SubscribeAfter a day-and-a-half trial, Municipal Judge Peter A. Ackerman on Friday convicted the woman of filing a false police report, a class-C misdemeanor. Ackerman explained his decision, saying there were many inconsistencies in the stories of the four, but that he found the young men to be more credible. He also said he relied on the testimony of a Beaverton police detective and the woman's friends who said she did not act traumatized in the days following the incident.So there are several bits of evidence, and she was only charged with a class-C misdemeanor, equivalent to getting caught with an 8th ounce of weed in most states (but not Oregon, coincidentally). The biggest problem would be the inconsistencies, and in addition to the friend, there was the testimony of the detective as well.
The woman's attorney and advocates for rape victims say the prosecution sets a dangerous precedent and could discourage others from reporting sexual assaults.Sheesh. Speaking of not paying attention when reading
but it seems pretty clear that one of them must be guilty if a rape is reported.--[delmoi]
There's a difference between being guilty and being proven guilty but if a rape is reported one person (we don't know which) must have committed a crime. We may never know which one, and maybe the best option is to let both of them go.
I agree that in some cases it may not be possible to prove either one is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but it seems pretty clear that one of them must be guilty if a rape is reported.
I attended this trial. It was especially interesting that the prosecutor kept referring to the three men involved as ‘boys’, when they were fully grown men. The woman was 17.
The judge found inconsistencies in all of the stories, thus establishing reasonable doubt in every story. Yet he convicted the victim. ‘Boys’ will be ‘boys’.
The young woman’s friends were a classmate at high school and her mother. The mother a) has always been seen with an alcoholic beverage or high on prescription pills by all who know her, b) provided the 17-year old with the alcohol she’d had that evening, which she stole from the store she cashiers at and c) was awaiting her boyfriend’s return to her home within two months of the rape. That boyfriend was in prison for molesting his own daughter. That’s hardly a credible witness with any sympathy for victims of sexual assault. But none of this could be introduced into evidence. Only the 17 year old’s sexual history could be exposed.
Additionally, the two ‘friends’ were the ones who convinced the 17 year old that she should report it to the police. So if the young woman is guilty, the instigating accessories to her ‘crime’ are considered credible experts about how a rape victim should act.
The outcome took me completely by surprise, as it did many others. But then, boys will be boys.
(My report cannot be truly objective as I’ve known the victim since she was a baby. I was sufficiently upset at the proceedings that, in the hallway outside the courtroom, I told the prosecutor and lead detective that they were “miserable pricks” and “a disgrace to their profession.”)
highgene: I was best friends with a female rape counselor [...]. She told me probably about 1/2 of them were fake, for various reasons. As a female its a very easy thing to cry if your ticked off at a male, or a group of them.WORD to the muthah-fuckin' google-ty power! I have long maintained this very point: that there are very real rape cases, and that's an awful thing, but that doesn't mean no one would ever lie about it, that there's never anything to gain... because there most certainly is. If "all men" can be potential rapists, then can't we say "all women" can be potential psychopathic liars? Are our Victorian era notions of women as the "fairer sex" still so ingrained that we can't imagine anything but sugar and spice from girls and snails and puppy dog tails from boys? Or that boys are some how orders of magnitude "worse", for no explicable reason?
pandaharma: Its [...] that the woman should realize how men think and how potentially dangerous men can be, and to take steps to either protect themselves or avoid the dangerous situation in the first place.You know whats more dangerous than just any "men"? All them nigger men. So much more dangerous! A woman should definitely never be alone with one of them, they're savage, illiterate, Kong-like beasts of unchecked agression and sexual rapacity. Really, any sensible woman in this day and age should understand that not all niggers are violent, but she should take steps to either protect herself or avoid the dangerous situation in the first place.
HTuttle: Enough men have been falsely accussed and convicted, if the work is turning and a few gals now suffer that fate then tough toodies.EXACTLY. Rape is a crime of power, and violence- the sex is incidental, but apparently the only part we want to think about.
« Older On the night of Feb. 7, 2005, Hatun Surucu, 23, wa... | The Social Issues Research Cen... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Optimus Chyme at 9:02 AM on December 4, 2005