The student who cried "Rape!" so she could get an extension on homework

Penguin wrote:

Aggie wrote:

We just need to fit in abortion and racism somehow and the circle will be complete.

Hmm... I'm sure there's something that could... yep.
[snip]

We're still missing the abortion angle. She's not visibly pregnant.

Oh, and trans wank! Can't have a topic without that. Let's get some obsessive discussion of a children's television program in here too.

Sutremaine wrote:

We're still missing the abortion angle. She's not visibly pregnant.

Wait, wait. Hold on...

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Okay it's not really abortion but it's a pregnant chick with something about defending life. I tried.

XLT-100852.0 wrote:

Oh thank god, there are intellient people here.

What fucking proof do you people want to named alledged rapist? A fucking video of the crime happening?

A conviction by a jury of their peers who believe that it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt would be nice.

gaijinguy wrote:

A conviction by a jury of their peers who believe that it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt would be nice.

Yes, because only the guilty get convicted and every piece of evidence gets used. Just like in Law & Order.

Yeah, fuck it, innocents will get convicted either way, so we should just put everybody away without due process. Just like in every dystopia you ever saw.

P.S. Your trolling sucks shit, Mystique.

this thread




[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

everyone here is either trolling or some sort of avatars of facepalm

Okay, I in no way want to derail the wank going on here, but I do have a question I wondered if someone could answer. They mention the girl was in college, and given Zozo's remarks, I'm assuming she's in the UK, which would make her around 16 or 17.

How does one develop, at the age of 16 or 17, the mindset that accusing a totally innocent stranger of rape is preferable to admitting to your teacher you didn't make your deadline on your project? I've heard that British teachers are formidable, but I think they abolished caning years ago. At the very worst, you'd end up failing. On the outside, he/she might agree to give you a few more days.

Apparently, this never occured to this girl. She realized she wasn't going to make the deadline, and instead of even considering talking to the teacher, she decided the best thing to do would be to accuse a janitor of rape, which would get her deadline extended AND probably lots of attention from everyone else. She doesn't seem to have thought the plot through; she just made up her mind, called the police, and everything went to hell in a handbasket.

What I want to know is what sort of a mindset do you have to be raised with that the first thing you'd think of when you realize you're not going to make your project deadline isn't "Maybe I can talk to the teacher and get an extention,' it's 'I know, I'll accuse the janitor of rape and then they'll have to let me have more time?" I know she's young, yes; but NOBODY could be that naive. Not if they've somehow managed to make it into college. Could they?

Look up Antisocial Personality Disorder.

• failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest; (check)
  
• deceitfulness, as indicated by repeatedly lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure; (check)
  
• impulsivity or failure to plan ahead; (check)
  
• irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults; (not exhibited)
  
• reckless disregard for safety of self or others; (check)
  
• consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations; (check?)
  
• lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another.(check)

I never thought I'd be saying this, but thanks, Psy-4. Makes a lot more sense now.

Cyberwulf wrote:

TheHedonist wrote:

They're not saying rapists should be given anonymity, they're saying that alleged rapists should be given anonymity.

Define "alleged". How far does it extend? Till they're charged? Till they're before a court?

You know, I honestly hadn't thought of this. I suppose I'd say until they're charged, and their guilt is therefore proven beyond the shadow of a doubt in a court of law. I'm not against suitable punishment after guilt has been proven.

Cyberwulf wrote:

Quote :

Once they're charged, then fine, go nuts, but until then lay off, is the point.

Cyberwulf wrote:

I don't know about the UK, but here that happens ALREADY.

Wait, I'm confused. I thought you were in the UK?

Cyberwulf wrote:

The Hedonist wrote:

she's saying that if a rape victim wants justice for their assault they need to report it.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Did you just not read the last page? Right at the bottom where the APALLINGLY LOW CONVICTION RATE FOR RAPE was posted?

So they should just not try? I respect and understand the reasons women (or people in general) don't report rapes (and that the possibility of disbelief is a large factor in that), but how does publicizing the name of the alleged rapist helps raise convictions? Prior convictions, even if they were overturned, would certainly help to get him arrested for subsequent crimes. And that can be done without harming the reputation of a possibly innocent man.

