NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/soc/men/23355

Text File | 1993-01-28 | 3.7 KB | 70 lines

Newsgroups: soc.men
Path: sparky!uunet!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!emory!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!linac!att!news.cs.indiana.edu![e-mail]
From: "amy lynn young-leith" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Are false accusations harmless? (WAS Re: Drunk Sex = Rape?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Indiana University, Bloomington
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 00:17:55 -0500
Lines: 59

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Joseph Albert) writes:
>i believe this because I believe that the picture of a woman's body with
>broken ribs, and black and blue marks was were indeed taken of smith's
>accuser.  these pictures were supplied by the police who investigated the
>case, and I really believe that they were the real pictures taken.
>unfortunately, the person who took them was inexperienced in this matter
>and didn't make sure that something in the picture could later demonstrate
>that the were of the woman in question, such as her face. the camera was
>pointed in a manner that neither her face nor some other identifiable
>marking were in the picture.

How many pictures were there, two, three?  It is sad that out of all
the pictures that must have been taken, the bozo doing it didn't get
1)a full body shot or 2)a shot of the face to show any damage.  But it
is SERIOUSLY hard for me to believe that anyone, inexperienced or not,
would be so stupid.  The police in charge of the investigation should
go back to school for this one.

>i also believe that an acquittal was the correct decision, given the
>available evidence.  just becuase the investigators botched the
>gathering of evidence doesn't mean that we should assume what the
>evidence would have been if they ahd done it right.  however, i am
>entitled to the opinion that these pictures really were the correct
>ones.
>i am not jsut forming an opinion from the headlines of tabloids, as
>Amy was suggesting people do.
>The Rodney King case is a good case in point.  here a jury acquitted
>these officers with overwhelmingly convincing evidence of their guilt.
>are you saying that i am not entitled to beleive that they were
>blatantly guilty just becuase of a not-guilty verdict?

Nowhere have I said that people *shouldn't* make their own personal
decisions on opinions about these issues.  I'm saying that if someone
is charged, you should not be able to discriminate against him because
of this charge.  If he is found not guilty, you should not be able to
discriminate against him because he was once accused of something.  If
he's been convicted of charges, one has a more supportable reason to
worry.

>a disturbing question:  why is it that the people who show valid concern
>for the potential damage of false accusations, never show any concern
>for a legal system which convicts 1 rapist for every 605 reported rapes?

Why is it that some people make such wide ranging generalizations
which, at least in this case, are wrong?  I'm very concerned about
violent crimes of all types, especially rape given that it's happened
to me and a grossly disproportionate number of women I know.  But I'm
NOT interested in a mass execution of the rights of someone just
because they have a penis.

amy


--
[e-mail]                Occupation:  Lifetime Student
*****************************************************************************
*This post was made on personal time and has nothing to do whatsoever with  *
*              the attitudes or opinions of Indiana University.             *
*****************************************************************************