By the way...glad to see you support false allegations of rape by women to toss innocent men into jail over issues like having to actually share assets in a divorce, or feeling shame for cheating. In the Shawn-universe... all men must only cheat on their wives with themselves, and never with another woman.
Nick
Now, did I say that?
As far as the compilations goes, I figured Hillary threads started by you fit the general theme. Of course I also thought about that while hastily putting together a list of your women/men centric threads, so I could be wrong. I also figured that anything dealing with rolling back abortion fit the theme, so there you go. That was just my thought process... just a compilation of your greatest hits. Some more related than others- the best of your greatest hits were listed below. However, the argument isn't whether you start a lot of threads on the same general subject-you do- the argument is whether or not that's good, as BR suggested.
As far as the compilations goes, I figured Hillary threads started by you fit the general theme. Of course I also thought about that while hastily putting together a list of your women/men centric threads, so I could be wrong. I also figured that anything dealing with rolling back abortion fit the theme, so there you go. That was just my thought process... just a compilation of your greatest hits. Some more related than others- the best of your greatest hits were listed below. However, the argument isn't whether you start a lot of threads on the same general subject-you do- the argument is whether or not that's good, as BR suggested.
Silence is endorsement.
As for your compilations. I understand, they were hasty and ill-informed. I suppose I shouldn't expect better by now. Next time try breaking them down by catagory since women is a bit broad don't you think. I mean they are half the planet don't you know. If you did that you would likely see the same topic (say abortion) might be posted two months apart from each other while say another (custody) is in between.
Paternity, custody, wage equity, criminal sentencing, false allegations, cohabitation vs. marriage, etc. are all different issues. You lump them all together under women. That is your choice. Likewise you are welcome to actually address the thread topic anytime now as well isntead of remaining silent
Certainly. Trumptman, you've done an excellent job in proving that women can lie about rape. I don't think anything can be really done about it. But hey, women lie about rape. The question is what shouldn't we do about it. Like, I don't think we should stick tiny Truth Electrodes? in the brains of women. I don't think we should mandate live-entertainment dramatic reenactments of the past sex lives of women during rape trials. I'm not sure flogging is the way to go either. Can anybody think of worse ways to stop these lying liars of women from lying?
Certainly. Trumptman, you've done an excellent job in proving that women can lie about rape. I don't think anything can be really done about it. But hey, women lie about rape. The question is what shouldn't we do about it. Like, I don't think we should stick tiny Truth Electrodes? in the brains of women. I don't think we should mandate live-entertainment dramatic reenactments of the past sex lives of women during rape trials. I'm not sure flogging is the way to go either. Can anybody think of worse ways to stop these lying liars of women from lying?
Perhaps we could do something like make them pay for the crime via reparations to the victims of those false allegations.
Or perhaps we could coin cute phrases like "Truth Electrodes" or "Femi-nazi" and presume there is no problem.
So trumptman what laws or legal procedures would you change to prevent this from happening in the future?
I agree it's a problem. DNA testing has show that false convictions are a huge problem in our criminal justice system. And the DNA cases are often rape cases, because those are the kinds of cases in which they often have DNA. But everything I've seen suggests that mistaken identity, coerced confessions, and police misconduct cause the vast majority of false convictions, not lying women.
So trumptman what laws or legal procedures would you change to prevent this from happening in the future?
I agree it's a problem. DNA testing has show that false convictions are a huge problem in our criminal justice system. And the DNA cases are often rape cases, because those are the kinds of cases in which they often have DNA. But everything I've seen suggests that mistaken identity, coerced confessions, and police misconduct cause the vast majority of false convictions, not lying women.
I've seen a study that suggests up to 40% of rape claims are false. We are not talking about overturned convinctions though we can certainly bring that in as well.
Right now I would say the biggest issue with crimes like these are the presumption of guilt and the sheltering of the accuser not only in name but basically in regard to anything you would use to discredit them.
It's pretty hard to prove doubt when you aren't allowed to question someone. It is like being denied a cross-examination in a case.
