http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2014/09/false_rape_accusations_why_must_be_pretend_they_never_happen.html

I was watching the other discussion post friday night by Bloo Collar and I didn't see anything go left in the discussion to warrant a locking. I mean no one suggested it being as big an issue in our society as rape itself, just that it is an issue worth discussing but for whatever valid and non-valid cultural reasons we can not. I think locking the discussion kind of proves the point.

I am far from a Men's Right Advocate but growing up a black man in the South and the father of sons it's an issue I am acutely sensitive too that I think is worth discussing. My pops almost had a heart attack once when he saw me riding alone with a white girl in my car. Shiiit to this day when I see Michael Strahan and Kelly Ripa walking together I instinctively want to pull him to the side and say "you better be careful with that girl".

I know I am not the only one with these instincts/training. Who else identified with the Patrice O'Neal when he said “I’m afraid if I toss a can of soda over my shoulder, it will fly over a bush and land on some dead white woman’s head, with my fingerprints on the can. Now I’m the Pepsi Cola Rapist—'"?


And it seems kind of crazy to much that as much as we discuss here how the criminal justice system systematically targets black men and villainizes us and folks can speak passionately about that issue in general and talk about the injustice that happened to Henry Lee McCollum for example, and yet, there is a blind spot to this particular issue that makes people say things like well if you are worried about false accusations of rape you should not "put yourself in a position where you'd be vulnerable"!!


I think thoughtful intelligent people can responsibly discuss the topic.


Perhaps Mods should lay ground rules regarding what would get the discussion locked.

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/blackpeopleonlocalnews

locked either.

He didn't say anything foul, even if people thought his position was opportunistic.

Def should be more leash let out for open thoughtful discussion tho.

#IBTL

Nigga I'm FAST....*pyoon*
ARE YOU TRYING TO RACE?!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-Hiper18Yc

not about the actual post

Folx hate on him for women themed post but I agree with his child abuse logic for the most part.

Gotta allow folx to have a dialogue, and then you can't just censor them if you don't agree.

Nigga I'm FAST....*pyoon*
ARE YOU TRYING TO RACE?!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-Hiper18Yc

My familiarity with the topic definitely comes from having at least 3 instances of people close to me accused of rape/sexual assault, in which later the woman recanted and/or had their story underminded by the facts.

That's a lot of people to know in that situation. And yet, I am still aware that the larger issue is actually rape.


It's just strange to me that folks feel like the topic is undiscussable less they think people will feel they are betraying actual rape victims.
**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/blackpeopleonlocalnews

but I have sons

the way these laws are being written and the hysteria surrounding the issue should worry any young man

“So back we go to these questions — friendship, character… ethics.”

These people represent the tiniest fraction of rape accusers, welfare recipients and HIV infected gays, but the people who hate women/the poor/gays love talking about them.

--------------

@frawgystyle
IG = @frawgychurl

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history/2013/12/linda_taylor_welfare_queen_ronald_reagan_made_her_a_notorious_american_villain.html

Very much worth the read and discussing.


I dont know anything about bug chasers/gift givers if the name is what it implies, yeah that's a topic I would read about and wouldn't have an issue discussing.

See that's what grown-up thoughtful mature people are capable of doing, reading about and discussing hard nuance topics without giving in to hyperbole and betraying their allegiance to what ever cause they believe in.




**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/blackpeopleonlocalnews

>See that's what grown-up thoughtful mature people are capable
>of doing, reading about and discussing hard nuance topics
>without giving in to hyperbole and betraying their allegiance
>to what ever cause they believe in.

now you KNOW not every player is ok.

here for dis.

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/blackpeopleonlocalnews

.

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

Waldorf and Statler Vol 4:CONAN IS OUT NOW!!!: http://waldorfandstatler.bandcamp.com

and don't forget to check "DVS 4 ALDERMAN"

http://windimoto.bandcamp.com/album/dvs-4-alderman-bandcamp-exclusive-expanded-editio

_______________________________________

I mean how often are black men sentenced to death for crimes they didn't commit?

How often are unarmed innocent black men killed by the police?

Can you cite exact numbers?


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/blackpeopleonlocalnews

It's absurd to imply that an issue is not worth discussing, because it’s not the majority issue in its category. A false rape accusation is a significant issue, whether or not the number of women who are raped is significantly greater than the number of men who are falsely accused.

There’s actually significant conversation to be had on the subject.

