I never said she was smart or was going about it the correct/most efficient way. I simply meant that it would be pretty crazy if she pulled it off, and he was actually guilty.
Majunior
Member
- Oct 14, 2005
- 94
- 0
- 61
Wow. you read an article, and you already don't think the man is guilty. glad you aren't on the jury.
Look, if the man is guilty he deserves all the punishment he gets. There's a reason there is no SoL on this kind of thing. Rape is horrible.
the circumstances are obviously not in the favor of the plantif, and this would be better prosecuted 32 years ago. But the same could be said about all the children that were molested by clergy. This stuff is seriously traumatizing.
zephyrprime
Diamond Member
- Feb 18, 2001
- 7,512
- 2
- 81
This country goes way overboard when it comes to rape charges. Sorry, but a case that is just my word vs. other person's word without any physical evidence and without any witnesses should never go to court. Can you not see that without this being the case anyone can be framed for a crime as easy as pie? And there should be a statute of limitations on this case also.
Don Vito Corleone
Elite
- Feb 10, 2000
- 30,029
- 67
- 91
This is silly paranoia IMO. There is no way prosecutors will ever be "flooded" with ancient rape cases, and in any event part of a DA's job is screening the cases he presents in court (admittedly in this case he may not have done a great job of it).
As a matter of public policy I don't think it makes sense to just assume an accusation is false (as you clearly are) because it's related to an old crime), nor do I think the law should be in the business of punishing rape accusers - rape is already one of the must underreported crimes, and rape victims are already afraid to come forward for fear of the character assassination they will undergo on the stand. Adding civil liability to the list of things rape victims need to fear makes no sense to me.
As for the prosecutor, IF it develops that he has strong/overwhelming reasons to believe this accusation is false (as Nifong did), then I agree that he might be held liable, but not simply because he elects to take on a challenging case. I imagine in this instance he finds this woman highly credible or he wouldn't be taking the case to court - to that extent I can appreciate his balls, in that some prosecutors ensure "100% conviction rates" by only taking cases they couldn't possibly lose, thus letting many offenders walk free.
There is a whole lot more to this story than a rape. Someone somewhere stands to make a bundle of money or get elected to office off of this.
Don Vito Corleone
Elite
- Feb 10, 2000
- 30,029
- 67
- 91
Negative. Again, her civil suit would be a personal-injury action, and Rhode Island has a 3-year SoL for PI actions. The statute of limitations expired 29 years ago.
Don Vito Corleone
Elite
- Feb 10, 2000
- 30,029
- 67
- 91
You are the one who appears to lack reading comprehension here, Tiger, so calm down and read more carefully.
Majunior
Member
- Oct 14, 2005
- 94
- 0
- 61
perhaps this clears up what I was trying to say ...
You = "IF it did (rape) wich i do not beleive it did"
me = "Wow. you read an article, and you already don't think the man is guilty. glad you aren't on the jury. "
My comment was made out of suprise on how little you know about the case, and your quick judgement.
Don Vito Corleone
Elite
- Feb 10, 2000
- 30,029
- 67
- 91
That same issue arose in the context of the trial of Michael Skakel, the Kennedy cousin who was convicted a couple of years ago of murder in Connecticut. The CT Supreme Court found that the juvenile system wasn't equipped to deal with a 42-year-old man.
Frankly, in many, perhaps most instances, a 16-year-old charged with rape would be prosecuted as an adult, and so I am not offended by the man in the OP being prosecuted this way. I don't know RI law at all, but it's quite possible that convicting a 48-year-old man as a juvenile would mean he couldn't be imprisoned at all, since in most instances juvenile courts retain no jurisdiction over offenders once they reach the age of majority.
- Dec 14, 2000
- 68,143
- 10
- 81
not really. consider that it is a repressed memory. during the 80's and 90
s that phrase ruined many lives (even though later found innocent). it has been proven many times that repressed momory's can be implanted while talking about the "rape" or " mollestation".
not to mention 32 yrs latter memory's fade and get joined together with other memory's.
so yes it is easy to say he is innocent. the DA better have something huge to prove it though. her "memory" against his is nto going to win it. and if i was on the jury no way in hell could i say he did it based on her 32 yr old repressed memory
not to mention the whole pesky "innocent until proven guilty" thing we have.
That's inaccurate, but without significant corroborating evidence I certainly couldn't convict based on a single person's recollection.
Proof seems to be unnecessary these days, just the accused and an allegation. Whether he did, or didn't, his name is now tarnished.
It should be very obvious to all Americans by now that we no longer have "innocent until proven guilty", it is clearly
Guilty Until Proven Innocent
Don Vito Corleone
Elite
- Feb 10, 2000
- 30,029
- 67
- 91
That I don't honestly know, particularly when it comes to Rhode Island, but it has certainly been commonplace in the last 20 years, when I have been old enough to be cognizant of these kinds of things. I think there's a legitimate argument that when it comes to procedural issues like this, the current circumstances are more relevant than what was occurring 32 years ago (this was largely the basis for the way the Skakel case was handled). It seems to me that IF this guy is guilty (let's just hypothetically assume he is, and there is ample corroborating evidence), it hardly makes sense to let him walk without punishment just because he committed the crime as a teenager and wasn't discovered until later.
I hope the charges are dropped and he retaliates by sueing her for damages to the future of his career since his reputation is now scarred whether he is prosecuted or not. I know cases like that in Florida have been won for those reasons. Granted, the women in question usually had terrible backgrounds of drugs and other miscellaneous crimes to help push things along.
- Dec 14, 2000
- 68,143
- 10
- 81
point is what evidence can there be? DNA? doubt she saved the clothes from the night.
pyshical truma? nope
witnesses? again its been 32 yrs.
as i been saying they need to have something big. such as a child.
and as i have said there is no way i would convict him based on a repressed memory. Unless something else comes up i think he is not guilty.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter