Rape Juror
Sex crime accusations are difficult to quantify with physical evidence and so destructive in their charge that it is often enough to convict one’s character on mere implication.
The word “rape” pulls at the very chords of our emotions with a resonance so deep, it inherently produces prejudice. It takes concentration and effort to pull ourselves back from these natural impulses.
Maybe it’s because I’m a man, but often I have felt the power of a sexual accusation perturbs people enough that in many cases the defendant must prove himself innocent. Sometimes though I wonder if that’s a good thing.
In our system, however, the complications of a such a crime can be very difficult to figure out. In many cases victims don’t even report their abuses, fearing an embarrassing and public confrontation that may not necessary lead to justice. Other times the assailant is a close friend or loved one (boyfriend, for example) and a victim becomes personally torn. Often it seems these cases involve a sinister cocktail of drugs, alcohol, dysfunction and bad circumstance. Each of these factors contribute a wilder and wilder number of spiraling variables.
So this unfortunately leaves me with little hope of rationalizing my way into a fair decision (the only guilt-free kind), and often I feel contempt towards the idea of giving the accused the benefit of the doubt (also known as reasonable doubt). I believe in the notion of innocence until proven guilty because it’s really the only way we can even attempt to have a fair and just system.
How do we really know what happened, though? If an intoxicated woman says no but then gives contradictory body language or consents physically after expressing an oral objection, is that rape? I guess it depends on if the woman files a complaint afterward or not. What if a woman is threatened and consents from fear of death? What if there is some hideous reason for her to fabricate such an accusation out of revenge or to save some sense of perverted dignity? What if in a moment of intense anger , fear or impaired judgment, a claim is made that a person feels they can’t retract without serious consequence? What if drugs and alcohol are involved and a defendant or victim can’t remember the details of consent and contact? What if a victim passes out and was taken advantage of (date rape) or just said she was because she can’t recall?
All these scenarios will yield very little physical evidence, especially if a defendant claims the sex was consensual. So basically you create a social stigma of casting additional suspicion upon the accused then you might with other offenses. I know I’m guilty of raising the justice bar just a little because I don’t really believe there are many women out there who would traumatize themselves unnecessarily by enduring the rape kit and follow up examination … Not to mention that creating a false claim is a crime and assuming an accusation might be false is sort of like not giving the victim the benefit of the doubt when it comes to fraud.
It’s a difficult issue that’ll continue to plague critical thinking jurors for a long time. I feel deep sympathy for both sides. Imagine a prosecutor being a woman’s only hope for justice in a “he said/she said case.” A vindicated rapist and a victim deprived of the ability to have a normal life. Can you imagine being convicted on an accusation or misunderstanding? Have you seen how sex offenders are treated by our justice system and the public? A verdict derived from foggy circumstance and debatable physical evidence - but often that’s what the public demands of our system. People are creatures of feeling and when it’s too close to call, a lot of us go with our instincts. (Which rarely favor a defendant.)
I wish I had an answer to this one, but I don’t. Just take it a case at a time. Fight the urge to lynch an accused person because what we’re really doing is hanging reason and justice out to dry. While at the same time, we’re embracing the difficulty of prosecution and offering sincere sympathy to a victim who may be utterly lost in our system of reasonable doubt.
August 7th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
I am appalled by these comments. This man does a disservice to the innocent men falsely accused of rape and he would do well to study the news accounts at my Web site http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/ It is clear he thinks false rape claims are a rarity.
Objectively verifiable data indicates that at least 9 percent and probably closer to half of all rape claims are false. The crime of false reporting of raport is rarely charged and is the criminal justice system’s dirty little secret. (The stats I’ve set forth are not fanatical Men’s Rights Advocate figures — I would suggest he read Prof. K.C. Johnson’s book on the Duke lacrosse non-rape case which traces all the major rape studies and concludes false claims are at least 9 percent and probably closer to half of all reported “rapes.” That book, by the way, has been praised by virtually every liberal newspaper in America, including the NY Times, which the book skewers for its coverage of the Duke case.) Yet the crime of making a false rape report has become so embroiled in the radical feminist sexual assault milieu — as this man seems to be as well — that it has been largely, and improperly, removed from the public discourse about rape. Sexual assault counselors often disingenuously refer to the fact of false rape accusations as a “myth.” Denigrating the experience of the falsely accused by dismissing their victimization as a myth is not merely dishonest but morally grotesque.
