JJFIVEOH Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 The DNA bit came from the defense and the defense only... And it was a pretty disgusting maneuver to say the least. Possible DNA of other individuals does not make somebody more or less likely to be raped. Unfortunately the public doesn't understand this so the defense was attempting to sway opinions. Whether you like it or not, promiscuity is used as a factor. Especially in a jury trial. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thwomp! Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 There is a lack of credibility of any chart that claims percentages of ANYTHING that is unreported. Surveys can and have been used to compile this data. If anything, that survey data may be on the low end. I'm sure there's many women out there who would not disclose a rape even in a Dept. of Justice survey. Maybe instead of attacking what evidence exists, the more important questions that should be asked are "Why do so many rapes go unreported?" and "Why do so many rapists get away with the crime?". Some of the answers to those questions can be found in this very thread. The simple answer is it's not worth going through hell (again) for a very small chance at conviction in a situation where you're as much or more of a defendant than the potential defendant is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 Whether you like it or not, promiscuity is used as a factor. Especially in a jury trial. A factor for what, exactly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 Surveys can and have been used to compile this data. If anything, that survey data may be on the low end. I'm sure there's many women out there who would not disclose a rape even in a Dept. of Justice survey. Maybe instead of attacking what evidence exists, the more important questions that should be asked are "Why do so many rapes go unreported?" and "Why do so many rapists get away with the crime?". Some of the answers to those questions can be found in this very thread. The simple answer is it's not worth going through hell (again) for a very small chance at conviction in a situation where you're as much or more of a defendant than the potential defendant is. Or maybe he just didn't do anything. But you're unwilling to accept that possibility. The reason there are victim shamers is because we've turned into a society where everybody is a victim. You're going to label her a victim regardless so it really doesn't matter. Sorry, I just can't put much credence behind a study of 'unreporteds'. Especially when it doesn't even apply to this situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thwomp! Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 (edited) Whether you like it or not, promiscuity is used as a factor. Especially in a jury trial. A factor for what, exactly? Oh, and why is female promiscuity so much of a huge factor anyway? I never hear anything about male promiscuity in these cases. Why is promiscuity in men celebrated, while promiscuity in women is shameful and used against them in situations such as this one? Or maybe he just didn't do anything. But you're unwilling to accept that possibility. The reason there are victim shamers is because we've turned into a society where everybody is a victim. You're going to label her a victim regardless so it really doesn't matter. Sorry, I just can't put much credence behind a study of 'unreporteds'. Especially when it doesn't even apply to this situation. I haven't once said that he did anything. I'm saying the statistics show that even if he did do something he is almost certain to get away with it from the point that the assault occurred forward. She still could be a victim, and a lack of charges doesn't prove that she's not. There are many, many victims out there among us who have been raped and who have not gotten justice. I'm also saying that just because charges were dropped does not mean that it's open season on her motives and that she should be punished for making a false accusation. Of course her motives have been questioned from the beginning, and that's a very large part of the overall societal problem that currently exists. Edited November 4, 2015 by EastsideOasis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 Oh, and why is female promiscuity so much of a huge factor anyway? I never hear anything about male promiscuity in these cases. Why is promiscuity in men celebrated, while promiscuity in women is shameful and used against them in situations such as this one? I haven't once said that he did anything. I'm saying the statistics show that even if he did do something he is almost certain to get away with it from the point that the assault occurred forward. She still could be a victim, and a lack of charges doesn't prove that she's not. There are many, many victims out there among us who have been raped and who have not gotten justice. I'm also saying that just because charges were dropped does not mean that it's open season on her motives and that she should be punished for making a false accusation. Of course her motives have been questioned from the beginning, and that's a very large part of the overall societal problem that currently exists. You haven't said he did do anything but you're working overtime coming with every possible spin to make her look innocent without once mentioning that she may possibly have ulterior motives. Stand up for your beliefs, take ownership of what you say. Get off the fence. I don't understand why males and females are viewed differently. Personally, I couldn't care less if you like to sleep around, male or female. But when it comes down to a jury trial promiscuity could be used if there is a case determining whether or not a rape took place over a casual serial encounter. It's really a discussion for another thread. If somebody dies from a drug overdose you can bet they'll put more effort into find somebody to prosecute if the person never used drugs as opposed to a drug addict. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 You haven't said he did do anything but you're working overtime coming with every possible spin to make her look innocent without once mentioning that she may possibly have ulterior motives. Stand up for your beliefs, take ownership of what you say. Get off the fence. I don't understand why males and females are viewed differently. Personally, I couldn't care less if you like to sleep around, male or female. But when it comes down to a jury trial promiscuity could be used if there is a case determining whether or not a rape took place over a casual serial encounter. It's really a discussion for another thread. If somebody dies from a drug overdose you can bet they'll put more effort into find somebody to prosecute if the person never used drugs as opposed to a drug addict. What is the relationship between victim promiscuity and validity of a rape accusation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted November 4, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thwomp! Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 You haven't said he did do anything but you're working overtime coming with every possible spin to make her look innocent without once mentioning that she may possibly have ulterior motives. Stand up for your beliefs, take ownership of what you say. Get off the fence. I don't understand why males and females are viewed differently. Personally, I couldn't care less if you like to sleep around, male or female. But when it comes down to a jury trial promiscuity could be used if there is a case determining whether or not a rape took place over a casual serial encounter. It's really a discussion for another thread. If somebody dies from a drug overdose you can bet they'll put more effort into find somebody to prosecute if the person never used drugs as opposed to a drug addict. Based on the statistics, the fence is exactly where I'm arguing more people should be. Not on one side of it or the other. The bolded is an interesting phrase that I've never heard when referring to a man. If someone has "casual serial encounters" they can't be raped? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 (edited) Whether you like it or not, promiscuity is used as a factor. Especially in a jury trial. This is 100% incorrect. Evidence of the victim's promiscuity is completely inadmissible. There are very narrow exceptions. None would apply here. Edited November 4, 2015 by eleven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 This is 100% incorrect. Evidence of the victim's promiscuity is completely inadmissible. There are very narrow exceptions. None would apply here. Mmmm that's what I thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 Based on the statistics, the fence is exactly where I'm arguing more people should be. Not on one side of it or the other. The bolded is an interesting phrase that I've never heard when referring to a man. If someone has "casual serial encounters" they can't be raped? That was supposed to be 'sexual' Damn autocorrect. And don't put words in my mouth, I never said they couldn't, and it's completely besides the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 This is 100% incorrect. Evidence of the victim's promiscuity is completely inadmissible. There are very narrow exceptions. None would apply here. What are you? Some sort of legal scientist? (Thank you) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thwomp! Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 This is 100% incorrect. Evidence of the victim's promiscuity is completely inadmissible. There are very narrow exceptions. None would apply here. So shouldn't there be repercussions to Cambria for even bringing this up? Or is all fair in love, war, and defending your client? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 I think I might be done with this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 I think I might be done with this thread. You've been done like 6 or 7 times. :P repeat to yourself 10 times, put the finger down, Liger. it's not worth it. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 I think I might be done with this thread. Is there something that was said in which you take offense? This is 100% incorrect. Evidence of the victim's promiscuity is completely inadmissible. There are very narrow exceptions. None would apply here. So when they test for DNA in a rape case, finding the DNA from other men would not be admissible? Any case, not just this one in particular. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 (edited) Edited November 4, 2015 by LGR4GM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 it looks like you are not done. You had at least 2 meaningless posts to contribute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 (edited) I'm no lawiologist, but I'm pretty sure the DNA would be admissible, presented as a defense that it wasn't pat in the room. Then the insinuation of promiscuity is left to the jury (and almost assured). Edited November 4, 2015 by Whiskey Bottle of Emotion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 I'm no lawiologist, but I'm pretty sure the DNA would be admissible, presented as a defense that it wasn't pat in the room. Then the insinuation of promiscuity is left to the jury (and almost assured). I'm also no lawentist, but I would think the only admissable DNA evidence to report when you went looking for a specific individuals DNA is that you found none of theirs. If you found others I don't see that as relevant in cases of alleged one-vs-one rape. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 I guess you are intent to try to annoy me or others by announcing you have nothing to say and then posting 10 hr. clips. I don't get it, but I do think it is intentionally being rude to the community wanting to discuss it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 X, I have too much respect for you. As such, I will stop posting 10 hour random videos in this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted November 4, 2015 Report Share Posted November 4, 2015 I'm also no lawentist, but I would think the only admissable DNA evidence to report when you went looking for a specific individuals DNA is that you found none of theirs. If you found others I don't see that as relevant in cases of alleged one-vs-one rape. I find it difficult to believe that the defense wouldn't be able to present evidence of the possibility that the woman was raped by someone other than the accused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.