Nina Shahravan, fined and sentenced to 90 days in jail for perjury after accusing Michael Irvin and Erik Williams of sexual assault.
How would that be reparations?
1. The act or process of repairing or the condition of being repaired.
2. The act or process of making amends; expiation.
3. Something done or paid to compensate or make amends.
4. reparations Compensation or remuneration required from a defeated nation as indemnity for damage or injury during a war.
She was convicted of perjury. How does that repair the reputation of those accused? Come now Grove be honest about this. Michael Irvin for example is a wealthy man and can survive even if his reputation was tarnished. He also had a videotape if I recall correctly. Not everyone has those two things on their side.
Are you saying that if Kobe Bryant for example were found innocent your perception of him would change regardless of the charge? What about someone who is not wealthy and is now viewed with suspicion in their field of work. Say a dentist who was accused by a patient, or a doctor accused by a patient. Their loss of income can and should be compensated.
I am suggesting more than punishment. I am suggesting payment much like in other cases of defamation or libel.
Quote:
A perfect example of how worthless your commentary is.
"I've seen a study that suggests up to 40% of rape claims are false."
Absolutely worthless.
I think I liked you better pretending to be indifferent. You could have simply asked for a source or posted your own. Rhetoric doesn't prove or disprove anything.
Reparations? What legal precedent would there be for reparations in a proceeding about whether or not a woman broke the law by lying?
I'd love to see some evidence that the falsely accused aren't allowed to pursue "reparations" in a civil case.
Quote:
Are you saying that if Kobe Bryant for example were found innocent your perception of him would change regardless of the charge?
Since the rape nurse said the girl's injuries were not consistent with consensual sex it's going to take some convincing to get me to believe that Kobe isn't a rapist. (I am not a court of law, don't pull the "innocent until proven guilty" crap.)
Quote:
What about someone who is not wealthy and is now viewed with suspicion in their field of work. Say a dentist who was accused by a patient, or a doctor accused by a patient. Their loss of income can and should be compensated.
Reparations? What legal precedent would there be for reparations in a proceeding about whether or not a woman broke the law by lying?
I'd love to see some evidence that the falsely accused aren't allowed to pursue "reparations" in a civil case.
Since the rape nurse said the girl's injuries were not consistent with consensual sex it's going to take some convincing to get me to believe that Kobe isn't a rapist. (I am not a court of law, don't pull the "innocent until proven guilty" crap.)
Civil suit. Common sense, use it.
Your sources are classic. Laughable. If it's not MenWeb it's some random site with absolutely no credibility.
From the site:
...
Lazy-ass googling != research.
Here's a good link to the same stuff. (To the National Coalition of Free Men. I'm sure you just *love* National Organization of Women pieces.)
Just poke around the ncfm.org site. If that isn't enough to dismiss whatever half-assed opinion pieces with selectively quoted parts of other research
Can I bring in half-assed NOW opinion articles and start acting like they are important?
I'll dismiss your ignorant baiting. It gets tiresome and isn't worth my time. The link had footnotes to all the assoiciated research. If you don't want to believe it. That is your choice. I won't waste time trying to argue you through ignorance.
I am suggesting more than punishment. I am suggesting payment much like in other cases of defamation or libel.
To get it on topic again (a little bit). It is really true that in the US, a woman accusing a guy falsely of rape is not liable to pay compensation if he sues her?
At least over here, she'll get sentenced for false accusations, feigning a crime and in a seperate trial the victim sue her . I am not sure about your country, but I somewhat doubt this is not possible.
To get it on topic again (a little bit). It is really true that in the US, a woman accusing a guy falsely of rape is not liable to pay compensation if he sues her?
At least over here, she'll get sentenced for false accusations, feigning a crime and in a seperate trial the victim sue her . I am not sure about your country, but I somewhat doubt this is not possible.
It is always possible to sue anyone in a civil matter, whether justified or not. However pursuing a civil matter is tremendously expensive and in most cases would not yield you any money since it involves spending more money than both parties typically have available.