I don't know, I can't claim to have answers I don't, but I can't help but object to the idea of an innocent man having his life ruined because of the media circus surrounding a rape accusation. It's not even necessary the accuser is lying, they might've not gotten a good look at their attacker and point he finger in the wrong direction.

TheHedonist wrote:

Wait, I'm confused. I thought you were in the UK?

I think she means the Republic of Ireland, not Northern Ireland.

Does "charged" mean something different in the US, or something? Because everybody keeps saying those accused of rape should remain anonymous until formally charged. Which they do.

Penguin: nice try. I know you're not being serious, my love, but your posts are reinforcing the notion that it should be women who have the responsibility of policing their bodies rather the responsibility of rapists not to rape.

Oh, and Psy-4, nice try, but APD is only diagnosed in adults (and personality disorders are a rather contentious issue among psychologists). I'd chalk this up to a lie that got out of control.

ZoZo wrote:

Does "charged" mean something different in the US, or something? Because everybody keeps saying those accused of rape should remain anonymous until formally charged. Which they do.

Sounds about the same. Charged basically formally accused of the crime in court (If I'm inaccurate in that description I'm sure Spotts will be along soon).

I know it's probably unrealistic but I'd rather see anonymity for all parties involved, no matter the crime, until the conclusion of the trial, where the victim's anonymity would be preserved but defendant's anonymity would only be kept if found not guilty. A guilty plea, being found guilty, or pleading no contest would end that protection.

But I suppose in the interest of open courts and public trials that probably isn't realistic.

ZoZo wrote:

Penguin: nice try. I know you're not being serious, my love, but your posts are reinforcing the notion that it should be women who have the responsibility of policing their bodies rather the responsibility of rapists not to rape.

Interesting take on it. I know who made those images (not personally, as in I know of him), Oleg Volk, and what he's trying to get at is that women shouldn't be denied the ability to defend themselves if it comes down to it. I wonder if anyone's told him that the images can come across that way.

ZoZo wrote:

Oh, and Psy-4, nice try, but APD is only diagnosed in adults (and personality disorders are a rather contentious issue among psychologists).

For one, so what? For two, she's 24.

ZoZo wrote:

I'd chalk this up to a lie that got out of control.

Or a 'catalogue of lies'. Also, she has done this before. In October 2006, and in May 2009 (although not specified is the nature of the second case).

Read the article, or, at least, the OP's quotes, you idiot.

Psy-4 wrote:

ZoZo wrote:

Oh, and Psy-4, nice try, but APD is only diagnosed in adults (and personality disorders are a rather contentious issue among psychologists).

For one, so what? For two, she's 24.

ZoZo wrote:

I'd chalk this up to a lie that got out of control.

Or a 'catalogue of lies'. Also, she has done this before. In October 2006, and in May 2009 (although not specified is the nature of the second case).

Read the article, or, at least, the OP's quotes, you idiot.

Still probably not APD.

I don't know why people pathologise "being a bit of a shit". Some people just are.

ZoZo wrote:

Still probably not APD.

I don't know why people pathologise "being a bit of a shit". Some people just are.

Yes, fine, I get it. You want to disagree with me on any issue I bring up, no matter how right (or wrong) you are, or how insignificant it is. Feel free to clarify why you are being contrary, or why you consider ruining at least two people's lives as "being a bit of a shit", or how accusing someone of rape to get an extension on homework meshes together with being mentally healthy.

But back to the topic at hand, should I just skip the fact, that, while both of our opinions are unqualified, mine happens to be backed up by official documentation, and clear concise bullet points; that mental problems are just like sexuality in that they are not binary, and you can have problems from mild to textbook; and just go straight to telling you to go sit in the corner, dumbass?

Because you should totally do that. Here's your dunce cap.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

ZoZo wrote:

The information I was asking for in a clear and reasonable post.

Thank you! I understand, kinda.

