Child Molestation, Sexual Misconduct, and Rape Accusations

[Dad]

Typically it takes people time to come forward with this information. This is most likely due to trauma of the incident or fear of persecution. These allegations can be damming and harm a person's career and tarnish their name.

 

Where do you stand and why?

[ShimoHkun1]

I would say that stuff like this ends up being situational. There are instances where people could be falsely accused, and because of the movement behind it, they get prosecuted unjustly and their lives get ruined.

 

On the other side of the coin, the victims most definitely have the right to be protected, provided the accusation is true. Any form of sexual assault is terrible, but especially when the victims are in a position to be harmed by coming forward is when this act is its worst. I believe that in situations like this, the true attacker should be punished to the full extent of the law.

 

There should be a way to get those who are falsely accused off the hook, while simultaneously proving the accusations against those who actually did it to be true. Unfortunately this isn’t really possible because of human error and the integrity of the justice system. So I would say that we should work to always assume innocent until proven guilty, otherwise I don’t think this problem will ever be genuinely resolved.

[mido9]

If you didn't go the police within the time you can prove it you forfeit the right to complain about it, in my opinion..

 

Also, something being traumatic is all the more reason to immediately say it and victims are treated like legends and heroes, so...

[Phantom Roxas]

While this may not always be the case, a recurring fear I've seen is that people don't come forward with allegations against their abusers is, as you've said, a fear of persecution. Certainly, allegations can tarnish a person's career, but in the case of men such as Harvey Weinstein, his career brought him a certain level of clout, which he used to create ultimatums: Either sleep with him, or you will never make it in the industry.

 

A fear of persecution is very much real, as people are intimidated by powerful men. If the allegations don't damage the accused, then it's the accuser who may get in trouble instead. Plus, there's the fear of "Am I alone in this?" Because if there's a high burden of proof, your word may not be enough, especially since, based on some testimonies if I recall correctly, women who report when they've been raped are just going to get ignored by the police, and told to "get over it", their trauma essentially be swept under the rug because actually investigating the allegations.

 

While women have spoken up against Roy Moore, Breitbart has responded with trying to discredit the accusers. Again, accusers risk getting in trouble instead, which is why speaking out against powerful figures can often be a double-edged sword. Sure, it can tarnish someone's career. However, depending on what their career is, they may have the benefit of who will drag those accusers down, either with the accused, or even instead of them. While I agree with ShimoKun1 about how there are instances where people are falsely accused, I think that as Breitbart has shown, there can also be knee-jerk reactions to "prove" that accusations are false.

 

To make a long story short, I stand by innocent until proven guilty, but I generally take all accusations seriously, and I'm more bothered by pushes to discredit allegations than by how quickly said allegations can tarnish someone's career.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

I don't believe in a statute of limitations for violent crime, especially when it comes to child rapists. Children should not be tasked with understanding the legal procedure involved and the extent to which what happened to them is a crime immediately after they've been raped.

 

If you didn't go the police within the time you can prove it you forfeit the right to complain about it, in my opinion..

 

Proof doesn't have an expiry date. If it happened, there's always time for it to be proven.

[mido9]

While this may not always be the case, a recurring fear I've seen is that people don't come forward with allegations against their abusers is, as you've said, a fear of persecution. Certainly, allegations can tarnish a person's career, but in the case of men such as Harvey Weinstein, his career brought him a certain level of clout, which he used to create ultimatums: Either sleep with him, or you will never make it in the industry.

 

A fear of persecution is very much real, as people are intimidated by powerful men. If the allegations don't damage the accused, then it's the accuser who may get in trouble instead. Plus, there's the fear of "Am I alone in this?" Because if there's a high burden of proof, your word may not be enough, especially since, based on some testimonies if I recall correctly, women who report when they've been raped are just going to get ignored by the police, and told to "get over it", their trauma essentially be swept under the rug because actually investigating the allegations.

If they did expose Weinstein or say that he gave them those ultimatums he would've been replaced with someone who isn't an abuser, they wouldn't lose anything and he doesn't have any power if he gets removed. He can't tarnish your career in any way. It's just a lot easier to just watch Harvey masturbate into a plant for favors than to make up for it with peak perfect performance. In my opinion it's just that those actresses decided it was easier to give Harvey favors than to be with a normal producer who won't accept getting bribed with titties(at least, assuming it was back when they could have proved it).

