Sunday, September 05, 2004

"Victims" and "Rapists"

"Not Guilty" or "Innocent"?


Some have asserted that now that the charges against Kobe Bryant have been dismissed with prejudice by the prosecution, he is not a rapist, and that the woman who accused him of raping her is not a victim. I don't know if he raped her, but I offer the following thoughts for your consideration:

Assume the following scenario occurs:

A man has sex with a woman against her will. She repeatedly tells him that she does not want to have sex with him, and he has intercourse with her anyway. Assume that there is no dispute about the facts.

Answer the following two questions:
Is he a rapist?
Is she a victim of rape?



In my view, he is a rapist, and she is a victim of rape.

He is a rapist and she is a victim of rape even if she does not file a police report.

He is a rapist and she is a victim of rape even if he is not arrested.

He is a rapist and she is a victim of rape even if he is arrested and the state decides not to prosecute.

He is a rapist and she is a victim of rape even if he is arrested and prosecuted and the state drops the charges.

He is a rapist and she is a victim of rape even if he goes to trial and is acquitted.

Wow - what about the presumption of innocence? What about "he's innocent until proven guilty"? Well, he still raped her, didn't he? And she still has all the consequences of having been raped, doesn't she? Under these facts, he is a rapist, but not a convicted rapist. Mike Tyson, for example, is not just a rapist, he is a convicted rapist.

Had Tyson been acquitted, would that mean he hadn't raped her? The criminal justice system is designed to force the state to prove its allegations against an individual beyond a reasonable doubt, so that theoretically, people who have been charged with a crime will not be convicted absent proof presented to a jury, proof obtained lawfully. If the proof is obtained unlawfully, the state may not use that evidence aganst the accused, and if the the jury does not believe the proof presented beyond a reasonable doubt, the state will not sustain its burden and the accused will be released. But 'not guilty" in a court of law is not the same as "innocent."

"Not guilty" in a court of law does not mean that the accused did not do it. He may have done it and the evidence necessary to prove it may have been unlawfully obtained and suppressed by the court. He may have done it and the state was unable to locate all of the necessary witnesses. He may have done it and the state was unable to properly and convincingly put the evidence before the jury in a way that convinces them beyond a reasonable doubt. Another jury may hear evidence against the same suspect (let's call him O.J.) and be convinced by a different standard that he did what he was accused of doing.

Let's not confuse "not guilty" as a verdict with "he didn't do it." "Not guilty" in a criminal trial means that the state did not prove him guilty with the evidence presented beyond a reasonable doubt. You will never hear a verdict in a criminal trial in America that the defendant is "innocent". The only choices are "guilty" or "not guilty". It's about the state's burden of proof, as well it should be. I think the confusion occurs when people think the jury is going to get to declare the accused innocent.

People accused of crimes should be presumed to not be guilty for purposes of trial. The state should have to obtain evidence lawfully. The state should have to prove each and every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Jurors should be screened to determine that they don't assume that the state has met its burden before the trial concludes and they have been instructed on the law and engaged in deliberations and found that the state has met its burden. They should be required to find the accused "not guilty" if they find that the state has not proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt. When a prosecutor assesses a case to determine whether to proceed, the prosecutor asks not only "did he do it" but also "with the evidence lawfully obtained and with the witnesses available, can it be proven beyond a reasonable doubt?" If the answer is no, the prosecutor should not file the charges, even if the accused committed the crime.

But let's not forget to take a dose of reality. When a man forces a woman to have sex against her will, she is a victim of rape, and he is a rapist. Prosecution or not. Conviction or not.

-- Marc

10 Comments:

Blogger outa-time said...

Captivating blog. I love surfing the web for the
type of blogs that you do. It had me on the edge of my
seat and I kept going back to again and again!
Please consider looking at my cash advance today blog.

January 19, 2006 at 4:05 AM  
Blogger Christopher London said...

I would assume also an alternate scenario based on the underground rumor mill. A woman consents to some form of sexual relations, basically intercourse. But her partner, the assailant acts in a predatory fashion and takes advantage of her vulnerability, sodomozing her, causing her pain, discomfort and physical damage. Does her consent to love making entitle the violator to cause physical damage by entering an orifice that the assailant was not given access to, but instead forcibly penetrated? Most knowledgeable people know that Kobe Bryant bought his way out of a legal predicament that would have sent the average man away for a long prison sentence. This is why I will never cheer for the Lakers or Kobe Bryant as long as I live.