I was thinking more along the lines of a series of laws that could be used by prosecutors to pursue noncriminal rememdies in addition to the criminal matters. A series of fines they could levy on matters in which there was clear malicious intent. We are talking about cases in which the story basically didn't stand up well enough to even get to court. Can someone be convicted of perjury if they sparked an investigation that harmed the man but didn't lead to a trial where they even took the stand? The fines could be imposed as a form of restitution. I'm speaking about something new so there is no precident for it.
For example most sexual harassment matters are not handled as criminal matters. Usually there are procedures that involve a mediator and it is often solved with money, not jail time.
So if there were a system in place whereby the falsely accused men could claim harassment and mediation through the counties for damages done on these smaller issues, that would be more along the lines of what I am thinking about This whole system arose in the business world basically because for most women, it was less expensive to take the loss and go pursue another job than it was to try to prove the loss of money or income and damage done. It basically took a whole new class of awareness, laws and procedures. It wasn't right for women to be harassed in a job environment. It isn't right for men to be harassed on a custody or domestic environment.
Understand that I'm not an expert on this. But there are large numbers of false allegations made regarding rape. Likewise there are large numbers of false sexual abuse claims made during child custody hearings when the mother basically doesn't want the father to have contact. We can discuss matters like fines for violating restraining orders involving stalking, or mediation on sexual harassment because there have been protections and system put in place in these matters. Could you imagine trying to take someone stalking you to court on a civil matter just to avoid what they were doing? The societal and business rememdies arose to solve the societal problems. When we are discussing false accusation rates of 40% and conviction rates that as a result are likely even much lower, versus the number of claims, those men should have more recourse than a self financed civil suit.
Just my two cents, and as what I am talking about is new, there really isn't away to prove it is more "right" than someone elses opinion. The initial post, before being made a mockery by those lacking the resolve to discuss it rationally, asked for suggestions on preventing these matters. I didn't claim to have the perfect solution, but instead was asking for opinions for solutions.
Others instead focused on whether false rape allegations even occur or whether the thread should even exist. It is sad in my opinion that they think discussion shouldn't occur on matters in which they have a disagreement. I think it says something very chilling about their mindset.
It is always possible to sue anyone in a civil matter, whether justified or not. However pursuing a civil matter is tremendously expensive and in most cases would not yield you any money since it involves spending more money than both parties typically have available.
If you would do just a tiny tiny tiny tiny bit of "research" you would see how full of shit you are. But then again, you would be forced to just post "FEAR! FIRE! FOES! WOMEN!"
Quote:
I was thinking more along the lines of a series of laws that could be used by prosecutors to pursue noncriminal rememdies in addition to the criminal matters. A series of fines they could levy on matters in which there was clear malicious intent.
A criminal court levying fines payable to the victim?
Hi, I'm the US legal system, have we met?
Quote:
Can someone be convicted of perjury if they sparked an investigation that harmed the man but didn't lead to a trial where they even took the stand?
No, because that's not what perjury is, sweetheart. That's providing false information to police.
Quote:
The fines could be imposed as a form of restitution. I'm speaking about something new so there is no precident for it.
Or we could just handle these things like we have for over a century and work harder to educate people like yourself as to how the system works. I like that idea more.
Quote:
So if there were a system in place whereby the falsely accused men could claim harassment and mediation through the counties for damages done on these smaller issues, that would be more along the lines of what I am thinking about
Civil court!
Quote:
Understand that I'm not an expert on this.
Understatement of the year. You don't even try to half-inform yourself.
Quote:
Just my two cents, and as what I am talking about is new, there really isn't away to prove it is more "right" than someone elses opinion.
There is absolutely nothing new about this. False accusation that damages reputation has been around for a long time.
It's not new, you just don't know what you're talking about.
Quote:
The initial post, before being made a mockery by those lacking the resolve to discuss it rationally, asked for suggestions on preventing these matters.
You start the thread with a sarcastic strawman title, follow it with an opinionated rant without credible backing and expect to be taken seriously?
