The preponderance of evidence standard is also survivor-centered.
Exactly the problem. The evidence standard should be centered neither on accuser or on the accused. It should be objective and unbiased.
When judging whether someone has been raped, it’s almost impossible to assert that a sex act constituted violence “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
So deceitful.
The prevailing standard on college campuses prior to 2011 was neither the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard, nor the "preponderance of evidence standard." It was the "clear and convincing evidence" standard.
Which is the appropriate standard to employ.
After one hearing about campus rape policies, Candice Jackson, the top civil rights official in the Department of Education, said, “The accusations — 90 percent of them — fall into the category of ‘we were both drunk, we broke up, and six months later I found myself under a Title IX investigation because she just decided that our last sleeping together was not quite right.’ ” Ms. Jackson has since called these remarks “flippant,” but they reveal a gross misunderstanding of sexual assault.
No, there is no misunderstanding. If two people are both drunk and they both choose to interact sexually while drunk, either both are guilty of sexual misconduct, or neither. How they "feel" about it afterwards is irrelevant.
Ms. Jackson essentially intimated that she believes either that alcohol-facilitated sexual assault and intimate partner violence are not real or that, at the very least, they are not harmful enough to merit disciplinary action.
Begging the question. Again, two people are both drunk and they both choose to interact sexually while drunk, either both are guilty of sexual misconduct, or neither. So take your pick: kick them both out of school, or neither.
Are we to believe that police are diligent about fully investigating and labeling reports as false, when police and prosecutors routinely refuse to charge false accusers with crimes related to false reporting?
Of course not. Police have no interest in identifying false accusers and bringing them to justice.
And of course we have 44.9% of cases where the police appear to be unable to determine whether or not a crime occurred. Keep in mind the saying, that "a grand jury could indict a ham sandwich." What percent of those were false? Probably a substantial proportion.
Then 13.9% contained insufficient information to be coded... why? Because an investigator felt uncomfortable writing outright that a woman may have lied?
And of the 35.3% who were referred for prosecution, we still have to keep in mind Brian Banks and the untold number of innocents who were not only falsely prosecuted, but falsely convicted. Most are only exonerated if there is exonerating DNA evidence available, but, as I've said before, it takes a special type of person to accuse someone of rape when you know the DNA in your vagina belongs to someone else. Men who are falsely imprisoned in cases where sex did occur, but the sex was nor rape -- those guys will likely be exonerated, ever.
[–]HeForeverBleeds 17 points18 points19 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]blackxxwolf3 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]aussietoads 18 points19 points20 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Sarin_G_Series 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]chickadeehill 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]feedmecarrots 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]MagicTampon1 points [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
Exactly the problem. The evidence standard should be centered neither on accuser or on the accused. It should be objective and unbiased.
So deceitful.
The prevailing standard on college campuses prior to 2011 was neither the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard, nor the "preponderance of evidence standard." It was the "clear and convincing evidence" standard.
Which is the appropriate standard to employ.
No, there is no misunderstanding. If two people are both drunk and they both choose to interact sexually while drunk, either both are guilty of sexual misconduct, or neither. How they "feel" about it afterwards is irrelevant.
Begging the question. Again, two people are both drunk and they both choose to interact sexually while drunk, either both are guilty of sexual misconduct, or neither. So take your pick: kick them both out of school, or neither.
[–]crimsonkodiak 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+]MagicTampon1 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
Are we to believe that police are diligent about fully investigating and labeling reports as false, when police and prosecutors routinely refuse to charge false accusers with crimes related to false reporting?
Of course not. Police have no interest in identifying false accusers and bringing them to justice.
And of course we have 44.9% of cases where the police appear to be unable to determine whether or not a crime occurred. Keep in mind the saying, that "a grand jury could indict a ham sandwich." What percent of those were false? Probably a substantial proportion.
Then 13.9% contained insufficient information to be coded... why? Because an investigator felt uncomfortable writing outright that a woman may have lied?
And of the 35.3% who were referred for prosecution, we still have to keep in mind Brian Banks and the untold number of innocents who were not only falsely prosecuted, but falsely convicted. Most are only exonerated if there is exonerating DNA evidence available, but, as I've said before, it takes a special type of person to accuse someone of rape when you know the DNA in your vagina belongs to someone else. Men who are falsely imprisoned in cases where sex did occur, but the sex was nor rape -- those guys will likely be exonerated, ever.
[–]crimsonkodiak 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]jeff_the_nurse 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kyle_Fischer 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]letsgetfunkymonkey 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]EricAllonde[S] 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kyle_Fischer 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]mechesh 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Dembara 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TigPlaze 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]thwml 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Rethgil 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link