Do you think that if someone accuses someone of raping them and it's PROVEN beyond ANY doubt that the person accusing someone of rape is lying, that they should get the same sentence as the person would've if they had been convicted of rape?

Comments

• Thanks but I don't think the political world is ready for me! +3

  • Report
  

  by Self Consuming Cannibal on August 20th, 2009

• LOL!
  .
  Thanks for the points ya gave me.

  • Report
  

  by Anonymous on August 20th, 2009

• You earned them, by sucking up to me! LOL I'm just messing with you. I just thought your answer was intelligent, funny and creative.

  • Report
  

  by Self Consuming Cannibal on August 20th, 2009

• You're right, it was all of that, and more.

  • Report
  

  by Anonymous on August 20th, 2009

• Yes and your last comment shows that you truly are humble by nature as well! LOL :P

  • Report
  

  by Self Consuming Cannibal on August 21st, 2009

• Damn! You have me all figured out!!!

  • Report
  

  by Anonymous on August 21st, 2009

• I'm working on it. I knew that degree in psychology would come in handy some day! LOL

  • Report
  

  by Self Consuming Cannibal on August 21st, 2009

Comments

Comments

• Good point. +3

  • Report
  

  by Self Consuming Cannibal on August 20th, 2009

Comments

• But do you really think your life becoming a legal hell would be as bad as the blow your reputation would suffer, for being thought of being a rapist and spending years in prison (and possibly being raped yourself while in there) for something you didn't do? Good answer anyway. +3

  • Report
  

  by Self Consuming Cannibal on August 20th, 2009

• I didn't see where you said the accused was actually convicted.

  • Report
  

  by Yarnlady is happy every day on August 20th, 2009

• I didn't say the person accused needed to be convicted, but if someone is willing to do that to you, even if it is unsucessful, they should be harshly punished just for trying if they're just making it up.

  • Report
  

  by Self Consuming Cannibal on August 20th, 2009

• what if the liar is broke as hell how can u compensate then?

  • Report
  

  by nikkib48 on July 9th, 2010

Comments

Comments

Comments

• I totally agree. Like I said it should have to be indisputable (sp?) proof that she's lying. +3

  • Report
  

  by Self Consuming Cannibal on August 20th, 2009

Comments

• thanks for your input. +3

  • Report
  

  by Self Consuming Cannibal on August 20th, 2009

Comments

Comments

• someone who makes these accusations should absolutly be dealt with by the law. especially someone who says they were raped several times at the time of accusation then by trial have changed their story several times which were all documented while on stand and at other hearings, and the doctor who examined the person says she was a virgin(mentioned in other words, but basically testified no sign of force etc.)then gets caught lieing several times on stand under oath. Yeah these type of people need to be punsished by exposing them publicaly just like a petafile and have to pay for the accussee court costs including attorney fees.

  • Report
  

  by nikkib48 on July 10th, 2010

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

• I don't but I think if you're willing to ruin someone's life and put them into prison for that long for something they didn't do then I say revenge is not wrong, it's justice.

  • Report
  

  by Self Consuming Cannibal on August 20th, 2009

Comments

• I think what the questioner was asking about are those occasions when a man or woman falsely accuses another of rape.
  
  http://www.newser.com/story/69646/hofstra-student-recants-gang-rape-claim.html
  
  – A reported gang rape at Hofstra University wasn't a rape after all, the local DA says. The accuser "recanted her claims against the five young men," a school official told students in a text message. The four men who had been charged—and publicly identified—were released from jail last night, Newsday reports. The 18-year-old accuser hasn't been identified.
  
  "The alleged victim of the sexual assault admitted that the encounter that took place early Sunday morning was consensual," the DA said. Students say they feel bad for the men, one of whom goes to Hofstra, because their mug shots were posted online and in newspapers. "The young man's life is still going to be ruined," one freshman said. "The girl lied about a serious thing."
  
  Should she walk away after making these public accusations that will in some part stick with these guys forever? Their names after all will be linked with a rape story on the internet forever. Especially when now some people are losing jobs based not just on convictions but on charges and other internet postings true or not? These accusations could ruin many lives. Is that okay?

  • Report
  

  by Wynper on July 9th, 2010

Comments

• What are you talking about?

  • Report
  

  by Self Consuming Cannibal on March 15th, 2011

Comments

• Because if women are scared of being imprisoned for reporting rape, then there's less of a chance they will do it. So therefore it should be harder to prove that they lied as oppossed to whether or not they was raped.

  • Report
  

  by Self Consuming Cannibal on March 15th, 2011

• I disagree. Justice should be fair to all, shouldn't it?

  • Report
  

  by Hardcore Conservative on March 15th, 2011

• Yes it should be fair to all but if women are afraid to report rape then justice will not be served.

  • Report
  

  by Self Consuming Cannibal on March 15th, 2011

• Don't penalize someone else because a woman may or may not be afraid. Because a woman is afraid doesn't mean that the accused is any less entitled the same protection as everyone else.

  • Report
  

  by Hardcore Conservative on March 15th, 2011

• I agree, we all are entitled to the same level of protection, but sometimes our legal system has so many loopholes even the judge can know that someone is innocent or guilty but because of a technicality he has to rule in the opposite direction. Now if a woman WAS raped but because of a technicality the judge even knowing that she was telling the truth had to rule in favor of the rapist, would convince women to just keep it to themselves if they was raped because then she could get charged with falsifying a rape report.
  
  That's the only reason I think that it should take more evidence to rule against someone claiming rape. But that's just my opinion.

  • Report
  

  by Self Consuming Cannibal on March 15th, 2011

• Technicalities sometimes get people off and sometimes get them convicted. And just because someone is found not guilty, doesn't mean they're going to go back and charge the accuser. The legal system doesn't work that way.
  
  Again, you're trying to put the burden on the accused to prove he didn't do it and we don't work that way. Granted, that's what happens anyway because the accused is accused publically while the victim can remain anonymous. Even after it turns out to be bullshit, the accused rapist is still crucified by the media. Duke Lacross is a prime example.

  • Report
  

  by Hardcore Conservative on March 16th, 2011

• Ok. I'll just agree with you because I don't have the time, desire or energy to further discuss this with you. And if you ever actually look at my question and decide to answer it, instead of questioning my logic, then and only then will I give you a thumbs up.

  • Report
  

  by Self Consuming Cannibal on March 16th, 2011

• I read your question and your comments, Cannibal.

  • Report
  

  by Hardcore Conservative on March 16th, 2011

• Well you never answered my question.

  • Report
  

  by Self Consuming Cannibal on March 16th, 2011

• Then you should go back and read my comments. You'll see the answer in there.

  • Report
  

  by Hardcore Conservative on March 16th, 2011

• I don't see your answer in there. All I see is your justification of your POV in your non-answer. You have never stated whether or not you think a person who falsely accuses someone of rape should get the same charge as someone who commits rape and that was my original question. You just keep going on and on about how you think that justice should be fair to all (which it rarely is) and asking me why should it have to be proven beyond ALL doubts for one person, but just proven beyond A REASONABLE doubts for others.

  • Report
  

  by Self Consuming Cannibal on March 16th, 2011

• If I said all of that, then I would think it would be obvious that my answer is no.

  • Report
  

  by Hardcore Conservative on March 17th, 2011

• Well that's what I assumed, but assumptions makes an "ass" out of "u" and "me". You never specifically said yes or no, you just said that everyone should be on an equal playing field when it comes to proving innocence or guilt. That's not the same as saying whether or not you think false rape accusations should carry the same sentence as an actual rape.

  • Report
  

  by Self Consuming Cannibal on March 17th, 2011