I love discussion, but that's not what you go for. You're a troll. And that's fine, I'm a troll too, but I'm not going to start a sarcastic, mocking thread and then whine that no one loves me.
If you would do just a tiny tiny tiny tiny bit of "research" you would see how full of shit you are. But then again, you would be forced to just post "FEAR! FIRE! FOES! WOMEN!"
Are your a walking argument for drug legalization or something? Your link proves my point precisely. The man in your article has filed a civil lawsuit after repeated false allegations, note repeated, she was not discredited at all after lying multiple times. She made at least 4 false allegations which allowed him to sue after being under house arrest for 7 months.
If convicted and sentenced to the maximum sentence, she will spend one less month in jail for five false allegations than he spent just under arrest while being investigated for those allegations.
In Groverat's troll-land, this is called good and proper.
Again I said he as well as anyone is allowed to file a civil lawsuit. They happen daily. However civil suits are costly matters.
Lastly again you prove my point. Suppose he spends a few THOUSAND dollars to get a judgement against this 18 year old head case. Do you think he would even be able to gain back the thousands spent to obtain the judgement? What sort of assets do you think the girl has Grove?
Quote:
A criminal court levying fines payable to the victim?
I have no idea what the hell you are talking about. Criminal courts regularly order payments of victim restitution to parties and payments to victim restitution funds. I seriously have no idea why you treat this as so oddball when you can walk into almost any court and watch it happen regularly. I watched it last week be ordered for a car thief regarding a stolen car. Quite honestly you are coming out of left field with this one. I could understand you saying, he Nick, a fine goes to the court, are you talking about restitution instead of a fine, but you make it sound odd to have a court order money paid to the victim in a criminal matter. The intent was clear.
Quote:
No, because that's not what perjury is, sweetheart. That's providing false information to police.
Regardless of what it is charged as, it should be more than a misdemeanor to lie and have someone lose several months worth of freedom and income.
Quote:
Or we could just handle these things like we have for over a century and work harder to educate people like yourself as to how the system works. I like that idea more.
Again victim restitution is not new. Thinking of men as victims when falsely accused of sexual crimes is new. The false allegations should be treated more seriously and the restitutions orders should be given. The possibility of a civil suit is available if the man still wants additional compensation or does not feel vindicated.
Quote:
Civil court!
Victim Restitution!
Quote:
Understatement of the year. You don't even try to half-inform yourself.
Yes well your repeated name calling and one whole link have so educated us all. You're an ignorant goon who is using bravado in place of information. When provided with a page full of endnoted studies, you dismissed them without a single link, contradicting study or anything else in return. You convince no one with tactics like that.
Quote:
There is absolutely nothing new about this. False accusation that damages reputation has been around for a long time.
It's not new, you just don't know what you're talking about.
Please find for me a case where the court ordered victim restitution to a man for a false allegation against that man on the matter of rape. It is a new concept. I'm not claiming it has NEVER been done. Just that it should become a common practice of which it currently is not.
Quote:
You start the thread with a sarcastic strawman title, follow it with an opinionated rant without credible backing and expect to be taken seriously?
I love discussion, but that's not what you go for. You're a troll. And that's fine, I'm a troll too, but I'm not going to start a sarcastic, mocking thread and then whine that no one loves me.
If you don't like the title, don't reply. Practice the indifference you preach. Better yet start your own "educational" thread where you can...gasp... post your own sources and make your own points... (scary concept I know)
I didn't whine that no one loves me Grove... it's just you I miss loverboy.
Comments
Originally posted by pfflam
look inward my friend.......
I assure you that I have looked within myself. The question is whether you with your bitter complaints and one liners have done any introspection.
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
By the way...glad to see you support false allegations of rape by women to toss innocent men into jail over issues like having to actually share assets in a divorce, or feeling shame for cheating. In the Shawn-universe... all men must only cheat on their wives with themselves, and never with another woman.
Nick
Now, did I say that?
