

  10. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    06-30-16 @ 07:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,309
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Should those accused os sex offences be convicted on "he said she said" evidence?

    Quote Originally Posted by Maenad View Post
    So, sex offenses should only be prosecuted on the off chance that the perp will be 'caught in the act.' Not going to happen. The act is planned in such a way as to have no witnesses. To require a witness would be a serious miscarriage of justice for the victim.
    Convicting a person in the absence of multiple witnesses (or other proof ) is an injustice to the accused. It is better that a guilty man go free then that an innocent man be punished.

    Quote Originally Posted by Maenad View Post
    I think my question was clear. Do you really think a rapist is going to go out and get witnesses? LOL.
    No I didn't say that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Maenad View Post
    And how many times has that happened? Most children are molested while in the care of a trusted adult, friend, or family member, and they are generally alone. Having a witness does not constitute proof anyway because witnesses can lie.
    Having multiple witnesses (the victim can count as a witness) proves the matter to a reasonable certainty, in the absence of witness bias.

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •