How big are we gonna let this snowball get as it rolls down the hill?

[Coyote]

Sexual harassment charges are running wild & seemingly out of control.
Either all these people are sexual predators or we have some liars in the mix.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say Congress needs to address this if possible. There needs to be some kind of built in protections for the innocent who are wrongly accused. A statute of limitations on allegations that lead to criminal or civil charges perhaps?

I mean what's to stop me from looking up old college classmates who've become wealthy and throwing out bullshit accusations in the hopes of a payday?
I' pretty sure that the pursuit of happiness does not include the right to be wrongfully accused of a crime.

We are crossing into territory from which their is likely no return. Do we just sit by and watch this happen or say enough, if you were raped/assaulted FUCKING REPORT IT WHEN IT HAPPENED not 10 15 20 or even 30 years later...

Are we so desperate to destroy our political adversaries that we consider ruining their lives and the lives of their families as a fair trade in our efforts to defeat them?

This shit has to stop, it's eating our nation from within.

Report it immediately.
Provide evidence.
Provide witnesses.
He said, she said is simply not gonna cut it anymore in my book.


And to be clear this thread is not a result of any particular person or accusation. It's just my observation of what looks like a semi rolling down the highway without a driver.

I kind of wonder about this...I think you have a point...are false charges abounding?

On the other hand...in the 1970's...most rapes and harrassment did not get reported. Women's reputations would be trashed in court...or, the man was powerful enough that they didn't dare report it. Let me point out Weinstein as an example there.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Like innocent until proven guilty?

That doesn't protect their job or their families or their stature in the public. All of that is destroyed immediately when these types of things are brought up regardless of their validity.

Slander is illegal. So is filing a false police report.

What protections do you suggest? If someone makes an accusation, either she's right or she's lying. Either one can be actionable, but how does the government know who is right?

Filing a false police report is a misdemeanor. How is that punishment for the character assassination they produce against the accused?

Such as we see from you on just about a daily basis?

The only "assassination" comes from the people who shun/fire/vilify the accused. So, I guess you could do your part and stand up for the poor accused. People do, you know. And sometimes they are right.

Gonna stand up for Weinstein?

 

[xotoxi]

I'd like to see a law that if you accuse and your accusations are proven false you go to the slammer.

Britain does it.

UK rape hoaxer gets 10 years in prison

A British woman dubbed an "attention-seeking" liar for falsely accusing 15 men of rape and sexual assault during four separate encounters was sentenced Thursday to 10 years in prison.

Jemma Beale, 25, was found guilty at London's Southwark Crown Court in July on four counts of perjury and four counts of perverting the course of justice, The Sun reported. Judge Nicholas Loraine-Smith called Beale a "convincing liar" who liked being pitied as the victim.

"This trial has revealed, what was then not obvious, that you are a very, very convincing liar and you enjoy being seen as a victim," Loraine-Smith said in court. "The prosecution described your life as a 'construct of bogus victimhood.'"

More at link:

UK rape hoaxer gets 10 years in prison

Anybody can tell by looking at her she's lying.

If unrapeable was a word...

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Sexual harassment charges are running wild & seemingly out of control.
Either all these people are sexual predators or we have some liars in the mix.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say Congress needs to address this if possible. There needs to be some kind of built in protections for the innocent who are wrongly accused. A statute of limitations on allegations that lead to criminal or civil charges perhaps?

I mean what's to stop me from looking up old college classmates who've become wealthy and throwing out bullshit accusations in the hopes of a payday?
I' pretty sure that the pursuit of happiness does not include the right to be wrongfully accused of a crime.

We are crossing into territory from which their is likely no return. Do we just sit by and watch this happen or say enough, if you were raped/assaulted FUCKING REPORT IT WHEN IT HAPPENED not 10 15 20 or even 30 years later...

Are we so desperate to destroy our political adversaries that we consider ruining their lives and the lives of their families as a fair trade in our efforts to defeat them?

This shit has to stop, it's eating our nation from within.

Report it immediately.
Provide evidence.
Provide witnesses.
He said, she said is simply not gonna cut it anymore in my book.


And to be clear this thread is not a result of any particular person or accusation. It's just my observation of what looks like a semi rolling down the highway without a driver.

Some fair points, and I can't help but share your concerns, but there's a glaring hole in your idea. Mainly, how does a woman prove such a thing? The fact that it is very hard to do so is a big part of why you don't always hear about these things in the first place. Also, people are ashamed by this, even though they are the victims. That, and the fact that every time someone does come out and say it, someone is right there to call him/her a liar and shame him/her.

frankly, I think we're probably only hearing about a tiny, tiny fraction of the things that have happened to people all over the country. As in, we ain't seen nothin' yet.