As far as the compilations goes, I figured Hillary threads started by you fit the general theme. Of course I also thought about that while hastily putting together a list of your women/men centric threads, so I could be wrong. I also figured that anything dealing with rolling back abortion fit the theme, so there you go. That was just my thought process... just a compilation of your greatest hits. Some more related than others- the best of your greatest hits were listed below. However, the argument isn't whether you start a lot of threads on the same general subject-you do- the argument is whether or not that's good, as BR suggested.
Originally posted by ShawnJ
Now, did I say that?
As far as the compilations goes, I figured Hillary threads started by you fit the general theme. Of course I also thought about that while hastily putting together a list of your women/men centric threads, so I could be wrong. I also figured that anything dealing with rolling back abortion fit the theme, so there you go. That was just my thought process... just a compilation of your greatest hits. Some more related than others- the best of your greatest hits were listed below. However, the argument isn't whether you start a lot of threads on the same general subject-you do- the argument is whether or not that's good, as BR suggested.
Silence is endorsement.
As for your compilations. I understand, they were hasty and ill-informed. I suppose I shouldn't expect better by now. Next time try breaking them down by catagory since women is a bit broad don't you think. I mean they are half the planet don't you know. If you did that you would likely see the same topic (say abortion) might be posted two months apart from each other while say another (custody) is in between.
Paternity, custody, wage equity, criminal sentencing, false allegations, cohabitation vs. marriage, etc. are all different issues. You lump them all together under women. That is your choice. Likewise you are welcome to actually address the thread topic anytime now as well isntead of remaining silent
Happy Be-lated Birthday,
Nick
It's quite amusing to watch.
Originally posted by ShawnJ
Certainly. Trumptman, you've done an excellent job in proving that women can lie about rape. I don't think anything can be really done about it. But hey, women lie about rape. The question is what shouldn't we do about it.
Perhaps we could do something like make them pay for the crime via reparations to the victims of those false allegations.
Or perhaps we could coin cute phrases like "Truth Electrodes" or "Femi-nazi" and presume there is no problem.
Nick
I agree it's a problem. DNA testing has show that false convictions are a huge problem in our criminal justice system. And the DNA cases are often rape cases, because those are the kinds of cases in which they often have DNA. But everything I've seen suggests that mistaken identity, coerced confessions, and police misconduct cause the vast majority of false convictions, not lying women.
Originally posted by BRussell
So trumptman what laws or legal procedures would you change to prevent this from happening in the future?
I agree it's a problem. DNA testing has show that false convictions are a huge problem in our criminal justice system. And the DNA cases are often rape cases, because those are the kinds of cases in which they often have DNA. But everything I've seen suggests that mistaken identity, coerced confessions, and police misconduct cause the vast majority of false convictions, not lying women.
I've seen a study that suggests up to 40% of rape claims are false. We are not talking about overturned convinctions though we can certainly bring that in as well.
Right now I would say the biggest issue with crimes like these are the presumption of guilt and the sheltering of the accuser not only in name but basically in regard to anything you would use to discredit them.
It's pretty hard to prove doubt when you aren't allowed to question someone. It is like being denied a cross-examination in a case.
Nick
Perhaps we could do something like make them pay for the crime via reparations to the victims of those false allegations.
Nina Shahravan, fined and sentenced to 90 days in jail for perjury after accusing Michael Irvin and Erik Williams of sexual assault.
People are already punished for these things. That's the problem with your posts, you do almost no research and use almost no common sense.
I've seen a study that suggests up to 40% of rape claims are false.
A perfect example of how worthless your commentary is.
"I've seen a study that suggests up to 40% of rape claims are false."
Absolutely worthless.
Originally posted by trumptman
I've seen a study that suggests up to 40% of rape claims are false. Nick
. . .. on WomenAreTheProblem.com?
Originally posted by groverat
trumpt:
Nina Shahravan, fined and sentenced to 90 days in jail for perjury after accusing Michael Irvin and Erik Williams of sexual assault.
How would that be reparations?
1. The act or process of repairing or the condition of being repaired.
2. The act or process of making amends; expiation.
3. Something done or paid to compensate or make amends.
4. reparations Compensation or remuneration required from a defeated nation as indemnity for damage or injury during a war.
She was convicted of perjury. How does that repair the reputation of those accused? Come now Grove be honest about this. Michael Irvin for example is a wealthy man and can survive even if his reputation was tarnished. He also had a videotape if I recall correctly. Not everyone has those two things on their side.
Are you saying that if Kobe Bryant for example were found innocent your perception of him would change regardless of the charge? What about someone who is not wealthy and is now viewed with suspicion in their field of work. Say a dentist who was accused by a patient, or a doctor accused by a patient. Their loss of income can and should be compensated.
I am suggesting more than punishment. I am suggesting payment much like in other cases of defamation or libel.
A perfect example of how worthless your commentary is.
"I've seen a study that suggests up to 40% of rape claims are false."
Absolutely worthless.
I think I liked you better pretending to be indifferent. You could have simply asked for a source or posted your own. Rhetoric doesn't prove or disprove anything.
Worthless to Groverat
Nick
How would that be reparations?
Reparations? What legal precedent would there be for reparations in a proceeding about whether or not a woman broke the law by lying?
I'd love to see some evidence that the falsely accused aren't allowed to pursue "reparations" in a civil case.
Are you saying that if Kobe Bryant for example were found innocent your perception of him would change regardless of the charge?
Since the rape nurse said the girl's injuries were not consistent with consensual sex it's going to take some convincing to get me to believe that Kobe isn't a rapist. (I am not a court of law, don't pull the "innocent until proven guilty" crap.)
What about someone who is not wealthy and is now viewed with suspicion in their field of work. Say a dentist who was accused by a patient, or a doctor accused by a patient. Their loss of income can and should be compensated.
Civil suit. Common sense, use it.
Worthless to Groverat
Your sources are classic. Laughable. If it's not MenWeb it's some random site with absolutely no credibility.
From the site:
...
Lazy-ass googling != research.
Here's a good link to the same stuff. (To the National Coalition of Free Men. I'm sure you just *love* National Organization of Women pieces.)
Just poke around the ncfm.org site. If that isn't enough to dismiss whatever half-assed opinion pieces with selectively quoted parts of other research
Can I bring in half-assed NOW opinion articles and start acting like they are important?
Originally posted by groverat
trumptman:
Reparations? What legal precedent would there be for reparations in a proceeding about whether or not a woman broke the law by lying?
I'd love to see some evidence that the falsely accused aren't allowed to pursue "reparations" in a civil case.
Since the rape nurse said the girl's injuries were not consistent with consensual sex it's going to take some convincing to get me to believe that Kobe isn't a rapist. (I am not a court of law, don't pull the "innocent until proven guilty" crap.)
Civil suit. Common sense, use it.
Your sources are classic. Laughable. If it's not MenWeb it's some random site with absolutely no credibility.
From the site:
...
Lazy-ass googling != research.
Here's a good link to the same stuff. (To the National Coalition of Free Men. I'm sure you just *love* National Organization of Women pieces.)
Just poke around the ncfm.org site. If that isn't enough to dismiss whatever half-assed opinion pieces with selectively quoted parts of other research
Can I bring in half-assed NOW opinion articles and start acting like they are important?
I'll dismiss your ignorant baiting. It gets tiresome and isn't worth my time. The link had footnotes to all the assoiciated research. If you don't want to believe it. That is your choice. I won't waste time trying to argue you through ignorance.
Nick
I'll dismiss your ignorant baiting.
Comedy Gold!
Originally posted by groverat
From the starter of *this* thread:
I'll dismiss your ignorant baiting.
Comedy Gold!
I would expect as much of you. Reply, have the last word, and enjoy feeding in the pig trough of your own ignorance.
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
I am suggesting more than punishment. I am suggesting payment much like in other cases of defamation or libel.
To get it on topic again (a little bit). It is really true that in the US, a woman accusing a guy falsely of rape is not liable to pay compensation if he sues her?