 

Also yes telling the police "I got X'd" isn't enough but if you have proof they will very very definitely hear you.

[vla1ne]

while i agree that you should step forwards as soon as possible, it's sometimes understandable as to why people don't, such as they're too young to understand, they trusted, and/or still trust the person, ect. i do agree that people are treated more as heroes for stepping forwards, and that's how it should be. not that they should always be believed by word of mouth alone, but they should be given beneift of the doubt and respected during the trial.

 

so in shorter, victims ( everybody in fact) should be taught step up early if assaulted, and take every case as seriously as neccecary, at the same time, the accused should be treated with the same respect, until proven to have assaulted.

 

 

 

While this may not always be the case, a recurring fear I've seen is that people don't come forward with allegations against their abusers is, as you've said, a fear of persecution. Certainly, allegations can tarnish a person's career, but in the case of men such as Harvey Weinstein, his career brought him a certain level of clout, which he used to create ultimatums: Either sleep with him, or you will never make it in the industry.

 

A fear of persecution is very much real, as people are intimidated by powerful men. If the allegations don't damage the accused, then it's the accuser who may get in trouble instead. Plus, there's the fear of "Am I alone in this?" Because if there's a high burden of proof, your word may not be enough, especially since, based on some testimonies if I recall correctly, women who report when they've been raped are just going to get ignored by the police, and told to "get over it", their trauma essentially be swept under the rug because actually investigating the allegations.

 

 

 

To make a long story short, I stand by innocent until proven guilty, but I generally take all accusations seriously, and I'm more bothered by pushes to discredit allegations than by how quickly said allegations can tarnish someone's career.

 

in the wienstein case, this opinion might not be popular here, but i have to say, i don't believe all of them are as innocent as they act. this was a known secret in hollywood, some of them are undoubtedly victims, but i've seen and heard of too many people willingly using their bodies to get what they want, to believe that 100% of the women stepping forth didn't use him just as much as he used them. dude's still a sack of horny sheet, but i honestly don't think he's the only one.

 

that's why stepping forward later than sonner is never a good idea, you do yourself, and others who may have been harmed, no favors by staying silent, in fact, you only give more time for people like harvey to build themselves up, and you lose what little evidence you may have. unlike cases such as theft and murder in cases like rape, and especially sexual harassment, the little evidence there is, does not remain forever, lf you don't speak up, it will only ever become harder to prove.

 

 

not too familiar on the breitbart one, so it's best i stay silent. but imo both pushes to affirm and discredit allegations (so long as they are done respectfully, with minimal to no slander or insults) are fair game in my book. if you're committed to stand on one side, then you may as well stand with them throughout the case, so long as if they are found guilty, you do the correct thing, and admit you were wrong, and apologize to those you spoke against.

 

 

Proof doesn't have an expiry date. If it happened, there's always time for it to be proven.

while i agree that what actually happened will always be a fact, proof of what happened can, and does indeed expire

 

 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

What separates Harvey from Presidents Clinton, Trump, Kevin Spacey, and Moore is that there is credible proof of his actions enough to prosecute him

 

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/harvey-weinstein-nypd-arrest_us_59fccdf6e4b0baea2631b6ee

[Delibirb]

While I hope and believe that most/all accusations made against these public figures is honest and true, the ability for even one accusation to ruin a career in just a day is... concerning. Yes, there's evidence for these allegations, there's corroboration to back up these accusations, these sources are credible; but what about next time? I fear people will begin catching on that people they dislike can be removed from power with the dial of a phone in a matter of hours. Maybe not literally removed from their position, but the public response is quantifiable and frighteningly powerful.

 

My sympathies go to any victims of such heinous crimes, not only for what they have gone through, but for how their credibility as victims is or may be tarnished by false accusers abusing the immediate and vindictive societal systems we have instituted.

