Is an army of innocent men imprisioned on the word of a woman alone because they did not have 5 million to spend on lawyers ? Are rape cases a modern witch hunt ?
Or do you still trust the system ?
For those who want to answer with the tired old "sometimes innocent people do time and sometimes guilty people go free", that pretty much equals to admitting that the court system is a lottery and needs to be replaced with something better asap.
2007-06-18 01:45:48 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Gender Studies
Randomgirl what we could do is to impose a system where innocent untill proven guilty CAN NOT be overtrown. Right now men are in jail on a he said she said basis.
In Germany that is not possibel because innocent untill proven guilty isnt just a guidline, but rock solid law.
2007-06-18 03:34:50 · update #1
The system does not work; few governmental systems do, at least not as intended.
Check the link below or do a google of Joyce Gilchrist, head chemist for the Oklahoma City Police Department until she was fired. She sent many hundreds of men to prison, some to the death chamber based on lies.
Many times, DNA was available but untested; others involved hair and fiber samples to which she either lied or used unconventional methods to "prove" her preconceived guilt.
Most will never be retried, many are guilty, many are innocent; who knows which and it seems no one cares except those behind bars.
O.J. Simpson is an example of obvious prejudice but in the opposite direction. Then there's the problems that are obvious in "family law" which are no less improper and prejudiced. Check out "paternity fraud". It is rarely, if ever, looked upon as a criminal act and many men are hooked into paying "support" for children he can prove are not his.
The whole legal system in the US is a dismal failure. For urinating on a building in an alley, a man stands a good chance of being ordered to register as a sex offender. His crime has nothing to do with sex but nevertheless...
2007-06-18 07:02:17 · answer #1 · answered by Phil #3 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I was shocked that charges were ever filed in this case. From the beginning the "victim" through up red flags that should have sent the prosecution running. Apparently Niflong was a top shelf idiot with big political aspirations so it went forward based on racial overtones of the downtodden minority woman vs. the "priveleged white male". But rape cases are very often difficult for the victim bordering on insanity. Victims constantly have their sexual histories attacked and publicly displayed along with constantly having to review the events publicly. No one should say that victims have a free reign because they don't. DA's should be the filter and take the heat for prosecuting or not. The system works when ethical people do what they are appointed to do.
2007-06-18 02:40:29 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Take away the national news coverage and replace the high priced legal team with a public defender and you have several innocent young men doing 10-20.
There is no doubt that this has happened before, with innocents getting convicted. However, it is also true that good things happen to bad people and vice-versa.
Unfortunately, as long as humans are involved, a certain amount of injustice will persist. It might serve as an impediment if some sort of penalty for false testimony was imposed.
2007-06-18 03:01:06 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
What would be better? Without spending more money than most people want to (seriously, try telling everyone that their taxes will go up so the justice system can be reformed; it's a no-go), this is the best we can do. I do doubt that there are so many men wrongfully imprisoned for rape. Sure, there are some, which is tragic. However, very few rapes are even reported, let alone prosecuted. Women are still being blamed for being a rape victim, and many feel ashamed. Based on that, I doubt crying rape is the favored method for dealing with guys you don't like.
2007-06-18 03:19:44 · answer #4 · answered by random6x7 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Two things bother me:
1) when we have technology such as DNA testing and we refuse to make it available to everyone, or blow off the evidence.
2) when we have jurors who are such morons that they don't even know what DNA stands for.
As for rape...It should be easy to prove or disprove using DNA, right? But look what happened to the Duke boys. None of the DNA matched but they were still railroaded.
Oh, the other thing that bothers me about the legal system is lawyers. They ALWAYS stand to gain no matter what happens they will go home highly enriched. They are simply actors and dramatists and cynical leeches who suck money from honest people. (most of them...not all, of course some are not pure evil...)
2007-06-18 01:53:23 · answer #5 · answered by greengo 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Lots. of guys are imprisoned on the word of a woman. If a woman has sex with a one night stand and regrets it the next morning, all she has to do is say she was drunk and he has committed a crime. She was too drunk to "give" consent. That equals rape. If a 17 says she is 18, it is still rape of a minor and you become a registered sex offender. Makes no sense to me. DAs are just looking for their numbers of convections, not the right or wrong
2007-06-18 01:52:39 · answer #6 · answered by Chloe 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
DNA tests and the fact that the "victim" told 10,000 versions of the rape that never happened freed those men, not rich lawyers. If anything, lawyers worked against proving the men innocent. The Prosecutor has just been disbarred and resigned for withholding DNA evidence. DNA testing will change the face of justice by eliminating the he said, she said rape scenario with true scientific proof. Innocent men in prison should demand DNA testing if it will prove their innocence.
2007-06-18 01:59:12 · answer #7 · answered by Debra D 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
of direction you do not get semen up in her junk in case you place on a condom. no rely if or not those men raped her, there isn't any forensic way that she would be able to teach it. Given, those men have been rather stupid and those women at ultimate have been undesirable dancers and at worst have been extorsionist hookers. advice for the Duke men: pass to a strip club next time...
2016-10-17 21:30:34 · answer #8 · answered by hilderbran 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's disgusting, it's horrible. The system needs to provide greater protection to those accused.
DNA don't even conclusively prove anything.
Look at this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=416170&in_page_id=1770&ct=5
She cried rape after consensual sex and now she is in jail. DNA cannot decipher between rape and consensual sex.
Look at this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/6486069.stm
She used a hammer to give herself bruises to make the claim more convincing. Now she's in jail.
There are too many false rape allegations. We need to revise the system. We must provide anonymity to the accused. We must ensure a FAIR trial. We must prosecute the false allegations to dissuade people from committing such atrocities.
2007-06-18 02:28:55 · answer #9 · answered by Nidav llir 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The system can still be trusted. Sadly, rape victims no longer really can. The woman in the Duke case harmed future rape cases immeasurably.
2007-06-18 05:04:26 · answer #10 · answered by Rio Madeira 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