Penguin wrote:

ZoZo wrote:

Does "charged" mean something different in the US, or something? Because everybody keeps saying those accused of rape should remain anonymous until formally charged. Which they do.

Sounds about the same. Charged basically formally accused of the crime in court (If I'm inaccurate in that description I'm sure Spotts will be along soon).

I know it's probably unrealistic but I'd rather see anonymity for all parties involved, no matter the crime, until the conclusion of the trial, where the victim's anonymity would be preserved but defendant's anonymity would only be kept if found not guilty. A guilty plea, being found guilty, or pleading no contest would end that protection.

But I suppose in the interest of open courts and public trials that probably isn't realistic.

Is there a particular reason why the way things are handled by the media here aren't good enough? On the local news stations that cover rape, none ever say that the suspected rapist is anything more than just a suspect; if a person is suspected of rape, saying so in news outlets isn't exactly trampling all over their civil rights.
I could easily see your point as to how even being suspected of rape (or murder, or any other crime, really) can seriously fuck up someone's social life (hell, it'll really fuck up the victims life in a lot of rape cases, especially if she or he is in a small town and everyone's bff's with the suspected rapist), but there's no real way to legally police people's social reactions to news. And, again, if a former victim of a rapist sees that they're suspected of having done it again, they'll be more likely to come forward.

It's also worth noting that, to the best of my knowledge, at least, victims of other crimes can also ask for anonymity from the press. I'll have to look into that, though, because I'm not positive. Spotts?

Penguin wrote:

ZoZo wrote:

Penguin: nice try. I know you're not being serious, my love, but your posts are reinforcing the notion that it should be women who have the responsibility of policing their bodies rather the responsibility of rapists not to rape.

Interesting take on it. I know who made those images (not personally, as in I know of him), Oleg Volk, and what he's trying to get at is that women shouldn't be denied the ability to defend themselves if it comes down to it. I wonder if anyone's told him that the images can come across that way.

While I can easily see and deeply agree with Zozo's point, I also see how the message of "fuck up those who are out to fuck you up" can be kind of empowering.

Psy-4 wrote:

Yes, fine, I get it. You want to disagree with me on any issue I bring up, no matter how right (or wrong) you are, or how insignificant it is. Feel free to clarify why you are being contrary, or why you consider ruining at least two people's lives as "being a bit of a shit", or how accusing someone of rape to get an extension on homework meshes together with being mentally healthy.

But back to the topic at hand, should I just skip the fact, that, while both of our opinions are unqualified, mine happens to be backed up by official documentation, and clear concise bullet points; that mental problems are just like sexuality in that they are not binary, and you can have problems from mild to textbook; and just go straight to telling you to go sit in the corner, dumbass?

Bolding mine, lol

I think her point was more 'you shouldn't go throwing around personality disorder diagnoses because even trained psychologists don't like to slap labels on things like that'. Stop throwing a tantrum when A.) you admitted you're unqualified and B.) that's an extremely rare disorder that it's actually rather difficult to get diagnosed with. You may have documentation stating that yes, her actions in this case may qualify her for the disorder but you don't have documentation stating that a board of trained psychologists tested her for and diagnosed her with this disorder. Until then Zo was perfectly right to disagree with you because everything you were saying, since you have neither a psychology degree nor have you spent any actual time with the girl and observing her behavior, was pure speculation and nothing more. Don't treat her like she's an idiot for treating it as such.

Bammy wrote:

I could easily see your point as to how even
being suspected of rape (or murder, or any other crime, really) can
seriously fuck up someone's social life (hell, it'll really fuck up the
victims life in a lot of rape cases, especially if she or he is in a small town and everyone's bff's with the suspected rapist)

The victims are usually given some degree of anonymity, though. Now, in some dinky little town, people may find out anyway, but the accused, no matter how innocent he is 45% of the time, doesn't get any of that.