You prove it with a rape kit.

You couldn't be more wrong, as not all sexual assault or harassment is rape. So tell us how little Johnny is going to use a rape kit to prove Spacey touched his peepee?

See something, say something. Tell your family. Tell your friends. Tell the authorities at the time. The emphasis has to be on punishing this behavior as well as protecting the innocent.

True story. Our tax collector of 25 years got caught at age 50 got caught messing with a 17 year old boy IN OUR COUNTY. He was married with two children. A big deal in the community as well as a person who had it made. Before it even came to trial, he committed suicide. The point is, sometimes just exposure to the sunlight causes justice to happen.

"See something, say something. Tell your family. Tell your friends. Tell the authorities at the time."

And what difference would that make? You would have exactly as much evidence (none), right? And this campaign to expose this behavior is hoping to accomplish Eexactly what you are saying: that people will do what you said, without fear.

The guy who "got caught"... How did he get caught?

 

[Shrimpbox]

Guys the end justifies the means. The Alabama election is one month away. The republican majority in the senate is a fragile 2 votes. You can sue em for slander, yeah right. Go ahead who cares. The ballots cannot be changed. This is hard ball politics that republicans cannot stand up to. It doesn’t matter if the charges are true or not, the democrats have accomplished exactly what they wanted to do. There’s beginning to be a sense that there is nowhere for a patriotic American to turn to in the American political spectrum.

It dies matter 100% if the charges are true.

What I am saying cc is that the effect over the short term is the same whether the charges are true or not. A typical democratic template.

 

[Billy000]

Sexual harassment charges are running wild & seemingly out of control.
Either all these people are sexual predators or we have some liars in the mix.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say Congress needs to address this if possible. There needs to be some kind of built in protections for the innocent who are wrongly accused. A statute of limitations on allegations that lead to criminal or civil charges perhaps?

I mean what's to stop me from looking up old college classmates who've become wealthy and throwing out bullshit accusations in the hopes of a payday?
I' pretty sure that the pursuit of happiness does not include the right to be wrongfully accused of a crime.

We are crossing into territory from which their is likely no return. Do we just sit by and watch this happen or say enough, if you were raped/assaulted FUCKING REPORT IT WHEN IT HAPPENED not 10 15 20 or even 30 years later...

Are we so desperate to destroy our political adversaries that we consider ruining their lives and the lives of their families as a fair trade in our efforts to defeat them?

This shit has to stop, it's eating our nation from within.

Report it immediately.
Provide evidence.
Provide witnesses.
He said, she said is simply not gonna cut it anymore in my book.


And to be clear this thread is not a result of any particular person or accusation. It's just my observation of what looks like a semi rolling down the highway without a driver.

What I find pathetic about this thread is that you are profoundly ignorant of the psychology that victims of sexual assault go through. The reason why victims wait years or decades to report sexual assault is because their experience brings a lot of shame and embarrassment. They don’t like acknowledging it to themselves let alone admitting it to someone.

All of this is pretty easy to believe if you tried a little cognitive empathy, Gramps. Imagine that a male who is stronger than you overpowered and raped you. Would you want your friends to know you were put into submission by another guy? How about your family? Would you tell them? You would also struggle admitting it to law enforcement more than likely.

Now are some of the allegations fake? Sure, it’s entirely possible, but don’t dismiss them just because the crime passes the statute of limitations. It really doesn’t make any sense for someone to fabricate a rape story by including that it happened decades ago. If they want the charges to stick, why wouldn’t they just say it happened last month?

 

[S.J.]

Yeah, by me.

You are saying we should do something that we already do?

Go back and read the thread again. You obviously missed a bunch of posts.

okay.... but I still thik it's fair to point out that the laws you are suggesting already exist. Of course, one would have to prove the accusations false.

The verdict does that. And the victim should not be shouldered with the financial burden of bringing charges against the one who falsely accused them. Timmy doesn't see it that way.

The verdict does not do that, You should stop talking about our legal system immediately, and not start talking about it again until you have done a lot of reading about it.

Seriously, I mean that. What you just stated as true (but thankfully which is utterly false) would be a sick perversion of our legal system.

