quote:"And I’m not really interested in looking out for the accused here"
You really didn't need to tell me that, I think I've figured that out by myself.
You’ve conveniently ignored the fact that I listed good and valuable reasons why IT’s BETTER FOR THE ACCUSED if no one approaches him on an amateur basis.
quote:"The legal system is not always compatible with our inherent sense of fairness
No? What about our inherent since of justice? I beg to differ. Principles of democracy hold that the "inherent sense" of the people is in fact what should determine the legal system, through and through. For legal reference see The United States Constitution
You’ve also left off the rest of the paragraph that explains, in detail, how our traditional and instinctive sense that we should give someone a chance to explain their side of the story is not necessarily the best way to proceed when the criminal justice system is involved. The protections for criminals are active when the criminal investigation and adjudication processes are invoked. He is better protected by having the police involved than by having someone else conduct the investigation.
As to your constitutional argument, it’s frankly ludicrous. The inherent sense of the people is specifically overridden by most of the provisions aimed at protecting criminal defendants. That’s why the congressional law overturning Miranda (the expression of the inherent sense of the people) was itself overturned by the Supreme Court. The protections in the Constitution are there precisely so they can’t be overturned by the will of the people, unless that will is expressed in a very cumbersome and difficult amendment process.
As for the inherent sense of justice, that is only helped by having someone with the proper training confront the accused. Justice does not involve private citizens performing their own investigation into alleged crimes committed against third parties.
quote:"No. Anthro is not equipped to provide an accurate version of reality."
Ungulate excrement. Anthro has a brain.
But as far as I know, she is not psychic. She WASN’T THERE. Probably neither person present can provide a totally accurate version of the events. More than common sense or a brain is needed in this situation – particular training is as well.
quote:"She is not a trained counselor or investigator, nor was she there when it happened."
Don't even think about getting me to start starting. Anyway I did not mean to imply Anthro should neccessarily act herself, a trusted representative who knows the subject would work as well, or maybe even, as Reiko suggested, a school couselor- anybody capable of gleaning information whose doesn't have the specific job of finding incriminating evidence.
I don’t even know what the first sentence means. As for the rest of your suggestion, if you do that you’ve almost certainly doomed any chance of criminal prosecution that may exist. Apparently, the suggestion that Anthro provide continued support to her friend, provide guidance on how to obtain expert assistance, and leave difficult jobs to those people with the expertise isn’t good enough for you.
quote: Dagonee, no more arguments. Keep on as you have and you will cause me to say something I may regret. Protcol is never a substitute for common sense. I respect you and your views(and I'm not just saying that, I otherwise would have chewed you out long ago), they simply do not apply to the general case, and even less to this specific one, as nearly as I can tell.
“No more arguments”? You get to spew potentially dangerous and certainly counter-productive advice and I have to remain silent about it?
What the hell does “Protocol is never a substitute for common sense” mean. My suggestion not to confront the accuser was made because someone suggested Anthro get his side of the story. I suggested she not do so and gave reasons. Common sense dictates that the more difficult a situation is, the more it should be left up to experts. How many situations, besides being the rape victim, are more difficult than being told by one friend that another friend raped her?
In the general case, my advice (and most of the advice given in this thread) is dead on. In this specific case, there are no details to distinguish it from the general case. You yourself said we were lacking enough information to know how to deal with this problem. (“In my opinion you have not said enough the incident for people to be making the judgements that they are.”)
So why is advice to get experts involved who will elicit the necessary information bad? If we lack information to make judgments, why are you advocating Anthro take action?
posted
Sometime's Dags posts really bug me. Sometimes I love them and sometimes I really look forward to them. Like this one.
Dags, are you secretly my hero?
And, if I were to make a CoH character named Dagonee, what super powers would he have? Would he blast people with his fiery passion and logic? Control people's minds with his careful rhetoric? Hit people with the giant axe that he somehow stores in his undershirt?
Posts: 3243 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Antrhro, I'm glad to hear you have been helping this young girl. I hope to hear un update when you get back.