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

It's a really difficult thing to handle. Because there needs to be some way to punish/avoid false claims and yet...making it punishable would cause plenty of people who were actually harmed to avoid coming forward. Because if the person in question somehow gets out of it (as is definitely possible) they could get punishment for a "fake" claim. Imagine getting arrested for telling someone about the fact you got raped? Chilling.

 

Of course the problem then becomes that it's way too easy to ruin a person by making a claim regardless of proof. It always makes me nervous when I hear in the news stories about multiple people coming forward after one person accuses someone famous of such a thing. Because it COULD be "oh this person was brave enough to come forward maybe I could too!" but it could just as easily be "I could jump in on this and get fame/money"

 

Honestly this is just another reason sex crimes are possibly the worst there are. Because false claims are damaging just as the actual act is (in different ways of course and I won't try and say which is worse or if they're equal).

[vla1ne]

It's a really difficult thing to handle. Because there needs to be some way to punish/avoid false claims and yet...making it punishable would cause plenty of people who were actually harmed to avoid coming forward. Because if the person in question somehow gets out of it (as is definitely possible) they could get punishment for a "fake" claim. Imagine getting arrested for telling someone about the fact you got raped? Chilling.

 

Of course the problem then becomes that it's way too easy to ruin a person by making a claim regardless of proof. It always makes me nervous when I hear in the news stories about multiple people coming forward after one person accuses someone famous of such a thing. Because it COULD be "oh this person was brave enough to come forward maybe I could too!" but it could just as easily be "I could jump in on this and get fame/money"

 

Honestly this is just another reason sex crimes are possibly the worst there are. Because false claims are damaging just as the actual act is (in different ways of course and I won't try and say which is worse or if they're equal).

well, if you want to ensure it's accurate, only claims that can be proven both false, and intentionally false, should be punished; like the one where a woman accused multiple men she hadn't even met of sexually abusing her. or the one where there was a tape of the entire sexual encounter, proving she lied abut being raped. or the one where the daughter accused the father of touching her, and later admitted the mother put her up to it. or the one where there was an entire log of text messages proving the rapist was actually the accuser. or the one where the woman broke down after 10 years and admitted the dude she put in prison had done nothing wrong... there's no reason to punish the ones that were unable to be proven true, but for the ones like that, which were demonstrably false, punishing them to the same extent of the one they accused would be the least they could do. 

[Phantom Roxas]

I don't believe in a statute of limitations for violent crime, especially when it comes to child rapists. Children should not be tasked with understanding the legal procedure involved and the extent to which what happened to them is a crime immediately after they've been raped.

 

 

Proof doesn't have an expiry date. If it happened, there's always time for it to be proven.

 

Agreed on all counts. Far too much responsibility is put on children to come forward within a certain time frame, and suggesting that someone "forfeits" their right to complain about it only adds to the pressure. As you said, there's always time for it to be proven. As such, those people should allowed as much time as possible to prove their case.

 

If they did expose Weinstein or say that he gave them those ultimatums he would've been replaced with someone who isn't an abuser, they wouldn't lose anything and he doesn't have any power if he gets removed. He can't tarnish your career in any way. It's just a lot easier to just watch Harvey masturbate into a plant for favors than to make up for it with peak perfect performance. In my opinion it's just that those actresses decided it was easier to give Harvey favors than to be with a normal producer who won't accept getting bribed with titties(at least, assuming it was back when they could have proved it).

 

Also yes telling the police "I got X'd" isn't enough but if you have proof they will very very definitely hear you.

 

Except the people he could have replaced him didn't know he gave them those ultimatums. He intimidated them so they couldn't expose him, and he still had his power, so could have tarnished their careers all the while preventing himself from getting removed.

 

Given the accounts given by some actresses, I highly doubt that they simply decided on their own that it was easier to give Harvey favors, and it wasn't that they could have just gone to a normal producer.

 

in the wienstein case, this opinion might not be popular here, but i have to say, i don't believe all of them are as innocent as they act. this was a known secret in hollywood, some of them are undoubtedly victims, but i've seen and heard of too many people willingly using their bodies to get what they want, to believe that 100% of the women stepping forth didn't use him just as much as he used them. dude's still a sack of horny sheet, but i honestly don't think he's the only one.

