(08-27-2015 10:28 AM)genieiab Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 09:18 AM)bluebacker Wrote:  Even if this turns out not to be true DRose's reputation will be PERMANANTLY damaged by this allegation.

Not really. Kobe seems to have survived quite nicely.

Kobe's reputation took a huge hit after those allegations came out. He was pretty widely considered to be likable before that happened and he still hasn't really recovered, even if the allegations are generally forgotten at this point.

General note.

If your post was stricken, its almost assuredly not personal or even a straight black and white AUP violation.

The mod team has mixed feelings on how to address this issue. Frankly rape allegations are a little above our pay grade generally and we are still feeling out this explosive issue.

If your post has been pulled, its not that you did anything wrong necessarily, it's just there are competing needs here (pg rating, desire to believe the best of a former tiger, desire to make sure mt.org is a safe place for victims of sexual assault, etc).

We're trying here. If your post was pulled, feel free to pm a mod.

Perhaps a corresponding poly reg thread should be started... It could be moderated lighter I suppose. Just a thought.

Honestly, this just sucks...

(08-26-2015 09:16 PM)NJ1 Wrote:  Good people of mt.org--

We're going to keep it classy here. We're going to understand that the accused are innocent until proven guilty, but we're also not going to engage in victim-blaming, slut-shaming, or anything of the like. I've already had to hide a post or two, so just to be clear, here's what we are NOT going to do--

1) We're not going to reflexively accuse the alleged victim of lying or trying for a "money grab." IF this young lady is actually a victim of what she claims to be a victim of, then she certainly does not deserve that. False accusations of sexual assault are extremely rare, so it's good to keep that in mind.

2) We're not going to turn this into any sort of political debate. There's another section of the forum where that would be appropriate, if you so choose to discuss it in that context.

Be well, and please don't hesitate to report posts that go too far.

Actually they are PRESUMED innocent until proven guilty. Being guilty of something has nothing to do with the court proceedings. If you did something and was able to beat it in court you are still guilty of doing it. You just were not convicted.

(08-27-2015 09:35 AM)NJ1 Wrote:  It's possible it's made-up.

But, again, false allegations of rape are EXTREMELY rare. The main reason is that coming forward about a rape tends to be more damaging to the victim than to the accused.

I don't think they are as "rare" as you keep insisting they are.

"I don't think they are as "rare" as you keep insisting they are."

I think you're right. Most false allegations are not prosecuted. Someone has to think they can win the case before going forward. You really don't have to prove anything in a civil case.

(08-27-2015 06:06 PM)Smith Wrote:  "I don't think they are as "rare" as you keep insisting they are."

I think you're right. Most false allegations are not prosecuted. Someone has to think they can win the case before going forward. You really don't have to prove anything in a civil case.

Instead of beyond a shadow of a doubt you just have to show a preponderance of evidence. I give you OJ Simpson as a prime example.

(08-27-2015 10:16 AM)RCM1029 Wrote:  If it is found in court that Rose (et al) did what Jane Doe is accusing him of doing, then he deserves whatever justice is handed down to him.

If if is found in court that Rose (et al) did NOT do what Jane Doe is accusing him of doing, then Jane Doe's identity should be made public just as Rose's is.

No.

(08-27-2015 12:11 PM)ncrdbl1 Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 09:16 PM)NJ1 Wrote:  Good people of mt.org--

We're going to keep it classy here. We're going to understand that the accused are innocent until proven guilty, but we're also not going to engage in victim-blaming, slut-shaming, or anything of the like. I've already had to hide a post or two, so just to be clear, here's what we are NOT going to do--

1) We're not going to reflexively accuse the alleged victim of lying or trying for a "money grab." IF this young lady is actually a victim of what she claims to be a victim of, then she certainly does not deserve that. False accusations of sexual assault are extremely rare, so it's good to keep that in mind.

2) We're not going to turn this into any sort of political debate. There's another section of the forum where that would be appropriate, if you so choose to discuss it in that context.

Be well, and please don't hesitate to report posts that go too far.

Actually they are PRESUMED innocent until proven guilty. Being guilty of something has nothing to do with the court proceedings. If you did something and was able to beat it in court you are still guilty of doing it. You just were not convicted.

Really? According to whom?

(08-27-2015 06:06 PM)Smith Wrote:  "I don't think they are as "rare" as you keep insisting they are."

I think you're right. Most false allegations are not prosecuted. Someone has to think they can win the case before going forward. You really don't have to prove anything in a civil case.

Come again?

I'm still trying to figure out the new microaggression policy that must have been added to the AUP...

(08-27-2015 08:09 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 10:16 AM)RCM1029 Wrote:  If it is found in court that Rose (et al) did what Jane Doe is accusing him of doing, then he deserves whatever justice is handed down to him.

If if is found in court that Rose (et al) did NOT do what Jane Doe is accusing him of doing, then Jane Doe's identity should be made public just as Rose's is.

No.

I think that people who make false allegations should be punished the same as if they had committed the crime they've tried to pin on someone else.

(08-28-2015 09:05 AM)bluebacker Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 08:09 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 10:16 AM)RCM1029 Wrote:  If it is found in court that Rose (et al) did what Jane Doe is accusing him of doing, then he deserves whatever justice is handed down to him.

If if is found in court that Rose (et al) did NOT do what Jane Doe is accusing him of doing, then Jane Doe's identity should be made public just as Rose's is.

No.

I think that people who make false allegations should be punished the same as if they had committed the crime they've tried to pin on someone else.