As far as the welfare queen comment, depending on your definition of “welfare queen”, there’s a lot more of those than most OKP’s would like to admit. There’s a ton of fraud that goes on and not all of it is able to be confirmed. A lot of shit slides for various reasons. If your definition is that of *thee* welfare queen so described by Regan, than yeah. There aren’t many of those.

-Sig-

“Why didn’t you do this in your own god damn country?"

-All Stah's view on undocumented immigrants wanting to be treated like human beings.

It's one thing if someone is simply trying to divert attention from one subject to another to avoid the original topic. You can call out that cowardly bit tactical of tactical maneuvering for what it is all day.

You shot down a topic on its own merits for not being prevalent enough in relation to a corresponding issue. Black on black crime may be a wild goose chase the Hannitys of the world bring up when tasked with explaining away the murderous actions of racist cops, but that doesn't invalidate the issue.

-Sig-

“Why didn’t you do this in your own god damn country?"

-All Stah's view on undocumented immigrants wanting to be treated like human beings.

Some of the new college guidelines for rape
They talked about it on npr

They should just call the police and let them deal with it
And allow both parties to get a lawyer

On a journey for enlightenment.

>Some of the new college guidelines for rape
>They talked about it on npr
>
>They should just call the police and let them deal with it
>And allow both parties to get a lawyer
>
>
>
>


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/blackpeopleonlocalnews

Or dealt with one
I dunno

On a journey for enlightenment.

I feel like rape is the only violent crime where the victim is almost always asked to prove it happened. If I call the cops and tell them someone pulled a gun on me, while there may not be enough evidence for a conviction, people won't assume I made it up.

I just meant that it should be handled by the police. People whose job it is to take care of it, Rotherham the school.

And if I ever get accused of shit I'm not doing anything without a lawyer.

On a journey for enlightenment.

>I feel like rape is the only violent crime where the victim
>is almost always asked to prove it happened.


Should an accusation alone be enough to prove guilt? If you presume that everything the accuser says is the truth what happens to the presumption of innocence?

The fact is rape is unlike most other crimes because it often comes down to the word of the accuser versus the word of the accused (talking about date rape, not stranger jumping out the bushes rape) AND it is very fact intensive. That is, if you are dealing with she said versus he said you have to drill down on facts and asks a lot of probing detailed embarrassing questions that a rape victim shouldn't have to deal with. But what's the alternative?


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/blackpeopleonlocalnews

>
>Should an accusation alone be enough to prove guilt?

no.


If you
>presume that everything the accuser says is the truth what
>happens to the presumption of innocence?
>

it destroys it. which is why courts don't do that.


>The fact is rape is unlike most other crimes because it often
>comes down to the word of the accuser versus the word of the
>accused (talking about date rape, not stranger jumping out the
>bushes rape) AND it is very fact intensive. That is, if you
>are dealing with she said versus he said you have to drill
>down on facts and asks a lot of probing detailed embarrassing
>questions that a rape victim shouldn't have to deal with.


yeah.
and in some cases, alleged victims have to answer questions like that.
a judge decides whether the question is relevant to a particular case.

courts do their best to balance out the risk of embarrassing the fuck out of alleged victims
for no good reason and protecting the rights of the accused.


But
>what's the alternative?
>



now what i DO think is a problem...
and this is a general problem, not just a rape problem--
although sex offenses are more damaging--
is the fact that we stigmatize ppl accused of crimes in our society
before facts come out.

we shouldn't do that, but we do it anyway.
it's a problem.

>now what i DO think is a problem...
>and this is a general problem, not just a rape problem--
>although sex offenses are more damaging--
>is the fact that we stigmatize ppl accused of crimes in our
>society
>before facts come out.
>
>we shouldn't do that, but we do it anyway.
>it's a problem.

but now I feel a little more comfortable doing so after reading this

yes.

I think (a good bit of) the "the victim is lying" talk is borne of the way that people are stigmatized for merely being accused. and when that crime is something as shameful as rape... yeah.

edit: now the LAW sees it differently than this, I'm speaking more of the court of public opinion.

it's one of the many fucked up things about this particular violent crime. (the other, of course, is really an unwillingness on the part of many to accept the actual existence of rapists among us)

that's a question that is on many job applications.
and it's like, an arrest doesn't even mean you've done anything wrong, necessarily.

but the the stigma is still there.


i'll take it a step further.
we-- as a society-- need to make up our minds what the fuck we want to
do with convicted sex offenders.

either we should lock them up and throw away the key forever,
or we need to let them do their time and then reintegrate with society.
yes, that means they should be able to live in regular ppl's neighborhoods.
yes, they should be able to work jobs. certainly not EVERY job.
but jobs, nevertheless.

either leave them in jail forever
or let them have a life when they get out.

but we need to make up our minds.