 

that's why stepping forward later than sonner is never a good idea, you do yourself, and others who may have been harmed, no favors by staying silent, in fact, you only give more time for people like harvey to build themselves up, and you lose what little evidence you may have. unlike cases such as theft and murder in cases like rape, and especially sexual harassment, the little evidence there is, does not remain forever, lf you don't speak up, it will only ever become harder to prove.

 

 

not too familiar on the breitbart one, so it's best i stay silent. but imo both pushes to affirm and discredit allegations (so long as they are done respectfully, with minimal to no slander or insults) are fair game in my book. if you're committed to stand on one side, then you may as well stand with them throughout the case, so long as if they are found guilty, you do the correct thing, and admit you were wrong, and apologize to those you spoke against.

That seems rather dismissive of victims of sexual harassment. Is there anyone you can specifically name who may have been using their bodies?

 

I'm not so sure about blaming the victims for how men like Harvey Weinstein gain power. I understand that it was a known secret in Hollywood, except why was he allowed so much clout beforehand? Why did Queintin Tarantino work with him for so long despite admitting that he knew enough Weinstein's behavior?

 

Regarding the Breitbart story, the push to discredit allegations are certainly not respectful in that case. I understand trying to verify whether or not accusations are true, but I think there's a fine line between trying to prove someone's innocence (If we're talking about known secrets, then Roy Moore's sexual misconduct would certainly qualify), and just silencing accusations. Roy Moore apparently has a history, so discrediting merely one or two of his accusers does not necessarily prove his innocence.

[mido9]

Except the people he could have replaced him didn't know he gave them those ultimatums. He intimidated them so they couldn't expose him, and he still had his power, so could have tarnished their careers all the while preventing himself from getting removed.

 

Given the accounts given by some actresses, I highly doubt that they simply decided on their own that it was easier to give Harvey favors, and it wasn't that they could have just gone to a normal producer.

The actresses could have just said he gave them the ultimatums, and if he gets outed he loses his power. Also, if you get prosecuted you WILL lose your power, and at worse nobody will want to work with you in the industry or else they will get immense backlash as well at worse. There's no scenario where an exposed weinstein with proof gets to walk off ruining someone's career.

[vla1ne]

That seems rather dismissive of victims of sexual harassment. Is there anyone you can specifically name who may have been using their bodies?

 

I'm not so sure about blaming the victims for how men like Harvey Weinstein gain power. I understand that it was a known secret in Hollywood, except why was he allowed so much clout beforehand? Why did Queintin Tarantino work with him for so long despite admitting that he knew enough Weinstein's behavior?

 

Regarding the Breitbart story, the push to discredit allegations are certainly not respectful in that case. I understand trying to verify whether or not accusations are true, but I think there's a fine line between trying to prove someone's innocence (If we're talking about known secrets, then Roy Moore's sexual misconduct would certainly qualify), and just silencing accusations. Roy Moore apparently has a history, so discrediting merely one or two of his accusers does not necessarily prove his innocence.

it's not dismissing them, it's saying that trading sex for power isn't a well kept secret, no, i don't know who among the accusers, if any, were doing so willingly, but i do doubt that 100% of the people he had sex with were as unwilling as everybody seems to suspect.  i will neither deride any people in particular, or attempt to name who among them decided to do so with minimal coercion, because i can't tell you what Schrodinger does behind closed doors, but i stand by my belief that it's very likely, that for some of the women, trading sex for a million dollar acting role, was no cause for stress.

 

i am not blaming anybody, especially not victims, i am saying that trading sex for power, or power for sex, is a well known tactic among both males and females, in and out of hollywood. weinstein, and others like him, both male and female, continued to hold such levels power, because even for all the creepy sheet they do with it, they still work to maintain said clout. is it right? no, but it's sadly, a fact that weinstein worked hard to manage his business relations, because if he didn't maintain his power, how else would he be able to continue acting in such a perverted manner. basically, weinsteins actions were known, but in hollywood, as you can see with the absolute deluge of accusations popping up, he was by no means, the only one (and sadly, from the little i've seen, he's not even the worst of the bunch).