Bullshit. If you're accused of a crime and found not guilty, the "not guilty" verdict vindicates you. You stated that the accused has to prove the accusations false. Why should one have to provide further proof when the verdict already did that? This is your last chance.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You are saying we should do something that we already do?

Go back and read the thread again. You obviously missed a bunch of posts.

okay.... but I still thik it's fair to point out that the laws you are suggesting already exist. Of course, one would have to prove the accusations false.

The verdict does that. And the victim should not be shouldered with the financial burden of bringing charges against the one who falsely accused them. Timmy doesn't see it that way.

The verdict does not do that, You should stop talking about our legal system immediately, and not start talking about it again until you have done a lot of reading about it.

Seriously, I mean that. What you just stated as true (but thankfully which is utterly false) would be a sick perversion of our legal system.

Bullshit. If you're accused of a crime and found not guilty, the "not guilty" verdict vindicates you. You stated that the accused has to prove the accusations false. Why should one have to provide further proof when the verdict already did that? This is your last chance.

The "not guilty" verdict removes all liability for the crime. It does not, then, either accuse, imply, state, or impune in any way the accuser as a liar.


I am not saying that the accused has to prove the accusation false, in order to be acquitted. I say that it would have to be proven that false accusations were knowingly made, in order to hold the accused liable for them.

 

[S.J.]

Go back and read the thread again. You obviously missed a bunch of posts.

okay.... but I still thik it's fair to point out that the laws you are suggesting already exist. Of course, one would have to prove the accusations false.

The verdict does that. And the victim should not be shouldered with the financial burden of bringing charges against the one who falsely accused them. Timmy doesn't see it that way.

The verdict does not do that, You should stop talking about our legal system immediately, and not start talking about it again until you have done a lot of reading about it.

Seriously, I mean that. What you just stated as true (but thankfully which is utterly false) would be a sick perversion of our legal system.

Bullshit. If you're accused of a crime and found not guilty, the "not guilty" verdict vindicates you. You stated that the accused has to prove the accusations false. Why should one have to provide further proof when the verdict already did that? This is your last chance.

The "not guilty" verdict removes all liability for the crime. It does not, then, either accuse, imply, state, or impune in any way the accuser as a liar.


I am not saying that the accused has to prove the accusation false, in order to be acquitted. I say that it would have to be proven that false accusations were knowingly made, in order to hold the accused liable for them.

And how do you make a false allegation without knowing it?

 

[bgrouse]

Have them take a lie detector test if you are considering jail time. If someone lies that's the worst thing to ever be accused of and they should go to jail. But equally if true and someone smears the victim they too should go to jail on the rape / molestation plus whatever this new charge would be.

Get Steve Wilkos to do it. If not we can' discuss feelings because that's "my guy".

I'm never heard of a true "lie detector." Just machines that read vitals and a guy who takes a guess as to what those vitals mean.

Then test it out (like they do anyway) and run tests. If not or if anyone objects when another party agrees that' an easy open and shut.

Test what out? "Lie detectors" have been tested, but were never proven to work. How does agreeing to take a bogus "test" prove or disprove someone as a liar?

Have them take a lie detector test if you are considering jail time. If someone lies that's the worst thing to ever be accused of and they should go to jail. But equally if true and someone smears the victim they too should go to jail on the rape / molestation plus whatever this new charge would be.

Get Steve Wilkos to do it. If not we can' discuss feelings because that's "my guy".

I'm never heard of a true "lie detector." Just machines that read vitals and a guy who takes a guess as to what those vitals mean.

Then test it out (like they do anyway) and run tests. If not or if anyone objects when another party agrees that' an easy open and shut.

Not really, because any smart person, innocent or not, knows not to take a lie detector test. They are totally bogus.

Regardless, when someone declines that automatically shows who's guilty with human behavior. That is the only way to find out allegations and if someone wants to accuse OR clear their name that' the fastest way possible.

Or you can just allow the most powerful with the biggest Microphone to drown out the small like Weinstein did.

Who's FOR that tho?

Passing or failing a bogus test means nothing. Refusing a bogus test proves nothing.

Like innocent until proven guilty?

That doesn't protect their job or their families or their stature in the public. All of that is destroyed immediately when these types of things are brought up regardless of their validity.

Slander is illegal. So is filing a false police report.

What protections do you suggest? If someone makes an accusation, either she's right or she's lying. Either one can be actionable, but how does the government know who is right?

Filing a false police report is a misdemeanor. How is that punishment for the character assassination they produce against the accused?

Some states charge them as felonies and even misdemeanors can result in jail time.