It's the matriarchy. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

Bammy wrote:

I could easily see your point as to how even
being suspected of rape (or murder, or any other crime, really) can
seriously fuck up someone's social life (hell, it'll really fuck up the
victims life in a lot of rape cases, especially if she or he is in a small town and everyone's bff's with the suspected rapist)

The victims are usually given some degree of anonymity, though. Now, in some dinky little town, people may find out anyway, but the accused, no matter how innocent he is 45% of the time, doesn't get any of that.

So goes the reality of being accused of any violent or sexual crime.
[EDIT: Or theft; that doesn't exactly do wonders for your reputation to be accused of, either.]

TheHedonist wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

TheHedonist wrote:

They're not saying rapists should be given anonymity, they're saying that alleged rapists should be given anonymity.

Define "alleged". How far does it extend? Till they're charged? Till they're before a court?

You know, I honestly hadn't thought of this. I suppose I'd say until they're charged, and their guilt is therefore proven beyond the shadow of a doubt in a court of law.

You don't even know what charged means.

I'm not against suitable punishment after guilt has been proven.

Quote :

Cyberwulf wrote:

I don't know about the UK, but here that happens ALREADY.

Wait, I'm confused. I thought you were in the UK?

No.

Quote :

Cyberwulf wrote:

The Hedonist wrote:

she's saying that if a rape victim wants justice for their assault they need to report it.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Did you just not read the last page? Right at the bottom where the APALLINGLY LOW CONVICTION RATE FOR RAPE was posted?

So they should just not try?

...Do you grasp the significance of a conviction rate that's in single digits?

In Ireland, approximately 95% of rape cases reported to the police are never brought to trial. There's only a one in twenty chance that your attacker will see the inside of a courtroom. The much greater probability is that the Gardaí will investigate, not find sufficient evidence to charge your attacker, and let him go. Leaving him free to tell anyone he chooses that you're a liar, a psycho, a vengeful bitch, whatever - and who are people going to believe? He was investigated by the police and they found no evidence. It's fucking nonsense to say OH WELL IF YOU WANT JUSTICE GO TO THE COPS because most of the time you won't get justice and instead you'll wind up looking like the bad guy. Because "innocent till proven guilty" doesn't count when a rape victim is suspected of making it all up and lying to cops for attention.

Quote :

how does publicizing the name of the alleged rapist helps raise convictions?

Who here said that?

If you have been charged with a crime and you're going to be tried for a crime, that's a fact. Newspapers are allowed to report facts.

Quote :

Prior convictions, even if they were overturned, would certainly help to get him arrested for subsequent crimes. And that can be done without harming the reputation of a possibly innocent man.

THE CONVICTION RATE FOR RAPE IN IRELAND IS ABOUT 5%. IF HE RAPED BEFORE THEN HE PROBABLY WAS NOT CONVICTED OF IT. BUT HIS VICTIM(S) MAY COME FORWARD IF HE IS CHARGED WITH A SUBSEQUENT RAPE.

Did you fail reading comprehension at school? Do you understand ANYTHING in this thread at all?

Psy-4 wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Take a good, long, look everybody!

Unable to find an opponent worthy of his debating genius, Psy was forced to create one out of straw! Here he is! The tragic clown!

It's pretty obvious they think that the criminal justice system works just like it does in cop-dramas.

Hey, Wulf, a couple questions:

-What's the rate of conviction for other major crimes? How does pleading guilty/no contest interact with these figures?
-What changes would you like to see made to the justice system in regards to this matter?

gaijinguy wrote:

-What's the rate of conviction for other major crimes?

Quote :

The true picture of rising levels of violent crime in England and Wales and historically low conviction rates can be revealed today by The Observer.

An investigation shows that conviction rates for many of the most violent crimes have been in freefall since Labour came to power in 1997 and are now well below 10 per cent. The chronically low figures for convictions come at the same time as reports that violent crime is increasing.

An analysis of Home Office figures reveals that only 9.7 per cent of all 'serious woundings', including stabbings, that are reported to the police result in a conviction. For robberies the figure falls to 8.9 per cent and for rape, it is 5.5 per cent.

Source.

The UK has an appaling conviction rate as it is and rape has the lowest of them all, but the thing is that rape is not at all the same as murder or robbery. Apples and pomegranates.