At least over here, she'll get sentenced for false accusations, feigning a crime and in a seperate trial the victim sue her . I am not sure about your country, but I somewhat doubt this is not possible.
Originally posted by Smircle
To get it on topic again (a little bit). It is really true that in the US, a woman accusing a guy falsely of rape is not liable to pay compensation if he sues her?
At least over here, she'll get sentenced for false accusations, feigning a crime and in a seperate trial the victim sue her . I am not sure about your country, but I somewhat doubt this is not possible.
It is always possible to sue anyone in a civil matter, whether justified or not. However pursuing a civil matter is tremendously expensive and in most cases would not yield you any money since it involves spending more money than both parties typically have available.
I was thinking more along the lines of a series of laws that could be used by prosecutors to pursue noncriminal rememdies in addition to the criminal matters. A series of fines they could levy on matters in which there was clear malicious intent. We are talking about cases in which the story basically didn't stand up well enough to even get to court. Can someone be convicted of perjury if they sparked an investigation that harmed the man but didn't lead to a trial where they even took the stand? The fines could be imposed as a form of restitution. I'm speaking about something new so there is no precident for it.
For example most sexual harassment matters are not handled as criminal matters. Usually there are procedures that involve a mediator and it is often solved with money, not jail time.
So if there were a system in place whereby the falsely accused men could claim harassment and mediation through the counties for damages done on these smaller issues, that would be more along the lines of what I am thinking about This whole system arose in the business world basically because for most women, it was less expensive to take the loss and go pursue another job than it was to try to prove the loss of money or income and damage done. It basically took a whole new class of awareness, laws and procedures. It wasn't right for women to be harassed in a job environment. It isn't right for men to be harassed on a custody or domestic environment.
Understand that I'm not an expert on this. But there are large numbers of false allegations made regarding rape. Likewise there are large numbers of false sexual abuse claims made during child custody hearings when the mother basically doesn't want the father to have contact. We can discuss matters like fines for violating restraining orders involving stalking, or mediation on sexual harassment because there have been protections and system put in place in these matters. Could you imagine trying to take someone stalking you to court on a civil matter just to avoid what they were doing? The societal and business rememdies arose to solve the societal problems. When we are discussing false accusation rates of 40% and conviction rates that as a result are likely even much lower, versus the number of claims, those men should have more recourse than a self financed civil suit.
Just my two cents, and as what I am talking about is new, there really isn't away to prove it is more "right" than someone elses opinion. The initial post, before being made a mockery by those lacking the resolve to discuss it rationally, asked for suggestions on preventing these matters. I didn't claim to have the perfect solution, but instead was asking for opinions for solutions.
Others instead focused on whether false rape allegations even occur or whether the thread should even exist. It is sad in my opinion that they think discussion shouldn't occur on matters in which they have a disagreement. I think it says something very chilling about their mindset.
Nick
It is always possible to sue anyone in a civil matter, whether justified or not. However pursuing a civil matter is tremendously expensive and in most cases would not yield you any money since it involves spending more money than both parties typically have available.
Pure fabrication.
If you would do just a tiny tiny tiny tiny bit of "research" you would see how full of shit you are. But then again, you would be forced to just post "FEAR! FIRE! FOES! WOMEN!"
I was thinking more along the lines of a series of laws that could be used by prosecutors to pursue noncriminal rememdies in addition to the criminal matters. A series of fines they could levy on matters in which there was clear malicious intent.
A criminal court levying fines payable to the victim?
Hi, I'm the US legal system, have we met?
Can someone be convicted of perjury if they sparked an investigation that harmed the man but didn't lead to a trial where they even took the stand?
No, because that's not what perjury is, sweetheart. That's providing false information to police.
The fines could be imposed as a form of restitution. I'm speaking about something new so there is no precident for it.
Or we could just handle these things like we have for over a century and work harder to educate people like yourself as to how the system works. I like that idea more.
So if there were a system in place whereby the falsely accused men could claim harassment and mediation through the counties for damages done on these smaller issues, that would be more along the lines of what I am thinking about
Civil court!
Understand that I'm not an expert on this.
