Australian court prohibits man accused of rape of introducing evidence that his accuser has made 12 previous false accusations

mikesteane · 2019-12-26T07:32:21+00:00

If these were civil cases, she would have been declared a vexatious litigant a long time ago. But as they are criminal complaints, it seems she can go on indefinitely without change.

1LegendaryWombat · 2019-12-26T09:02:46+00:00

Unfortunately I can't even see the site, all it wants is for me to subscribe to it for actual money.

So, I can only speculate, but that seems relevant. There was that woman in the UK who falsely accused 15 different guys, I don't see how this wouldn't be important to the case. A history of being a proven liar is kind of important, especially if things are ambiguous in either direction.

Boy(or in this case, girl) cried wolf scenario.

Lion_amongst_gods · 2019-12-26T10:14:49+00:00

This is why we need equal punishment for false rape accusations.

MyFatThumb · 2019-12-26T10:31:51+00:00

Pay wall. Anybody got an archived copy? Or a name so I can source this.

Ukman_44 · 2019-12-26T12:58:58+00:00

Rulings like this help nobody but false accusers. Genuine victims are also hurt becasue the end result is that they are less likely to be believed.

omegaphallic · 2019-12-26T14:39:07+00:00

This is the sort of situation that is why the Supreme Court of Canada forced the Canadian government to change it's Rape Shield laws, so situations like this and others wouldn't happen.

Recently the Supreme Court in Canada ruled the Rape Shield laws should also protected the accused, I wonder if such a ruling could happen in Australia over this law.

Castle454 · 2019-12-26T13:00:50+00:00

It disgusts me that this is happening in my country.

Kravego · 2019-12-26T17:06:49+00:00

A couple good things to point out about this shitty situation:

The article didn't identify the defendant. As opposed to the typical crucifixion by the public, the defendant may actually have his life back once this is all over. I'm not sure if that was by policy, law, or luck.
The judge who excluded the evidence only did so because the law required it and he was bound to uphold the law. He called the fact that he had to exclude it an "affront to justice", and has personally called on parliament to amend that specific section of law

These were both really refreshing to see.

VDogMeat · 2019-12-26T15:33:09+00:00

uuummmm. He should have every right in the world to bring that to attention.

oafsalot · 2019-12-26T18:06:34+00:00

Grounds for an immediate appeal, no?

Tmomp · 2019-12-26T14:30:20+00:00

Maybe I'm missing something but the past false accusations don't seem sexual history if they were false. If false accusations are sexual history, then shouldn't a false accusation be considered sexual assault?

I don't know what actually happened, but if she is outright falsely accusing him, and I have no idea if she is, then there was no rape, implying a rape shield law wouldn't apply, depending on its wording. Otherwise anyone could just say, ". . . and I was raped" and keep their past history out.

MRRamming · 2019-12-26T17:32:55+00:00

Do you want violent mobs in the street judge because that's how you get violent mobs

spoderman616 · 2019-12-26T13:46:59+00:00

Thanks for the article. Couldn't read it directly though - had to refer the comment section.

Anyway, it gave me something new: RAPE SHIELD LAW.

That's a whole other load of crap.

LongjumpingChance · 2019-12-26T16:26:48+00:00

how do you get around the paywall?

MeatyDogFruit · 2019-12-26T18:22:30+00:00

How do you all feel about this?

It’s scary ngl

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_shield_law

This is supposedly the law this would be under, but in this case it’s absolutely foolish and stupid.

marks1995 · 2019-12-26T16:01:14+00:00

Not a lawyer, but if the defendant had 12 previous rape accusations against him, would those be admissible?

Mr7FootCock · 2019-12-26T18:46:03+00:00

Fucking atrocious

toseawaybinghamton · 2019-12-26T20:15:39+00:00

What happens if someone in the crowd shouts this information?

Sarm11111 · 2019-12-26T22:30:25+00:00

We did crape like this in Canada, a high profile celebrity in Canada was acquitted of multiple rape, sexual abuse cases. He used past emails, tweets texts to establish consent and the women were caught conspiring together. This led to the Gohmeshi law because how dare he not be found guilty when he was guilty by social Medea. So now the evidence of the like he used must be presented to the judge and persecutor get to judge if it will be allowed. If it is allowed you have just shown your defence strategy to the side that tries to prove your guilt and can now debunk or cast doubt on the defence because they planned for it.

