Wonder why rape victims don't come forward?

So infuriating.

Its obviously a lot more complicated then that. Most rape cases aren't similar to this at all.

Victim blaming.

seems like a good time to overhaul our criminal justice procedures and redistribute old wealth because it is clearly in the hands of overwhelmingly stupid people.

Maybe not 100%? Lolwut

pretty much done with humanity

next to impossible not to just give up on the human race

To be clear i dont actually think theres anywhere close to anything other 100% about his guilt, i was agreeing about the general perception of the witness.

Of course Yak actually believes it lol

What?

You're cute and all but I don't think you have any idea what I think about this case which is telling. FTR, I think he is 100% guilty. While I don't know the US system very well, I could see how in court with all the restrictions the jurors have, someone could find reasonable doubt. You'd have to be a psychopath totally void of empathy and without a speck of knowledge about what humans think to not see how that could be the case.

Do you mean that you think he did the crime he's accused of, or other crimes he wasn't caught for due to statute of limitations? Maybe I'm in the minority, but I wouldn't want to see someone convicted of a crime where there's reasonable doubt because he did other crimes. That might seem like justice, but it's not.

What's your theory?

it's not "his" theory, it's well known that rape and sexual assault victims are hesitant to come forward because 1) the rapist usually is somebody they know/see/interact with regularly, 2) every aspect of their life will be scrutinized and put on public display by the defense (and maybe even law enforcement) for the purposes of shaming and discrediting the victim, and 3) feelings of guilt/remorse related to not having done or been able to do more to prevent it. also litigation is expensive. and now in 2017 in trump's new america, if he and republicans can overhaul the healthcare system the way they want, women will be charged higher premiums on the basis that being a rape or sexual assault victim is a pre-existing health condition. not only personal disincentives to report, but financial ones as well.

not sure what kind of point you're trying to make here with this "your theory" bull****, but it's not a good look

just want it on the record that i agree with this^^, and it's obviously the fundamental basis for why defense attorneys attack an accuser's credibility so ruthlessly. the extent to which misogyny is entrenched in modern culture contributes to making this an extremely effective tactic.

It would seem practically impossible to convict someone of rape if there isn't material found that links the defendant to the crime, eyewitnesses or some type of a confession. And even if some of these may be available it can still be terribly hard to convict someone. Its a complex problem which is almost impossible to solve, at least when taking the legal/courtrooms POV. When taking the social/societal POV its still extremely hard to solve but at least some form of a solution seems to be present.

and eye witness testimony is notoriously inaccurate. cant remember which program it was on npr that had a long story about a women who was raped on the beach by a random. she said that she decided to put all of her focus on memorizing his features so that she could identify later. she was 100% certain they had the guy. well, like 15 years later, DNA proved her wrong.

Even DNA evidence won't lock someone up 100% for obvious reasons so Im not saying eye witness would but you sure have a better chance to convict someone when you have an eyewitness vs when you have nothing.

Ok, sorry, I agree completely. Your original post made it sound a little differently.

Thanks, sorry about that semi passive aggressive post, I let myself go a bit.

8 years ago or so, I let my guard down and served on a jury. I thought it would be interesting and I could fulfill my civic duty. But it really wasn't. It was only a 1 day trial and most of that time was a waste. A man was charged with burglary of a business and possession of stolen property. Without getting into a ton of detail, we found him not guilty of the burglary and guilty on the possession charge. The state basically just wanted us to assume that since he was in possession of the property, he must have committed the burglary.

Had I known what his sentence was going to be, I may have acted differently. I found out a month or so later he was sentenced to 25 years to life due to his prior theft convictions. I thought that was pretty damn harsh for a thief.

The moral of the story, just throw the damn notices away.

FYI this is very bad advice in many parts of the US.

Probably should rename thread:

Is Bill Cosby a Scumbag

You'd just have to rearrange the words.

You realize that ignoring a jury notice can get a bench warrant put out for you right?

How often it happens, I am not willing to find out.

I don't think you understand what "old money/wealth" means.

LOL maybe not go on the interwebs as much and turn off any other screen pumping humanity's hor**** into your dome. You only have youself to blame, that and your lil interwebs addiction.

I wasn't asking about general theories regarding rape victims and reporting. Riverman said what he said in the specific context of the Bill Cosby trial regarding Andrea Constand. Unless I'm reading his post incorrectly, he insinuated that there was something in this case that leads him to believe that rape victims should feel vindicated in not reporting crimes against them due to the declaration of a mistrial. I was asking him what makes him think that in regard to this case.

As for "litigation is expensive," I think you're either confusing civil suits with criminal suits or you're somehow assuming that no one would take a credible lawsuit against the opposite of an empty bag on a contingency fee. Am I misunderstanding you?

I googled the issue of rape/sexual assault as a preexisting condition and... yikes.

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-s...on-not-exactly

That's baffling. In DC, we have a victim's compensation fund that pays for any expenses that arise from being a victim of a crime, so hopefully that would be taken out of the equation here. Hopefully other states have something similar.

http://www.dccourts.gov/internet/sup.../compcosts.jsf

i dont think "vindicated" is the word you're looking for

i'm not confused at all, prosecutors may be hesitant to bring anything to criminal trial and you're probably not going to find the best legal team to represent you in civil court on contingency, unless you have the prospect of being paid out buku damages (and they're going to take at least half of any judgment granted, sometimes after years of dragging on). not entirely sure what you mean by "opposite of an empty bag", but not every accused rapist is insanely wealthy like bill cosby is

the more you know