Posts: 2711 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The police helped me. I was honest with them, and said I didn't remember the whole night well, and at first they were very skeptical, but the physical evidence cleared me.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions, suntranfs, and Anthro has neither the obligation to pursue the truth by himself, or the training to do it properly. Not only could it be dangerous, but he could cause more harm than good, both to his friend who feels victimized and to the case of the accused by altering his reactions once the police question him.
quote: I think it would be safer for the parents, or better yet the cops, to ask the questions. We're talking about a guy who allegedly raped a 14 year old. If he'd do that, it's entirely possible he could hurt Anthro for getting involved.
Cops on the other hand carry mace, small clubs, and guns. If the guy freaks out over the questions, the cops are trained to protect themselves and the community at large.
Anthro, the only thing I would ask of you is this. When you talk to your friend again, remind her that if she says nothing, she is leaving every other girl this boy knows in danger of him doing the same thing to them. Even if she doesn't want to speak out for herself, she may want to speak out to stop him from hurting anyone else this way.
okay...especially in reference to the second paragraph, the one about how it would be better that the police interrogate him as they carry arms...there are more ways to freak out than violently, for all we know he could have a nervous breakdown and be destroyed worse than any damage that has been inflicted on this girl...personally I would think it would be much easier and less intimidating for them to speak to a counsellor first, and then, if she decides to press charges then all the power to her...but if she decides not to in the end, there is a chance that the damage will already have been done on both ends...
I am not saying that he is innocent of all wrong doing, only that there is a chance that he will never do it again... also I am not saying that she should do nothing
if what I have said sounds offensive or I am wrong, please accept my appologies...
Posts: 1158 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: Sometime's Dags posts really bug me. Sometimes I love them and sometimes I really look forward to them. Like this one.
Did this one do all three at once?
quote:Dags, are you secretly my hero?
Well, not any more, blabbermouth.
quote: Antrhro, I'm glad to hear you have been helping this young girl. I hope to hear un update when you get back.
Yes, let’s not lose site of this. Anthro, you’re doing a good thing. You’ve made an immeasurable difference in this girl’s life, no matter how it turns out.
quote:The police helped me. I was honest with them, and said I didn't remember the whole night well, and at first they were very skeptical, but the physical evidence cleared me.
This is the flip side – lots of people are cleared by the police every day.
quote: okay...especially in reference to the second paragraph, the one about how it would be better that the police interrogate him as they carry arms...there are more ways to freak out than violently, for all we know he could have a nervous breakdown and be destroyed worse than any damage that has been inflicted on this girl...
Barring police brutality, this is an extremely unlikely scenario. I don’t think the physical danger is the key issue here, although it can’t be ignored. Anthro could pretty easily set up a situation where the physical danger is small.
The issues are giving the accused a chance to prepare his version of the story and the fact that it is hard to testify about a conversation with someone. Police are much better at this than most, even counselors. As I said before, they’re often able to get a good read from the moment of first accusation. Finally, the accused does not want to give multiple statements about this, especially if he is innocent. Innocent people often behave and speak in ways that make the average person (read, juror) think they are guilty. For one, they’re less likely to have prepared a story, and so more likely to have minor inconsistencies that look devastating on the stand.
However, having ANY trained person do the confrontation is far better than Anthro doing it. This decision shouldn’t be Anthro’s at all – it should be the victim’s, based on advice from the rape crisis counselor.
quote:I am not saying that he is innocent of all wrong doing, only that there is a chance that he will never do it again...
Once is enough. I’m sure you didn’t mean to imply otherwise. And any harm caused by a police investigation is negligible compared to the harm suffered by the victim.
posted
Yeah, Reiko, better apologize, you sure do have to be careful about offering a dissenting opinion around here. Even if you are dead on right, as I have more faith in your views on this than my own, and might as well have been plagarising, you can still get slammed with rhetorical crap all day long.
quote: “No more arguments”? You get to spew potentially dangerous and certainly counter-productive advice and I have to remain silent about it?