Well that’s now a super deterrent

jagenigma · 2019-12-26T15:27:30+00:00

Throw the accuser into the fires.

AlistairH94 · 2019-12-26T16:40:23+00:00

The boy who cried wolf has a very important message.

If this guy actually raped her, people would just think this is just another false accusation. Trivialising rape is not a good thing.

fool4discgolf · 2019-12-26T19:47:54+00:00

Lol, gonna be honest, this is where you go extra judicial. Kill the woman, kill the judge, kill the offspring.

People need to learn that injustice is dangerous again.

EvilBeano · 2019-12-26T14:12:46+00:00

I guess this is so that women who have previously made false accusations and are actually raped aren't immediately discredited (they should get punishment, but prison, the fact that they have made false accusations doesn't mean they deserve to get raped, it means they deserve to get sent to prison)

I think the best solution would be to still include the false accusations, but not to make those the deciding factor. They should make a decision with the previous false accusations in mind

2019-12-26T20:18:11+00:00

I'm not Australian but that sounds pretty fucked up

jdbsays · 2019-12-26T20:28:46+00:00

Her history cant be brought up just as his previous conviction cant be brought up, its a new trial. You base it on the evidence related to this matter not another matter.

2019-12-26T23:13:44+00:00

Same thing happened with Mike Tyson. His accuser had made a false accusation against a former boyfriend but his lawyer couldn't use it because of Indiana's rape shield law. The prosecutor was able to portray her as naive and innocent when that wasn't the case.

2019-12-27T02:58:16+00:00

Have someone broadcast it on the radio or make it go viral on social media.

Perhaps the case will get thrown out due to the jury "being compromised". Or at the very least, the jury will know about her (and that can't hurt if the case continues)

The_toast_of_Reddit · 2019-12-27T13:05:36+00:00

He should get the names of the jurors & bureaucrats such as the judge and sue them into selling their homes off. Put all of their children into hotel rooms & get social services to take them away.

2020-01-02T14:18:04+00:00

Be careful with women who told you they have been raped previously. My ex-wife told me her bf had raped her. I was shocked and upset. Now, during our divorce process, she's claiming I also raped her! I am absolutely disgusted. Now I need to fight for my freedom.

Commercial_Ganache · 2019-12-26T13:48:55+00:00

I'm not saying it is right, but I can understand the logic behind it. If someone falsely accused 12 people of rape but ended up actually being raped and making a 13th accusation, does the victim not deserve justice because they lied previously? That being said, at 12 false accusations, you would think she would be facing some very serious repercussions, and it doesn't seem like she has.

kamk890 · 2019-12-27T01:42:43+00:00

But remember guys, women can't lie

astoicguy · 2019-12-26T17:32:34+00:00

well... Me: Kill the cunt and shot myself later.

BreakfastForDinnn · 2019-12-26T23:43:13+00:00

Australia has long been the Cuckistan of the world.

timeforknowledge · 2019-12-26T14:27:55+00:00

(in the UK) That's not evidence though. Evidence must relate to this case, anything not related but can influence the jury cannot be allowed. Say for example there is overwhelming evidence that this person is guilty but the jury disregard the evidence because of the actions in the accusers past. That's not justice.

Trials are based on facts and evidence not on what ifs.

Edit: we are all perfect examples of this, we all think she is making it up we think there is no case, yet not one of us has seen the evidence yet we are already passing judgement. This proves my point.

Should there be more legal powers to convict false allegations? Yes.

Title	Australian court prohibits man accused of rape of introducing evidence that his accuser has made 12 previous false accusations
Author	gprime
Upvotes	1773
Comments	127
Date	December 26, 2019 6:49 AM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/efs5ep/australian_court_prohibits_man_accused_of_rape_of/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/australian-court-prohibits-man-accused-of-rape-of.862268 https://theredarchive.com/post/862268

Comments