Hello all. The overall sentiment in the pill (especially TRP) community is that individuals who make false rape claims should face legal consequences. I agree with this sentiment.

The problem is, that there is another idea that if a woman makes a rape claim, goes to trial. And the man she accused is considered “not guilty”, many people believe that she should be persecuted for even making the claim in the first place. This is where I strongly disagree.

In court, a person is considered innocent until proven guilty. In other legal systems, there are 3 claims: guilty, not guilty, and insufficient evidence. In the USA, we only have guilty and not guilty. Meaning that someone can be “not guilty” but still have done something wrong, simply because it cannot be proven.

For example, a woman gets raped while drunk at a party. He insists that she consented and didn’t act super inebriated. She insists that she was too drunk to consent. In court, with a jury, the jury decides that there isn’t enough evidence that the rape took place, and the guy is classified as “not guilty”.

Does this mean that she wasn’t raped? No. It means we don’t have enough evidence. Punishing her is unnecessary and created a culture of fear amongst women who may have been raped in ambiguous situations.

Now let’s say the woman in the case wrote a text message to her friend that she is angry at this guy and wants revenge on him so she will make a rape claim. That is documented legal proof and should be persecuted. Or imagine he gets charged and her conscious bothers her so much that she confesses a false rape claim. Again, that should be charged.

But if a woman makes a rape claim, and the court doesn’t have enough evidence, and the man is voted not guilty, the woman who makes the claim should not be persecuted simply for making a claim. And everyone should legally assume the accused man is innocent until proven guilty.