Yeah I agree on the sex offender thing. Either lock them up forever or deal with them but the current way we do it probably only makes things worst.


>that's a question that is on many job applications.
>and it's like, an arrest doesn't even mean you've done
>anything wrong, necessarily.
>
>but the the stigma is still there.
>
>
>i'll take it a step further.
>we-- as a society-- need to make up our minds what the fuck we
>want to
>do with convicted sex offenders.
>
>either we should lock them up and throw away the key forever,
>
>or we need to let them do their time and then reintegrate with
>society.
>yes, that means they should be able to live in regular ppl's
>neighborhoods.
>yes, they should be able to work jobs. certainly not EVERY
>job.
>but jobs, nevertheless.
>
>either leave them in jail forever
>or let them have a life when they get out.
>
>but we need to make up our minds.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/blackpeopleonlocalnews

>Yeah I agree on the sex offender thing. Either lock them up
>forever or deal with them but the current way we do it
>probably only makes things worst.

... especially when a sex offender was convicted on a charge that wasn't rape or involved a child.

In some states you get a sex offender charge for getting caught pissing behind a dumpster. Almost every chick I know has changed clothes in her car, but that could get you an indecent exposure charge, which also means sex offender status. Nearly everyone I know has fucked in a car late at night, but that's an indecent exposure and a gross indecency charge which also includes sex offender status.

And before somebody goes ona rant about it, I know several people that were hit with sex offender status for these very reasons. A cat near Irvine, CA that got hit for pissing behind a dumpster while he was in LA. One chick I know got it for changing her clothes in her car (including her bra and panties). Cops were called and the person that saw her took video of it happening with her phone.

In cases like these, the person that was required to register pretty much had their life fall apart. Any time someone finds out, the immediate reaction is that the person is a child molester. In the case of the chick, she attempted to kill herself after not being able to find a job, find a place to live cause her city's laws prevented sex offenders to live close to a school or park and they were everywhere, and for having the stigma of being a rapist associated with her name when she has never so much as looked at a kid the wrong way. Dude tries to make jokes about it, but I know he went through some similar shit. The only reason he has a job now is 'cause he owns a consulting company and doesn't list his name anywhere on the company website. He stopped doing the work himself and hired people so he wouldn't run the risk of his clients finding out. He has no social media accounts of any type and the woman he was just kickin it with when it happened is now his wife 'cause every other chick he encountered bailed on his ass whenever he brought it up except her.

There's thousands of people whos lives have been destroyed because of some shit they did that had nothing to do with rape or kids thanks to this registry shit.


(edit)

My memory was just jarred... Wasn't there an OKP facing registry a few years back for a mishap with his zipper at work? Whatever happened with that?


---------------------------

forcing myself to actually respond to you is like bathing in ebola virus. - Binlahab

Like there is stupid, and then there is you, and then there is dead. - VAsBestBBW

R.I.P. Disco D

an accused person is presumed innocent at every stage of the criminal justice system. which means the burden is on prosecutors to prove guilt. rape complainants call police who investigate and create a case to bring to prosecutors. the police ARE trying to prove that the rape happened. the proof almost always involves cooperation from the rape complainant. which can make it seem like the complainant is made to prove the rape. in actuality only the police have to prove it to prosecutors and then the prosecutors have to prove it to a fact-finder (judge or jury). why? b/c the accused rapist is presumed innocent.

as for other crimes the process is the same. if i call police and complain that you battered me, the police will try to prove that to prosecutors. to do so they're gonna interview me. during the interview they will seek to discover facts that prove you battered me. they will ask me to prove to them that you battered me. if they're satisfied w/the proof they will take it to a prosecutor. who may take those facts to trial before a judge or jury. same process if i accuse you of stealing from me. or of acquiring my lawful service w/o payment. or of driving while you're impaired by alcohol intoxication. it goes on and on.

fuck you.

I'm not saying that accused rapists should not be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. I get that. If I report my ipod stolen, the legal system will probably accept on face, my claim that it was stolen, but may not have the evidince to charge anyone. When a woman reports a rape, they first attempt to prove that she was in fact raped before they prove they investigate the accused.

I will concede that I could be wrong about this. All I'm saying, is that with most reported crimes, the police will investigate based on the word of the accuser instead of making them prove they were victims of a crime.