If that's the way you want to take it, go ahead, but last time I checked I didn't have the power to force you to remain silent. Wow, Dag, I knew you were strong in your convictions, but I didn't know you thought you were God. As far as every last thing I have said on this thread goes, well intentioned generally cautious and polite though it was, it is apparently in fact I, not you, that has no right to say what I believe to be true if it happens to be in disagreement with what you have said. Since you are God, and therefore You are definitely totally right and I am definitely totally wrong and am somehow on the side of someone who is very likely a rapist, and totally ignoring the real issue of helping a hurt little girl, or so say your accusations, then I guess I really don't have a right to talk. I just kinda figured that since the responsibility was in the hands of the thread originator, that I would give my advice along with others directly to her and that she could pick and choose as she saw fit. I didn't count on the fact that you would seek an argument with me when I actively tried to discourage it, but I guess if you're sure you're absolutely and totally right and someone else is absolutely and totally wrong about a subject of great import, then the only option is to just drive him and his argument into the ground,-so what if you have to accuse him of taking a position he's not and then, when he tries to respond without getting offended because he thinks he should try to be extra respectful and cautious on this subject, you accuse him again of the same things, and so you trash him publicly because he does not wish to deny directly what you are saying on his own behalf- oh well, I suppose it's fair enough, you get your completely correct point accross unchallenged, and evidently that's the important part, that it's unchallenged? I mean for somebody to challenge your views, they would have to be really really really bad. Still I wonder, if God's on an internet forum, offering advice, is it really neccessary for him to quash any other opinions than his, why not just let them be heard without being run into the ground so that everybody can see how much better God's opinions are, hey isn't that what free will is all about? Let's see I didn't say much... just that the kid is top priority and that the truth is neccessary to help the kid, and then, oh oh, this one must have been a pretty serious insult to God, I implied that the person writing for advice should have just a little confidence in herself(God evidently requires faith, not confidence), and then oh oh oh oh the clincher, I implied that maybe nobody posting, including God, was really able to judge the particular situation well enough to say most of what they were saying. That latter bit was surely the final straw, I mean even God can't deal with the suggestion that he might not be God! Not even posted yet and as I predicted, I almost regret it already, but I'm posting it anyway because I'm sick of having the sh*t heaped on me because my ideas on this matter are not perhaps as articulate as they should be, but I did my best and I tried to keep brief and to the point, it's 3:30 in the morning here and I'm going to bed.
Posts: 1103 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:If that's the way you want to take it, go ahead, but last time I checked I didn't have the power to force you to remain silent.
You’re the one who ordered me not to respond in a way that contradicted you, not me.
quote:Wow, Dag, I knew you were strong in your convictions, but I didn't know you thought you were God.
So offering opinions and providing arguments as to why a particular piece of advice is bad is the equivalent of playing God. I guess most of the participants in the political threads are God, then.
quote:As far as every last thing I have said on this thread goes, well intentioned generally cautious and polite though it was, it is apparently in fact I, not you, that has no right to say what I believe to be true if it happens to be in disagreement with what you have said.
I have not once attempted to keep you from posting or to silence you. I have offered information and reasons for someone to reject the advice you offered. In doing so, I responded directly to the points raised in support of that advice, something you still have not had the courtesy to do.
quote:Since you are God, and therefore You are definitely totally right and I am definitely totally wrong and am somehow on the side of someone who is very likely a rapist, and totally ignoring the real issue of helping a hurt little girl, or so say your accusations, then I guess I really don't have a right to talk.
Again, who has said you don’t have the right to talk? Who has said you were on the side of a likely rapist? Not me. I have said simply that confronting the accused rapist is a mistake, and provided reasons why it is in the interest of all concerned parties, victim, rapist, and friend, that Anthro not do so.
quote:I just kinda figured that since the responsibility was in the hands of the thread originator, that I would give my advice along with others directly to her and that she could pick and choose as she saw fit.
Same here. My advice happens to contradict yours. Instead of just flatly contradicting your advice, I provided reasons.
quote:I didn't count on the fact that you would seek an argument with me when I actively tried to discourage it, but I guess if you're sure you're absolutely and totally right and someone else is absolutely and totally wrong about a subject of great import, then the only option is to just drive him and his argument into the ground,
I responded to your arguments. You have yet to do so to mine.
quote:-so what if you have to accuse him of taking a position he's not and then,
I’ve accused you of nothing. I have said your advice is incorrect and provided reasons why.
quote:when he tries to respond without getting offended because he thinks he should try to be extra respectful and cautious on this subject, you accuse him again of the same things, and so you trash him publicly because he does not wish to deny directly what you are saying on his own behalf-
Where have I done any of this.
quote:oh well, I suppose it's fair enough, you get your completely correct point accross unchallenged, and evidently that's the important part, that it's unchallenged? I mean for somebody to challenge your views, they would have to be really really really bad. Still I wonder, if God's on an internet forum, offering advice, is it really neccessary for him to quash any other opinions than his, why not just let them be heard without being run into the ground so that everybody can see how much better God's opinions are, hey isn't that what free will is all about?