How is that punishment? Gee, I dunno...

 

[bgrouse]

okay.... but I still thik it's fair to point out that the laws you are suggesting already exist. Of course, one would have to prove the accusations false.

The verdict does that. And the victim should not be shouldered with the financial burden of bringing charges against the one who falsely accused them. Timmy doesn't see it that way.

The verdict does not do that, You should stop talking about our legal system immediately, and not start talking about it again until you have done a lot of reading about it.

Seriously, I mean that. What you just stated as true (but thankfully which is utterly false) would be a sick perversion of our legal system.

Bullshit. If you're accused of a crime and found not guilty, the "not guilty" verdict vindicates you. You stated that the accused has to prove the accusations false. Why should one have to provide further proof when the verdict already did that? This is your last chance.

The "not guilty" verdict removes all liability for the crime. It does not, then, either accuse, imply, state, or impune in any way the accuser as a liar.


I am not saying that the accused has to prove the accusation false, in order to be acquitted. I say that it would have to be proven that false accusations were knowingly made, in order to hold the accused liable for them.

And how do you make a false allegation without knowing it?

Mistaken identity for example.

 

[Siete]

some woman goes to the media with a story - chances are pretty solid her story gets a thorough investigation before the press makes it public just to keep them from getting their ass sued off for slander etc. Its called investigative reporting btw.

I doubt Congress can do a damn thing about 32 year old Republians trying to pork 14 year old girls.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Have them take a lie detector test if you are considering jail time. If someone lies that's the worst thing to ever be accused of and they should go to jail. But equally if true and someone smears the victim they too should go to jail on the rape / molestation plus whatever this new charge would be.

Get Steve Wilkos to do it. If not we can' discuss feelings because that's "my guy".

I'm never heard of a true "lie detector." Just machines that read vitals and a guy who takes a guess as to what those vitals mean.

Then test it out (like they do anyway) and run tests. If not or if anyone objects when another party agrees that' an easy open and shut.

Test what out? "Lie detectors" have been tested, but were never proven to work. How does agreeing to take a bogus "test" prove or disprove someone as a liar?

Have them take a lie detector test if you are considering jail time. If someone lies that's the worst thing to ever be accused of and they should go to jail. But equally if true and someone smears the victim they too should go to jail on the rape / molestation plus whatever this new charge would be.

Get Steve Wilkos to do it. If not we can' discuss feelings because that's "my guy".

I'm never heard of a true "lie detector." Just machines that read vitals and a guy who takes a guess as to what those vitals mean.

Then test it out (like they do anyway) and run tests. If not or if anyone objects when another party agrees that' an easy open and shut.

Not really, because any smart person, innocent or not, knows not to take a lie detector test. They are totally bogus.

Regardless, when someone declines that automatically shows who's guilty with human behavior. That is the only way to find out allegations and if someone wants to accuse OR clear their name that' the fastest way possible.

Or you can just allow the most powerful with the biggest Microphone to drown out the small like Weinstein did.

Who's FOR that tho?

Passing or failing a bogus test means nothing. Refusing a bogus test proves nothing.

Like innocent until proven guilty?

That doesn't protect their job or their families or their stature in the public. All of that is destroyed immediately when these types of things are brought up regardless of their validity.

Slander is illegal. So is filing a false police report.

What protections do you suggest? If someone makes an accusation, either she's right or she's lying. Either one can be actionable, but how does the government know who is right?

Filing a false police report is a misdemeanor. How is that punishment for the character assassination they produce against the accused?

Some states charge them as felonies and even misdemeanors can result in jail time.

How is that punishment? Gee, I dunno...

Compared to having your reputation ruined for the rest of your life, it is small potatoes!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

okay.... but I still thik it's fair to point out that the laws you are suggesting already exist. Of course, one would have to prove the accusations false.

The verdict does that. And the victim should not be shouldered with the financial burden of bringing charges against the one who falsely accused them. Timmy doesn't see it that way.

The verdict does not do that, You should stop talking about our legal system immediately, and not start talking about it again until you have done a lot of reading about it.

Seriously, I mean that. What you just stated as true (but thankfully which is utterly false) would be a sick perversion of our legal system.

Bullshit. If you're accused of a crime and found not guilty, the "not guilty" verdict vindicates you. You stated that the accused has to prove the accusations false. Why should one have to provide further proof when the verdict already did that? This is your last chance.

The "not guilty" verdict removes all liability for the crime. It does not, then, either accuse, imply, state, or impune in any way the accuser as a liar.