>I'm not saying that accused rapists should not be presumed
>innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. I get that. If
>I report my ipod stolen, the legal system will probably accept
>on face, my claim that it was stolen, but may not have the
>evidince to charge anyone.

this varies so wildly by circumstance, accuser, accused, police department and prosecutor. some police may not believe your claim right off the bat depending on the circumstance. some may believe you right from the top.

let's say i look like a middle-aged, homeless man who doesn't own much of anything except whatever is in the backpack i carry w/me everywhere. i go to the police and claim that my iPod was stolen. i wanna file a complaint and i want an investigation done. the police will probably allow me to file that complaint. and i doubt they'd believe i ever owned an iPod so they will ask me to produce a receipt. if i can't i don't expect there will be any investigation into my complaint depending on why i can't produce the receipt.

now let's say i look like a middle-aged successful man who owns lots of shit everywhere. i go to the police and claim my iPod was stolen and want to file a complaint to start an investigation. the police will allow me to file it, will likely believe i owned an iPod and will ask me to produce a receipt or some other proof that i owned an iPod. if i can't produce the receipt or some other proof i don't expect the investigation will get very far.

the police will ask for proof of ownership in part b/c they know the prosecutors will need it in order to get a conviction. ownership of the stolen item by the complainant is one of the elements the prosecutors will have to prove at trial. and prosecutors won't even take the case and file a criminal charge if they can't prove that element. so police won't waste time working the case if they don't have the proof.

fuck you.

> All I'm saying, is that with most reported crimes, the police will
>investigate based on the word of the accuser instead of making
>them prove they were victims of a crime.


What's the real difference between these two things? Any such investigation would have to include grilling that victim regarding what happened.

Now, if they didn't bother doing a physical examination or interview the guy, yeah that's problematic.



Or let's think about an example. A woman walks into campus police or a police station and says that she was raped. They interview her and in the course of the interview they learn that the accused is an acquaintance with whom she had frequently had sex with. She isn't battered in anyway. And she had been drinking a lot that night so her memory is very fuzzy on events (though she didn't pass out). They interview the accused and he was drinking too and he says the sex was consensual. There are no other witnesses.

What exactly can the police or a prosecutor do with that?

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/blackpeopleonlocalnews

>Or let's think about an example. A woman walks into campus
>police or a police station and says that she was raped. They
>interview her and in the course of the interview they learn
>that the accused is an acquaintance with whom she had
>frequently had sex with. She isn't battered in anyway. And
>she had been drinking a lot that night so her memory is very
>fuzzy on events (though she didn't pass out). They interview
>the accused and he was drinking too and he says the sex was
>consensual. There are no other witnesses.
>
>What exactly can the police or a prosecutor do with that?

1. submit the accuser to a hospital or clinic for a rape kit exam to discover any physical evidence on her body.

2. locate the clothing the accuser wore at the time of the alleged rape to discover any physical evidence on her clothes.

3. go to the scene and look for surveillance cameras. if cameras are found, immediately contact the bldg owner and get the camera footage from the day/time of the alleged rape.

4. canvass the area where the accuser claims the rape happened attempting to locate witnesses. the accuser thinks there are no witnesses but there could be - maybe she missed something that a trained investigator will notice.

5. research the accused's background to create a profile. include info from his/her criminal history and school records.

...and that's just off the top of my head.

fuck you.

>>Or let's think about an example. A woman walks into campus
>>police or a police station and says that she was raped.
>They
>>interview her and in the course of the interview they learn
>>that the accused is an acquaintance with whom she had
>>frequently had sex with. She isn't battered in anyway. And
>>she had been drinking a lot that night so her memory is very
>>fuzzy on events (though she didn't pass out). They
>interview
>>the accused and he was drinking too and he says the sex was
>>consensual. There are no other witnesses.
>>
>>What exactly can the police or a prosecutor do with that?
>
>1. submit the accuser to a hospital or clinic for a rape kit
>exam to discover any physical evidence on her body.

Let's say his semen is present but he doesn't deny having sex with her. Says it was consensual. No evidence of trauma.


>
>2. locate the clothing the accuser wore at the time of the
>alleged rape to discover any physical evidence on her
>clothes.

Same answer as above.

>
>3. go to the scene and look for surveillance cameras. if
>cameras are found, immediately contact the bldg owner and get
>the camera footage from the day/time of the alleged rape.

I provided in the hypo no witnesses, it happened in either his or her bed room.

>4. canvass the area where the accuser claims the rape happened
>attempting to locate witnesses. the accuser thinks there are
>no witnesses but there could be - maybe she missed something
>that a trained investigator will notice.

again in his or her bedroom. Let's say no witnesses even saw there state immediately after.