Exactly. If there's evidence that proves Rose did not do what she is very publicly accusing him of doing, then her identity should be known publicly, as well.

(08-28-2015 11:41 AM)RCM1029 Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 09:05 AM)bluebacker Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 08:09 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 10:16 AM)RCM1029 Wrote:  If it is found in court that Rose (et al) did what Jane Doe is accusing him of doing, then he deserves whatever justice is handed down to him.

If if is found in court that Rose (et al) did NOT do what Jane Doe is accusing him of doing, then Jane Doe's identity should be made public just as Rose's is.

No.

I think that people who make false allegations should be punished the same as if they had committed the crime they've tried to pin on someone else.

Exactly. If there's evidence that proves Rose did not do what she is very publicly accusing him of doing, then her identity should be known publicly, as well.

Not just have the name released....equivalent jail time IF it's proven to be a totally false allegation.

(08-28-2015 09:05 AM)bluebacker Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 08:09 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 10:16 AM)RCM1029 Wrote:  If it is found in court that Rose (et al) did what Jane Doe is accusing him of doing, then he deserves whatever justice is handed down to him.

If if is found in court that Rose (et al) did NOT do what Jane Doe is accusing him of doing, then Jane Doe's identity should be made public just as Rose's is.

No.

I think that people who make false allegations should be punished the same as if they had committed the crime they've tried to pin on someone else.

Sure, lets give victims more reason not to come forward.

(08-28-2015 01:31 PM)idroot4russia Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 09:05 AM)bluebacker Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 08:09 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 10:16 AM)RCM1029 Wrote:  If it is found in court that Rose (et al) did what Jane Doe is accusing him of doing, then he deserves whatever justice is handed down to him.

If if is found in court that Rose (et al) did NOT do what Jane Doe is accusing him of doing, then Jane Doe's identity should be made public just as Rose's is.

No.

I think that people who make false allegations should be punished the same as if they had committed the crime they've tried to pin on someone else.

Sure, lets give victims more reason not to come forward.

If they are telling the truth they have nothing to worry about.

(08-28-2015 01:31 PM)idroot4russia Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 09:05 AM)bluebacker Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 08:09 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 10:16 AM)RCM1029 Wrote:  If it is found in court that Rose (et al) did what Jane Doe is accusing him of doing, then he deserves whatever justice is handed down to him.

If if is found in court that Rose (et al) did NOT do what Jane Doe is accusing him of doing, then Jane Doe's identity should be made public just as Rose's is.

No.

I think that people who make false allegations should be punished the same as if they had committed the crime they've tried to pin on someone else.

Sure, lets give victims more reason not to come forward.

If the allegations are false, who is the real victim?

(08-28-2015 02:06 PM)RCM1029 Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 01:31 PM)idroot4russia Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 09:05 AM)bluebacker Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 08:09 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 10:16 AM)RCM1029 Wrote:  If it is found in court that Rose (et al) did what Jane Doe is accusing him of doing, then he deserves whatever justice is handed down to him.

If if is found in court that Rose (et al) did NOT do what Jane Doe is accusing him of doing, then Jane Doe's identity should be made public just as Rose's is.

No.

I think that people who make false allegations should be punished the same as if they had committed the crime they've tried to pin on someone else.

Sure, lets give victims more reason not to come forward.

If the allegations are false, who is the real victim?

Yep.

(08-28-2015 02:03 PM)bluebacker Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 01:31 PM)idroot4russia Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 09:05 AM)bluebacker Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 08:09 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 10:16 AM)RCM1029 Wrote:  If it is found in court that Rose (et al) did what Jane Doe is accusing him of doing, then he deserves whatever justice is handed down to him.

If if is found in court that Rose (et al) did NOT do what Jane Doe is accusing him of doing, then Jane Doe's identity should be made public just as Rose's is.

No.

I think that people who make false allegations should be punished the same as if they had committed the crime they've tried to pin on someone else.

Sure, lets give victims more reason not to come forward.

If they are telling the truth they have nothing to worry about.

So you are saying the courts always get it right? Guilty people never get acquitted? If I rape some chic and then get a good lawyer and beat the charge my victim should face jail time?

That is asinine.

(08-28-2015 04:35 PM)idroot4russia Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 02:03 PM)bluebacker Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 01:31 PM)idroot4russia Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 09:05 AM)bluebacker Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 08:09 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  No.

I think that people who make false allegations should be punished the same as if they had committed the crime they've tried to pin on someone else.

Sure, lets give victims more reason not to come forward.

If they are telling the truth they have nothing to worry about.

So you are saying the courts always get it right? Guilty people never get acquitted? If I rape some chic and then get a good lawyer and beat the charge my victim should face jail time?

That is asinine.

I didn't say that the defendant was found 'not guilty'; I said that it's proven that the allegations are totally false. Big difference.

(08-28-2015 05:11 PM)bluebacker Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 04:35 PM)idroot4russia Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 02:03 PM)bluebacker Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 01:31 PM)idroot4russia Wrote:  

(08-28-2015 09:05 AM)bluebacker Wrote:  I think that people who make false allegations should be punished the same as if they had committed the crime they've tried to pin on someone else.

Sure, lets give victims more reason not to come forward.

If they are telling the truth they have nothing to worry about.

So you are saying the courts always get it right? Guilty people never get acquitted? If I rape some chic and then get a good lawyer and beat the charge my victim should face jail time?

That is asinine.

I didn't say that the defendant was found 'not guilty'; I said that it's proven that the allegations are totally false. Big difference.

So what is your standard of proof? Are you going to put all victims on trial to weed out the ones who made false allegations?