 

that's fair. i made no move to defend the story, because i'd had just about enough of the sexual accusation torrent around the time kevin spacey got accused. Hollywood's old money structure is crumbling, that's all i need to know.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

well, if you want to ensure it's accurate, only claims that can be proven both false, and intentionally false, should be punished; like the one where a woman accused multiple men she hadn't even met of sexually abusing her. or the one where there was a tape of the entire sexual encounter, proving she lied abut being raped. or the one where the daughter accused the father of touching her, and later admitted the mother put her up to it. or the one where there was an entire log of text messages proving the rapist was actually the accuser. or the one where the woman broke down after 10 years and admitted the dude she put in prison had done nothing wrong... there's no reason to punish the ones that were unable to be proven true, but for the ones like that, which were demonstrably false, punishing them to the same extent of the one they accused would be the least they could do. 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/29/mother-of-son-who-hanged-himself--after-being-accused-of/

 

What should be the punishment for this? How do you repay time? How do you repay life?

[vla1ne]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/29/mother-of-son-who-hanged-himself--after-being-accused-of/

 

What should be the punishment for this? How do you repay time? How do you repay life?

you can't repay that. the most you can do is put the person who falsely accused him behind bars for at least 2x as long as he was slated to be.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

you can't repay that. the most you can do is put the person who falsely accused him behind bars for at least 2x as long as he was slated to be.

I've always had a problem with our legal process for that reason:

 

It seems that punishment is more encouraged than rehabilitation. Ok, she lied about the rape, what does keeping her in 2x as much do?

 

And I don't think the state has the right to take that which it cannot return. You may have sentenced the man to death or removed 20-30 years of his life that you cannot return

 

Two separate problems, but when our legal system is far from precise, it's something we need to consider

 

---

 

No I don't have a good answer. The closest I can get to a solution is to outlaw capital punishment, but that doesn't address false convictions that can strand people in jail for decades. 

[vla1ne]

I've always had a problem with our legal process for that reason:

 

It seems that punishment is more encouraged than rehabilitation. Ok, she lied about the rape, what does keeping her in 2x as much do?

 

And I don't think the state has the right to take that which it cannot return. You may have sentenced the man to death or removed 20-30 years of his life that you cannot return

 

Two separate problems, but when our legal system is far from precise, it's something we need to consider. 

no system of punishment would be enough, nor would any rehabilitation system. i've got my issues with the prison system, but in thes particular case, is there really anything any system would be capable of achieving? the entire debacle cost the lives of 2 innocent people, the accusation, though sweetened up as "withdrawn" was clearly a deliberately false one, if the testament of literally everybody who knew the kid (friends, family, neighbors, therapist during the ordeal, ect) is any indication. 

 

it ensures that she at the very least, is not free to roam about as if her accusation didn't just cost two people their lives. it's not a complete solace, since it still cost 2 innocent people their lives, and ripped the sanity from far more family and friends as well. but it would at least be something. there's honestly nothing i can think to suggest outside of actual rape right now, that would come close to what i think that level of damage should be punished with. thankfully, we aren't complete barbarians (or so i'd like to think), so rape as punishment should remain out the picture anyways.

 

the state has the right to take that which it cannot return, but it also has the obligation to return as much as possible in the event that the punishment was unjust, which incidentally, is also a good argument for reforming prisons to rehabilitate prisoners, rather than to waste them away, the less you take, the less you will need to return, and the easier it is for prisoners to both reform and return to society. but that's getting off track.

 

it's two different sides of the same multi-faceted issue, our prisons are inadequate, and the damage from false accusations (up to, and including suicide), coupled with that inadequacy, means that for cases like this, there is no adequate punishment that is both civil, and effective. 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

The entire mentality of the state needing to take away x to punish y for doing z is why we so badly need criminal justice reform. The role of the state is to understand why y did z and try to help eliminate those underlying causes

 

Punishment v Rehabilitation 

 

---

 

Our positions (being reversed) on this is really fascinating given how much more authoritarian I am than you lol

 

---

 

The problem with the rape case above is our society is incredibly sexist. Everyone trips head over heels to to white knight

 

One needs simply look at the dismal record of convictions and reports for male rape 

