How should schools handle it though? It's a public relations nightmare if you allow someone to keep playing that was a rapist. Can you imagine if someone gets convicted....the school will be scraped through the mud forever.

You do the right thing. Innocent until prove guilty unless the school is provided clear evidence otherwise.

---

I couldn't disagree more.


Because why would any rape victim actually make an accusation at that point? They'd be afraid of being brought up on charges if there's not enough evidence to convict -- and often there isn't. They've already been through hell, they wouldn't want to go through it again with a trial.


False accusations are terrible, there's no question about it. But I don't think charging women who come forward, when their attacker is cleared, isn't the answer to fixing that problem.

So women shouldn't be charged for false rape allegations?

---

There is a difference in "being cleared" and having insufficient evidence to bring charges or convict.

 

If proof exists that the accusation was totally false and/or done maliciously then I'm all for bringing charges. Otherwise I agree with Eleventh Doctor.

 

In this case, is there any prohibition against Jones taking civil action?

 

Right, but he specifically stated cleared. Also, how do you prove it was totally false short of a confession? Couldn't the woman always fall back on "well, I felt I was raped" to avoid any repercussions?

 

I'm all for due process and burden of proof before punising an accusor. Where is this demand for due process when punishing (expelling, firing, etc.) the accused, though?

---

I couldn't disagree more.


Because why would any rape victim actually make an accusation at that point?  They'd be afraid of being brought up on charges if there's not enough evidence to convict -- and often there isn't.  They've already been through hell, they wouldn't want to go through it again with a trial.  


False accusations are terrible, there's no question about it.  But I don't think charging women who come forward, when their attacker is cleared, isn't the answer to fixing that problem.  


 

So let them run around just willy nilly crying rape? There has to be some amount of self accountability here.

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"

Right, but he specifically stated cleared. Also, how do you prove it was totally false short of a confession? Couldn't the woman always fall back on "well, I felt I was raped" to avoid any repercussions?

 

I'm all for due process and burden of proof before punising an accusor. Where is this demand for due process when punishing (expelling, firing, etc.) the accused, though?

So you want to put a rape victim on trial, after her attacker goes free, because there was a lack of evidence to convict?  


You know what else is a terrible crime?  Rape.  And women shouldn't have to fear facing a trial because her attacker is found not guilty.  

 

 

So women shouldn't be charged for false rape allegations?

 

How do you determine 'false' rape allegations?  Just because someone is found not guilty, doesn't mean they're innocent.  


 

 

So let them run around just willy nilly crying rape? There has to be some amount of self accountability here.

 

So make women fear prosecution for reporting their rape, and put other women in danger of being attacked?

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

False accusations are terrible and can ruin men's lives, but let's not do anything about it.

 

---

False accusations are terrible and can ruin men's lives, but let's not do anything about it.

 

Rape is terrible, but we should make women (and men for that matter, since men do get raped) afraid to report it.

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

The debate is over false accusations. You know, like the morning after regret. There is accountability if the rape occurred, there should be accountability if there was not a rape.

 

Regards.....................the Chiefjag

---