That’s all I’ve done. I’ve provided reasons for my opinion on this matter. When presented with contrary opinions, I’ve addressed the reasons why I think those contrary opinions are wrong.
quote:Let's see I didn't say much... just that the kid is top priority and that the truth is neccessary to help the kid, and then, oh oh, this one must have been a pretty serious insult to God, I implied that the person writing for advice should have just a little confidence in herself(God evidently requires faith, not confidence), and then oh oh oh oh the clincher, I implied that maybe nobody posting, including God, was really able to judge the particular situation well enough to say most of what they were saying.
No, you said “I agree with Reiko, there may be [another side of the story]. Therefore you should attempt to uncover it, aggressively. I find the idea that you should not "break cover" deplorable.” Aggressive attempt to uncover the other side of the story is what I (and others) have counseled against.
The lack of information speaks to turning this over to the experts, not playing Nancy Drew.
quote:That latter bit was surely the final straw, I mean even God can't deal with the suggestion that he might not be God!
You seem to be the one with a problem with people disagreeing with you. I have been content to post reasons why the independent investigation is a bad idea. You have made this personal in two posts. I certainly don’t think I’m God. I don’t offer advice unless I’m confident in it or qualify to show where my doubts lie. Having given advice, I provide additional reasoning to support it when it has been questioned, or modify my advice in response to the questions.
quote:Not even posted yet and as I predicted, I almost regret it already, but I'm posting it anyway because I'm sick of having the sh*t heaped on me because my ideas on this matter are not perhaps as articulate as they should be, but I did my best and I tried to keep brief and to the point, it's 3:30 in the morning here and I'm going to bed.
You think this is sh*t being heaped on you? Try being told not to disagree and then told you have a God complex for having the nerve to respond to posts on a discussion board.
posted
My training addressed not questioning possible victims of sexual abuse ourselves, as we may accidentally ask leading questions or contaminate testimony. Seems that the same goes for suspects as well, that either side, the questioning needs to be done by trained professionals.
Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
i think everything dag has suggested is wise, but even that which i found questionable i now understand because he backed it up with solid reasoning and facts. i also trust mackillian as this has been an area of study for her.
i don't know why you are taking someone disagreeing with you so personally, suntranafs. i think dagonee's advice is the best route to ensure justice for BOTH the accuser and the accused. and he was thorough in explaining why. perhaps you have some personal beef with this issue, or you just can't handle someone having a difference of opinion, but either way you are out of line.
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
There is absolutely nothing wrong with providing care and support. And if your friend divulges anything, that's her choice. Same went with my clients. We just couldn't ask questions about the incident.
Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's the part I'm least comfortable about with lawyering. It would be realtively easy for a good defense attorney to plant the idea that the rape counselor subtly altered the victim's testimony. Careful training is required to avoid such an outcome.
posted
I don't see why you tried to make this personal, Sun. I reread all the posts, and you seem to be the only one offended, at it seems that you are more offended that everyone doesn't immediately agree with you.
I think that most of us here understand that Anthro wants to do what is right for her friend, but doesn't know what is the best course. We all can empathize, but some of us have been her situation ourselves.
So far a lawyer, a social worker, and a person who has psych training and is a NR-EMT all agree that in their opinions confronting the accuser could cause serious repercussion, and is a matter best left to those who have the training to deal with it, and to whom the duty is intended for.
We don't care if you disagree....at least I don't...but please do it a little more civilly.
You have as much right as we do to post your opinions on the subject, but the odds of changing my mind, or the minds of the others, are severely limited but calling others names and ranting. If you actually care about changing minds, IMO you would be better served by calmly disagreeing with the points listed than by making personal attacks on others who care enough to respond....even if they don't agree with you "aggressive" plan.
posted
Well spoken, all but the last nine words. *Hits self on the head for use of word aggressive in that phrase for the 100th time*
"I don't see why you tried to make this personal, Sun. I reread all the posts, and you seem to be the only one offended"
There are two combining reasons for that. Numero uno, nobody else had a number of inflamatory comments sent their way(I can ennumerate if neccessary). Numero Dos, Shoot me I'm sensitive on this matter, and the fact that I DO NOT have case specific experience to back up my case, but am pretty darn sure I'm right, does not help matters.