Sir, you should not be a juror deciding rape cases. In a he said-she said dispute over consent, if both parties have furnished plausible explanations, it is your duty not to convict. How dare you say that a lot of people (and I assume you mean YOU) “go with our instincts . . . . Which rarely favor a defendant.”
Absolutely disgraceful. Pray that you are never false accused of rape, sir.
August 7th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
ah, a blame the victim mentality. The reason sex offenders are treated the way that they are is because they are statistically likely to commit the offense again. Also, NO means NO, regardless of whether the girl was drunk or not.
I think you make a lot of excellent points, though.
August 8th, 2008 at 7:33 am
Like I said I don’t know what to make of the issue but I understand the plight of both prosecution and defense. I made the remark about instincts because at least in my experience and as you’ve also explained, rape charges can carry an unjustifiable weight of prejudice to them. I meant the remarks more as a criticism (and truth) of human nature. I was not condoning its practice, I was simply trying to look at the dilemma from both sides because I think it’s important to understand the legal and social challenges associated.
I do believe men are the target of false rape charges and a larger percentage are targeted with lesser allegations such as sexual harassment. I also believe that actual rapes and associated sex crimes are often under reported and that true victims are frightened at the idea of losing public credibility.
Which begs the question: How to encourage real victims to come forward while actively suppressing those that would exploit the system through false accusation.
I wish I had an answer to this one, but I don’t. Just take it a case at a time. Fight the urge to lynch an accused person because what we’re really doing is hanging reason and justice out to dry.
While at the same time, embracing the difficulty of prosecution and offering sincere sympathy to a victim who may be utterly lost in our system of reasonable doubt.
I appreciate your intelligent remarks and I’m glad to see the issue is being discussed.
August 8th, 2008 at 7:39 am
Tyler: I understand, and thanks for the clarification.
Obvs said: “The reason sex offenders are treated the way that they are is because they are statistically likely to commit the offense again.” Kindly furnish objectively verifiable data to back up this wild assertion, madam. Even the committee members who objected to Congress’ rush to enact terrible Fed. Rule Evidence 413 didn’t believe THAT fairy tale.
August 9th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
While in some cases it may be hard to tell if it is he or she who is telling the truth, what the victim gets to experience afterwards in court may be just as bad as the attack itself. In a place where everybody knows everyones business it may be hard for the vic to report it because of no privacy. I heard more than half go unreported sometime ago and i could see why someone would not want to go to trial. If someone is found guilty of making a false statement in this area then steps to cleanse the arrest record of the accused should take place and perhaps the accused would be entitled to a retraction in the newspaper/TV. I do not beleive rape is a crime the victim ever gets over,not ever.
August 9th, 2008 at 11:36 pm
“Dr. Doren isn’t sure, pointing out, for example, that convicted rapists are more likely to re-offend in the years immediately after release, and more likely to commit other violent crimes. “If we’re concerned about violence generically, it’s rapists we should be concerned about” in the short term, he said.”
Pulled from The Wall Street Journal
http://blogs.wsj.com/numbersguy/how-likely-are-sex-offenders-to-repeat-their-crimes-258/
And before you say it’s a blog, its backed up with sources
A 1991 study published in the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology stated that 43 percent of convicted child molesters released from mental institutions went on to commit new violent or sexual offenses within an average of six years.
Also, you would do well to read this article: Structural behavioural analysis as a basis for discriminating between genuine and simulated rape allegations.
Authors:Marshall, Ben C.1 ben.marshall@ucl.ac.uk
Alison, Laurence J.2
Source:Journal of Investigative Psychology & Offender Profiling; Jan2006, Vol. 3 Issue 1, p21-34, 14p, 1 chart, 3 graphs
I don’t know if you have access to ACADEMIC JOURNAL sources.