I am not saying that the accused has to prove the accusation false, in order to be acquitted. I say that it would have to be proven that false accusations were knowingly made, in order to hold the accused liable for them.

And how do you make a false allegation without knowing it?

Dumb question. Acquittal does not mean the accusation is false. Aaaaaand we're back to square one.

 

[JustAnotherNut]

this is part of the 'me too' movement, but has been changed from the original intent that was started by a sexual assault survivor as a way to show empathy & connect with other survivors thru the healing process......... and now it is bringing out anyone that has experienced any type of inappropriate sexual contact in their lifetime. AKA an accuser's cry and probably politically motivated in some way.
So far, many of those accused (Weinstein, Hoffman, Spacey, and others) have all admitted & apologized. They will only do jail time if their actions were within the statute of limitations for sexual misconduct/harassment/assault.

But I agree that with the more credible accusations that come out on a daily basis, when & where will come those false accusations? How many lives will be ruined over a 'pat on the popo' that happened so many years before and hadn't been bad enough to come forward previously. And I'm not talking about rape here at all. Any man (or person) that has to force himself on another for sexual gratification is lower than filth and should suffer. Same goes for threatening retaliation, whether outwardly or insinuating.

Ultimately I think it'll all run its course before it fizzles out. Namely because there aren't that many women that haven't had some type of sexual innuendo or misconduct toward them and we tend to have a good cry & hug each other in support.

 

[S.J.]

The verdict does that. And the victim should not be shouldered with the financial burden of bringing charges against the one who falsely accused them. Timmy doesn't see it that way.

The verdict does not do that, You should stop talking about our legal system immediately, and not start talking about it again until you have done a lot of reading about it.

Seriously, I mean that. What you just stated as true (but thankfully which is utterly false) would be a sick perversion of our legal system.

Bullshit. If you're accused of a crime and found not guilty, the "not guilty" verdict vindicates you. You stated that the accused has to prove the accusations false. Why should one have to provide further proof when the verdict already did that? This is your last chance.

The "not guilty" verdict removes all liability for the crime. It does not, then, either accuse, imply, state, or impune in any way the accuser as a liar.


I am not saying that the accused has to prove the accusation false, in order to be acquitted. I say that it would have to be proven that false accusations were knowingly made, in order to hold the accused liable for them.

And how do you make a false allegation without knowing it?

Dumb question. Acquittal does not mean the accusation is false. Aaaaaand we're back to square one.

The OP was obviously commenting on the recent tsunami of sexual assault allegations against famous people. The women who accused Trump, for example. How do you mistake Donald Trump for someone else? Those women had no proof, no evidence, no witnesses (except the one on the plane, and he said she was lying). Or the one who claimed he groped her at the Ray Charles concert (that was CANCELLED). Caught red handed but nothing happened to her for making up the story. That's what I'm talking about and you know it, but since you're losing the argument, your only option is to muddy the waters so everyone loses interest in your defense of false accusers.

 

[Mac1958]

It's just my observation of what looks like a semi rolling down the highway without a driver.

Yeah, this is just ugly on multiple fronts, a no-win situation. New names and accusations coming out literally every day.

Plus the political angle. Holy shit, what's next? Anything is possible.

No doubt many of the accusations are true, but since no one can even agree on what a fucking FACT is any more, I think we're just gonna find out how ugly we really are.
.

 

[ClosedCaption]

All they have to do is a lie detector test anyone who avoids a lie detector test is obviously the person who's lying. Now is a lie detector test a hundred percent? No but it is more reliable than the gut feelings that were using right now.

It' always suspicious when people seek to dismiss any and all means of getting to the truth. Watch Steve Wilcos. The person who takes extra steps to avoid or demean the methods always look guilty.

 

[peach174]

It's just my observation of what looks like a semi rolling down the highway without a driver.

Yeah, this is just ugly on multiple fronts, a no-win situation. New names and accusations coming out literally every day.

Plus the political angle. Holy shit, what's next? Anything is possible.

No doubt many of the accusations are true, but since no one can even agree on what a fucking FACT is any more, I think we're just gonna find out how ugly we really are.
.

It worked out well for the Dems on getting rid of Herman Cain ,so they are doing the same thing again to knock his numbers down.
Does anyone know what happened to all the women who made the claims against Cain?
Did any go to court and if so what was the outcome?

 

[jon_berzerk]

Flood the news with sexual allegations until no one cares any more ... abracadabra! Sexual assault is acceptable.

and that is how they do it