There is a presumption in law that no woman would falsely accuse a man of rape, is this justified ?

Question

What is the legal basis for this presumption ?

Is this presumption rebuttable ?

Can judges draw general conclusions about human conduct and use it as the basis during trial ? Can a trial be conducted based on such generalizations or assumptions ?

Answer 1

This presumption is just because of the social status of Indian women in general, that if they accuse any men of the offence of rape it must be so as it is presumed no Indian woman will openly expose her sexuality. You live in big city & people you meet are educated & socially well to do. For you such accusation seems indigestible as you have seen the social status of women in cities, but if you go to remote areas, villages in India you will still find the pathetic condition of Indian women. Poverty, uneducation, social backwardness, religious ethos all had prevented these women to develop as their counter parts in cities that you see & meet. This presumption which you talk about is kept keeping in mind those women. No doubt this presumption is not a matter of right but only matter of convenience, in each case the facts & circumstances have to be weighed to come to conclusion regarding the offence of rape. Just recently the Supreme Court in its landmark judgment convicted the accused of the offence of rape merely on the statement of the victim woman although the medical report (which is the most important piece of evidence in such cases) did not prove the charges against the accussed.In this case the victim was a poor, uneducated, socially backward woman who was raped. The Supreme Court of India was convinced that in such a case the mere statement of the victim was sufficient as such a statement was not corrupted with any other ulterior motives. So this presumption regarding the accusation of one being raped has to be based on all the facts & circumstance (including the social status of the victim) of the whole case as it was in this particular case. Definitely the presumption is rebuttable as such presumption may not even taken in account if a ultra modern woman, well educated & belonging to high social status accuse any man who himself be having high social status, in such case the strict proof based on irrefutable piece of evidence will be required on the records to convict the accused of the offence of rape. This fact always weigh in the mind of any judge who is hearing a complaint of rape the social status of the victim or complainant & they can assume that a well to do woman, with advance outlook may be using such accusation as a tool to victimize a man for some ulterior motives other then the act of rape & hence the complete evidence brought on the record of this charge has be strictly assessed. But in case of a socially backward woman the assumption of her being actually being raped will weigh high in his mind.

Answer 2

Any such presumption in law is wrong though Iam not sure if any exists either. Women can falsely accuse other men for personal gains too so no such presumptions should exist.

Answer 3

There is no such presumption, at least in the United States. The sole presumption codified in U.S. criminal law is that one is innocent until proven guilty.

--
edit to answer stung4ever, below: the dying declaration exception to the hearsay rule is not codified in criminal law, but rather part of the Federal Rules of Evidence. It is not a presumption, but an exception, based, perhaps on an assumption, and is strictly limited in its application. **

Answer 4

Where exactly is this presumption stated? The way lawyers attack the credibility of women in rape cases and the way the judges continually allow it make me think you're going out on a pretty scrawny limb making such a statement.

Answer 5

I wish this were the case in the United States where rape victims are revictimised although the laws have changed on this count. Having personally had to go to court on a similar charge (a man was accused with assault and battery), I have to say the Judge and the two policemen who accompanied me showed me every consideration. I was proffered a bribe to recant my charges, which I refused, whereupon the individual changed his plea to guilty and accepted the judge's punishment rather than go to trial. I know many women who have not been so lucky.

False charges of rape, like all false reports, are taken very seriously. Of course, these people also have the presumption in our courts of innocent until proven guilty.

Finally, judges must use all their powers of observation as well as their familiarity with the law to deal with all cases before them. Your demeanor in the court, way you express yourself, and the way you dress are all part of the way a judge views you. I was once told that there are only seven basic personality types. It amazes me how many people show up in US courts dressed casually, even slovenly, or who address judges in a rude manner. Let's just say I do not aspire to be a judge.

Answer 6

there is no such presumption in American law.

the fact is that only about 10% of women report rapes since most laywers who defend an alleged rapist will seek to destroy her reputation to advance his client's cause. most have events in their past that could and would be used against them to this end. it is rare, but not unheard of, for a women to bring rape charges against a man.

rape is not about sex, it is about power. the power of the stronger over the weaker. it most usualy expresses the angry of the rapist and his low self-esteme.

only a courageous woman reports rape as most times, the offender is given a light sentence if convicted. only a woman of low character or damaged mentality would accuse an innocent man of rape.

each case would have to be judged on it's own particular evidence so you cannot support such a broad statement.

Answer 7

I do not know this is true, but in all cases people take an oath to tell the Truth and nothing but the truth but court , judges and people on the jury know that in spite of this initial statement, people do not tell the truth through.

Due to. Commission of will full perjury or by an omission or by wrong information that they may have to start with or by genuine error.

It is the responsibility of the judge and the jury to look at the evidence presented and in face of above com to and equitable justice.

This is done by weighing the creditability of the evidence itself.

Answer 8

It may be correct in the Indian context because women are held in high esteem here.There can be exceptions and the judges can make out and and enquire the particular episode and ask for proofs.

Answer 9

There is no such presumption, at least not in any U.S. law.

Answer 10

Logically speaking if something is there in law like this it has to be removed. As in the present society the ancient ethics and culture are slowly deteriorating