"We don't care if you disagree....at least I don't...but please do it a little more civilly."
Remind me that next time I'm good and pissed off in the middle of the night. Reluctant conditional apology.
Posts: 1103 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
sun, thanks for the conditional apology. I would like to know which comments you considered inflammatory. Up to my response to the "God" post, I honestly don't see anything even potentially inflammatory except the "frankly ludicrous" comment, and that seems pretty mild in the context of the discussion up to that point.
If I insulted you, I didn't mean to, nor did I realize I was doing so.
posted
"If I insulted you, I didn't mean to, nor did I realize I was doing so."
I rather suspected that.
"I would like to know which comments you considered inflammatory."
Well, I'm pretty tired and it's pretty late here again, so I'll give you a list but not explanations, OK?
quote: the "frankly ludicrous" comment
quote: “No more arguments”? You get to spew potentially dangerous and certainly counter-productive advice and I have to remain silent about it?
quote: Apparently, the suggestion that Anthro provide continued support to her friend, provide guidance on how to obtain expert assistance, and leave difficult jobs to those people with the expertise isn’t good enough for you
quote: You’ve conveniently ignored the fact that I listed good and valuable reasons why IT’s BETTER FOR THE ACCUSED if no one approaches him on an amateur basis.
There were also a few minor comments in your posts that made it obvious you were missing a little too much of what I said, and then filling in the gaps a bit excessively. I don't really now think you did that intentionally, but it needled me all the same. This list was compiled at your request, not as further accusations.
Posts: 1103 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Suntrafs, it's all good...I know that you meant nothing but the best for anthro in your original posts. It's a touchy subject, even for those of us who aren't directaly involved with this particular event.
I know what you mean, too...it does seem that getting all sides of the story would seem fair ad reasonable. I just think the risks to all invovled, accused and accuser (and anthro herself), are too great for an untrained person to take.
After it comes out, and there is less to lose, I could see myself being able to listen to both sides, if they were willing to speak to me. We can't know what really happened, as we weren't there, so I believe in keeping a somewhat open mind. Somewhat, because I wouldn't really care what the reasons for doing something like this are..if she feels violated, then something went really wrong somewhere.
And I know what you mean about beating youself up for using the word "aggressivly"...foot in mouth disease runs in my family...
posted
Her ex, the one mentioned in this thread, showed up at school yesterday. He graduated last year, but he came and wanted to talk to her. The administrators kicked him out, but she was pretty down.
They never pressed charges of any kind. As far as I know, she hasn't had any physical problems after this. We looked up state law and the largest possible thing to claim is sexual assault or stat rape, but, well, I dunno.
Posts: 550 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
At this point, she needs to concentrate on taking care of herself then.
The other possibility that may arise is a future date rape by this guy. Prior bad acts are often admissible against defendants in sex crime cases. It's very likely that, if he raped her, he will do it to someone else. If the next victim is in the same he-said/she-said situation, your friend's testimony may be extremely valuable. I'm not sure I'd mention it to her, but there is a possibility she may be able to act against him in the future if she chooses to, even though her case is probably not pursuable now.
However, if she changed her mind, it's not too late to report it. They may not (even probably won't) prosecute, but it might do some good.
It's also not too late for her to call a rape crisis center. I know they get calls years after some attacks, and they will know where to refer her.
posted
I went through a similar situation in the past year. I was not around when this thread was started, but as I read it a few things came to mind. 1. School counselors are only a good choice if the person wants it known to both parents and police. The person will have no choice after the councilor knows. I told a teacher and they were obligated to tell the councilor. Once the councilor knows the parents and police have to as well. It was horrible for me. I was not ready to get that out in the open. My control of the situation was taken away. That is one of the worst things you can do to a rape victim. 2. I would recommend just letting them talk, assuring them they are not at fault, and just holding them (if it is possible/appropriate) 3. Do not force a rape victim to do anything they don't want to. You should be gentler in your persuasion. 4. Do encourage them to get help, when they are ready. Do not assume that just because they seem fine they are; bring it up every so often until they do. Edit:This it just from my experience. Everyone is different.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