 

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2014/04/male_rape_in_america_a_new_study_reveals_that_men_are_sexually_assaulted.html

 

In society we see women as these delicate flowers who need to be protected and avenged viciously (as that poor guy and his mom found out). But most people are not genuine about the underlying rape culture (as seen by how often men are brushed aside as rape victims esp when the perp is a woman)

 

It's not about justice, it's about a pound of flesh and scalp secured

[vla1ne]

taking away X to punish Y is the first step, the issue is that they don't actually follow up on said action. putting somebody in a cage for 10+ years isn't going to help them reform unless you do something else in addition. teach them trades, actually give them something to work towards, if there's still hope of them becoming (or returning to) functioning members of society. 

 

there's no reason punishment and rehabilitation can't go hand in hand, so long as you work out when and how to punish/rehabilitate.

 

we're getting a bit off topic with the prison reform speak though, but the sentiment is the same for both of us i believe. false accusations hurt the real accusers, and something needs to be worked out that reduces the damage, and likelihood, of false accusations being levied at anybody, especially in the case of sexual assault.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

The problem with the rape case above is our society is incredibly sexist. Everyone trips head over heels to to white knight

 

One needs simply look at the dismal record of convictions and reports for male rape 

 

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2014/04/male_rape_in_america_a_new_study_reveals_that_men_are_sexually_assaulted.html

 

In society we see women as these delicate flowers who need to be protected and avenged viciously (as that poor guy and his mom found out). But most people are not genuine about the underlying rape culture (as seen by how often men are brushed aside as rape victims esp when the perp is a woman)

 

It's not about justice, it's about a pound of flesh and scalp secured

In which case I will repeat this point

 

---

 

If rape culture was the target, we would not see the gender disparity we see in people's eagerness to come off as "allies" to women

[vla1ne]

In which case I will repeat this point

 

---

 

If rape culture was the target, we would not see the gender disparity we see in people's eagerness to come off as "allies" to women

my solution applied across the board though. i would say the same be it male or female victim of a false rape charge. 

 

i never really said anything about rape culture, because i don't view it in such a way as to be a culture.

[Dad]

Subject:

 

How do you effectively change the laws affecting false convictions in a way that benefits real victims and real rapists?

[I Hate Snatch Steal]

Honestly I don't know how to fix the justice system as a whole.

 

However I do know that there should be a proven conviction before ANY action is taken. Someone very close to me was accused of having a pedophelic sexual orientation despite the fact that he'd never sexually touched anyone. His parents mistook his https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraphilic_infantilism as Pedophilia thus he and suffered through years of torture similar to the following (read the first paragraph):

 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/hide-and-seek/201509/when-homosexuality-stopped-being-mental-disorder

 

despite never having committed a sex crime.

 

If you want a non-Wikipedia article explaining more, look here:

http://understanding.infantilism.org/

[vla1ne]

Subject:

 

How do you effectively change the laws affecting false convictions in a way that benefits real victims and real rapists?

I don't think you need to aim for benefiting real victims, i think you just need to avoid causing further harm to them. going for benefits, is the reason false accusers often make such accusations in the first place, many of the false accusations i've seen are linked to somebody either cheating, or feeling regrets about their promiscuity, and calling it rape, well after the fact, because calling it rape gives a shield to the accuser,in the form of white knighting.

 

that aside though, i think the first step in the best way to go about it, is the way every other crime has been done for years, (which we've been slipping on in sexual assault cases lately) innocent until proven guilty, and false accusations depending on severity, need to be scaled to match what they put the accused through. for example, in the case where a man was n prison for 10 years on a false accusation, he needs to be released, exonerated on all channels, and compensated as much as possible for every year spent in that hellhole. while the accuser, should no longer be treated with kiddie gloves, they should be side by side with his image, as the person who condemned him to 10 years of hell, and still had a good nights sleep. it's not a perfect solution, but it's the most powerful thing you can give to the falsely accused. as for jail time, it needs to match, if not exceed, the time given to the accused.

 

 

that said, the justice system as a whole, is in need of an overhaul, sexual assault cases are but one facet of the areas where jail/prison are not doing our citizens any favors.