>
>5. research the accused's background to create a profile.
>include info from his/her criminal history and school records.


Let's say no history.

What do you do then?




**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/blackpeopleonlocalnews

>Let's say his semen is present but he doesn't deny having sex
>with her. Says it was consensual. No evidence of trauma.

his semen is present and he admitted having sex w/her. those facts and the accuser's complaint is enough to give the police probable cause to arrest him. the police would have facts that give them reason to believe a crime has occurred and that the accused is the person who committed the crime. so i expect he'd be arrested. he may be released from the scene and given a ticket w/a court appearance date but that's unlikely. more likely he'll be held until a judge can determine if he'll need to post a cash bond to secure his release as he awaits trial.

>I provided in the hypo no witnesses, it happened in either his
>or her bed room.

still, the police would likely go collect the camera footage b/c they'll want to take a look at how the 2 related as they walked into her dorm bldg and walked through the lobby to the elevator. and then what happened in the elevator. and then as they got off the elevator.

>>4. canvass the area where the accuser claims the rape
>happened
>>attempting to locate witnesses. the accuser thinks there
>are
>>no witnesses but there could be - maybe she missed something
>>that a trained investigator will notice.
>
>again in his or her bedroom. Let's say no witnesses even saw
>there state immediately after.

the police don't know that until they investigate. so they will go out and canvass and if they can't find witnesses then they will tell the prosecutor there are no witnesses. and the prosecutor will send their own investigators out to find witnesses and if THEY can't find any then there are none. but the police and prosecutors will not just take the complainants word that there are no witnesses.

>Let's say no history.
>
>What do you do then?

that goes in the profile the police will create.

fuck you.

Which is basically believing what she said in a he said/ she said.



**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/blackpeopleonlocalnews

but here i understand the arrest and i do see the police have probable cause in his hypo.

fuck you.

/she said with no further evidence.



**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/blackpeopleonlocalnews

there's his semen and his admission.

if home girl claimed he'd raped her and a rape kit exam was performed w/in a time where his semen would be present and no semen was found during the exam and the accused denied having any contact w/the accuser and there is actually no other evidence then i don't see probable cause for an arrest.

fuck you.

consensual.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/blackpeopleonlocalnews

that's what i meant by 'admission'.

his admission that he put his penis in her vagina and ejaculated leaving his semen is what i referred to. that plus the semen evidence plus her statement amounts to probable cause for his arrest.

fuck you.

the guy doesn't dispute that they had sex.

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/blackpeopleonlocalnews

Then they have less evidence and less basis for arrest.

He should stfu. Innocent ppl should especially stfu to police.

fuck you.

when their is physical evidence of their intercourse as oppose to say it was consensual sex, especially when you believe that to be true?
**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/blackpeopleonlocalnews

maybe the rape kit exam result evidence was mishandled either during its collection or analysis. maybe that evidence (the semen) will not come into his trial, if he has one. w/o it there's much less proof that he even had physical contact w/the accuser. oh...but if he admits he had some kind of sex w/her...

my eye is on trial, not on the police station. i'm not worried about ppl avoiding arrest. i'm much more concerned w/them being found not guilty at trial. remaining silent can sometimes mean being arrested - in the short time it might hurt. in the long term it's almost always better. it's why if i'm ever stopped while driving and the cop tells me s/he suspects i'm under the influence of __, i'm not participating in any field sobriety tests or submitting breath, blood or urine for chemical testing. i know this means i'm likely to be arrested. i also know that by the time the cop asks me if i've been drinking s/he already has enough facts to amount to probable cause for arrest and that i'm likely to be arrested on suspicion of DUI no matter how i perform on those field tests. i know that back at the station even if i blow under the legal limit i may still be charged and can even be convicted of DUI. i know that by refusing chemical tests i will lose my driving privilege for at least a year and maybe longer. but i also know that w/o that evidence it's unlikely the prosecutors can prove beyond reasonable doubt that i was driving while impaired by alcohol intoxication. and in the longer run i'd rather avoid a DUI conviction and all of those extreme consequences than try to wiggle my way out of an arrest.

i see this the same way. if i'm accused of rape and i know we had consensual sex i'm not saying shit to the police about the case until after i've consulted w/my lawyer. and most likely my lawyer is going to advise me to chill out and make 'em prove it w/o my cooperation. and i wouldn't admit to shit. even if it means i get arrested - fuck it. let 'em prove it.

fuck you.