Post: #26

(10-23-2013 09:28 AM)Mike5055 Wrote:  For anyone with some legal backing/knowledge - would the guy have any civil recourse against the girl? I mean, he probably has zero job prospects. His life is basically ruined.

Yes. If she has any assets worth going after.

Post: #27

I mentioned this in my ROK article on the Duke rape case, but figured I'd mention it again. The Romans had a law called "calumnia" whereby a false accuser would be subjected to the same range of punishment as the crime she/he falsely alleged happened. So, if you falsely accuse someone of rape and the statute for rape says 10 to life, then you get 10 to life for making a willful false accusation.

And to show just how bad things are now, remember that even in the darkest days of the Inquisition in Spain, the inquisitors dealt severely with false accusations of heresy. False accusers would forfeit their own property, which would be confiscated for the crown.

It's open season on men and masculinity, no matter how you slice and dice it. I just got a call from a friend of mine here at my office. Just got off the phone. He told me that a friend of his is going through a nasty divorce and getting destroyed. The bitch is a scumbag meth user and brings guys over their (i.e., his) house to bang.
Apparently there's some law that says if someone thinks someone is going to kill themselves, people will detain you for 24 hours in a hospital for evaluation. Looks like this bitch falsely called some hotline and told them her husband was suicidal. She did this just to fuck with him. So the mental health people haul him out of his house and detain him.

Crazy things are happening out there...people would not believe it.

Post: #28

Go after the prosecutors who refuse to prosecute false accusations or only do token prosecutions like this one.

Publish their names and make sure their dereliction of duty is known by everyone in their district. Most people never here about these things. District attorneys are often elected officials and they care about public opinion.

If there is enough naming and shaming of prosecutors they will be more motivated to prosecute false accusations to the fullest extent of the law.

Post: #29

The only rape going on in this case was after this kid was sent to jail. Get falsely accused of rape and then really get raped behind bars. Of course, nobody gives a shit about men getting raped in jails.

Post: #30

Yes, he could sue her for abuse of process or whatever the appopriate cause of action is in that state.

The problem is that she has no money and he would get nothing out of it since she has admitted it was a lie.

I will say this: if the penalty for confessing had been materially steeper, she would not have come forward and he would still be in jail.

I think women who recant should get light sentences, to encouragr more women to admit to their lies.

The women who really deserve to go to jail for a long time are the ones who keep insistimg they were raped after they were exposed--like the Duke lacrosse accuser.

Post: #31

(10-23-2013 10:30 PM)Glock Wrote:  Yes, he could sue her for abuse of process or whatever the appopriate cause of action is in that state.

The problem is that she has no money and he would get nothing out of it since she has admitted it was a lie.

I will say this: if the penalty for confessing had been materially steeper, she would not have come forward and he would still be in jail.

I think women who recant should get light sentences, to encouragr more women to admit to their lies.

The women who really deserve to go to jail for a long time are the ones who keep insistimg they were raped after they were exposed--like the Duke lacrosse accuser.

I think that confessions should be inadmissible in court. If the state can prove by some other means, besides her own admission, that she gave false testimony, then the state should be able to prosecute her on those grounds. But as you point out, it's important not to create a disincentive for false accusers to recant.

Post: #32

(10-23-2013 10:30 PM)Glock Wrote:  Yes, he could sue her for abuse of process or whatever the appopriate cause of action is in that state.

The problem is that she has no money and he would get nothing out of it since she has admitted it was a lie.

I will say this: if the penalty for confessing had been materially steeper, she would not have come forward and he would still be in jail.

I think women who recant should get light sentences, to encouragr more women to admit to their lies.

The women who really deserve to go to jail for a long time are the ones who keep insistimg they were raped after they were exposed--like the Duke lacrosse accuser.

Well, the problem ist the conviction in the first place without evidence.
This should not be possible.