Understatement of the year. You don't even try to half-inform yourself.
Just my two cents, and as what I am talking about is new, there really isn't away to prove it is more "right" than someone elses opinion.
There is absolutely nothing new about this. False accusation that damages reputation has been around for a long time.
It's not new, you just don't know what you're talking about.
The initial post, before being made a mockery by those lacking the resolve to discuss it rationally, asked for suggestions on preventing these matters.
You start the thread with a sarcastic strawman title, follow it with an opinionated rant without credible backing and expect to be taken seriously?
I love discussion, but that's not what you go for. You're a troll. And that's fine, I'm a troll too, but I'm not going to start a sarcastic, mocking thread and then whine that no one loves me.
Originally posted by groverat
trumptman:
Pure fabrication.
If you would do just a tiny tiny tiny tiny bit of "research" you would see how full of shit you are. But then again, you would be forced to just post "FEAR! FIRE! FOES! WOMEN!"
Are your a walking argument for drug legalization or something? Your link proves my point precisely. The man in your article has filed a civil lawsuit after repeated false allegations, note repeated, she was not discredited at all after lying multiple times. She made at least 4 false allegations which allowed him to sue after being under house arrest for 7 months.
If convicted and sentenced to the maximum sentence, she will spend one less month in jail for five false allegations than he spent just under arrest while being investigated for those allegations.
In Groverat's troll-land, this is called good and proper.
Again I said he as well as anyone is allowed to file a civil lawsuit. They happen daily. However civil suits are costly matters.
Lastly again you prove my point. Suppose he spends a few THOUSAND dollars to get a judgement against this 18 year old head case. Do you think he would even be able to gain back the thousands spent to obtain the judgement? What sort of assets do you think the girl has Grove?
A criminal court levying fines payable to the victim?
I have no idea what the hell you are talking about. Criminal courts regularly order payments of victim restitution to parties and payments to victim restitution funds. I seriously have no idea why you treat this as so oddball when you can walk into almost any court and watch it happen regularly. I watched it last week be ordered for a car thief regarding a stolen car. Quite honestly you are coming out of left field with this one. I could understand you saying, he Nick, a fine goes to the court, are you talking about restitution instead of a fine, but you make it sound odd to have a court order money paid to the victim in a criminal matter. The intent was clear.
No, because that's not what perjury is, sweetheart. That's providing false information to police.
Regardless of what it is charged as, it should be more than a misdemeanor to lie and have someone lose several months worth of freedom and income.
Or we could just handle these things like we have for over a century and work harder to educate people like yourself as to how the system works. I like that idea more.
Again victim restitution is not new. Thinking of men as victims when falsely accused of sexual crimes is new. The false allegations should be treated more seriously and the restitutions orders should be given. The possibility of a civil suit is available if the man still wants additional compensation or does not feel vindicated.
Civil court!
Victim Restitution!
Understatement of the year. You don't even try to half-inform yourself.
Yes well your repeated name calling and one whole link have so educated us all. You're an ignorant goon who is using bravado in place of information. When provided with a page full of endnoted studies, you dismissed them without a single link, contradicting study or anything else in return. You convince no one with tactics like that.
There is absolutely nothing new about this. False accusation that damages reputation has been around for a long time.
It's not new, you just don't know what you're talking about.
Please find for me a case where the court ordered victim restitution to a man for a false allegation against that man on the matter of rape. It is a new concept. I'm not claiming it has NEVER been done. Just that it should become a common practice of which it currently is not.
You start the thread with a sarcastic strawman title, follow it with an opinionated rant without credible backing and expect to be taken seriously?
I love discussion, but that's not what you go for. You're a troll. And that's fine, I'm a troll too, but I'm not going to start a sarcastic, mocking thread and then whine that no one loves me.
If you don't like the title, don't reply. Practice the indifference you preach. Better yet start your own "educational" thread where you can...gasp... post your own sources and make your own points... (scary concept I know)
I didn't whine that no one loves me Grove... it's just you I miss loverboy.
Nick