June 1, 2009 at 2:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ups sorry delete plz [url=http://duhum.com].[/url]

January 30, 2010 at 10:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ups sorry delete plz [url=http://duhum.com].[/url]

February 2, 2010 at 11:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You know, come to think of it, I wonder if the accused are presumed innocent because the drafters of our constitution got it confused? Maybe the were ignorant, uneducated, or couldn't spell?

Sometimes I want to cry, I want to vomit, I want to shove an ice pick in my ear... Every time some traitorous halfwit mocks the care and dedication put into founding our government.

That came from a long legacy of people using their heads to figure things out, a rare burst of the good the can come out of humanity. Our founders were probably some of the most capable people to have existed, which explains the nosedive we seem to be in now. Clue: the intellectuals are all dead.)

You make me sick. Would you please at least respect that our poor still send their 19 year-olds into combat to make sure your corporation keeps you on the payroll you jerk?

March 10, 2012 at 7:07 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You know, come to think of it, I wonder if the accused are presumed innocent because the drafters of our constitution got it confused? Maybe the were ignorant, uneducated, or couldn't spell?

Sometimes I want to cry, I want to vomit, I want to shove an ice pick in my ear... Every time some traitorous halfwit mocks the care and dedication put into founding our government.

That came from a long legacy of people using their heads to figure things out, a rare burst of the good the can come out of humanity. Our founders were probably some of the most capable people to have existed, which explains the nosedive we seem to be in now. Clue: the intellectuals are all dead.)

You make me sick. Would you please at least respect that our poor still send their 19 year-olds into combat to make sure your corporation keeps you on the payroll you jerk?

March 10, 2012 at 7:07 AM  
Anonymous Buy Valium said...

Great post at the right time for me.

October 30, 2012 at 1:47 AM  
Blogger Situs Poker Idn Play said...

Artikel yang sangat bagus menarik dan bermanfaat

Bergabunglah dan rasakan sensasi bermain Situs Poker, Domino99, Pokerqq, QQ Online, Domino Qiu, Qiu Qiu Online, Poker Qiu Qiu yang memberikan kemenangan besar hanya di http://Maxbetqq.net/ Agen Poker IDN terpercaya yang memberikan kemananga besar jackpot besar bersama Situs Poker Idn Play.

Dengan didukung server yang berkulitas dan permainan yang sangat fair 100% Player vs Player dan tidak ada campur tangan ROBOT di dalam Situs Poker Online Terpercaya MaxbetQQ.

Promo HOT Di Poker Online Terpercaya Maxbetqq :
– Bonus Bulanan Megajackpot
– Bonus New Member 20% (Minimal Deposit Rp25.000 | Maksimal Bonus Rp.50.000)
– Bonus Rollingan 0,5%
– Bonus Deposit Rp. 5000 Setiap Hari
– Bonus Refferal 10% Up To 60%

7 Games Dalam 1 User ID :

✔️ Texas Poker
✔️ Domino QQ
✔️ Capsa Susun
✔️ Bandar Ceme
✔️ Ceme Keliling
✔️ Super Ten
✔️ Pot OMAHA

Info Maxbetqq Anda Bisa Langsung Menghubungi Lewat :

Livechat : http://Maxbetqq.net/
Whatsapp : +66613295868
WeChat : MaxbetQQ
Line : MaxbetQQ


QQ NET
QQ.NET
QQ PAGCOR
ONLINE QQ
DAFTAR QQ
QQ ONLEN
POKERQQ
POKERQQIDN
QQ ONLINE
DOMINO QIU
POKER ONLINE
MAXBETQQ.NET
SITUS POKER
AGEN POKERQQ
AGEN DOMINO99
POKER QIU QIU
QIU QIU ONLINE
Idn Poker
Idn Poker Apk
Agen Poker Idn
Idn Poker Play
Poker Idn Play
Situs Judi Poker
Idn Poker Terbaru
Game Poker Online
Situs Judi Poker Terbaik
Situs Poker Idn Play
Agen Poker Idn Terpercaya
Agen Poker Idn Terbaik
Situs Poker Idn Uang Asli
Bandar Poker Idn Indonesia
Situs Judi Poker Terpercaya
AGEN POKER UANG ASLI
AGEN POKER TERPERCAYA

November 1, 2019 at 7:58 AM  
Blogger jasonbob said...

golden goose shoes
kyrie irving shoes
curry 7
stone island
curry 7
curry
kawhi leonard shoes
yeezy
kyrie spongebob
yeezy

September 17, 2021 at 11:54 PM  
Anonymous Levi Hutton said...

Great readding this

December 19, 2021 at 4:05 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home