• surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 hours ago

    live… Cross examinations

    Of minors in a court setting. What better way to intimidate children into not coming forward than the idea of being put into a spectacle to relive your horror.

    • Mirshe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Yeah, imagine putting a 13-year-old girl on the stand, in front of reporters, judges, lawyers, potentially their rapist, and definitely their parents, and having them go blow-by-blow with a lawyer who’s already adversarial in nature and out to catch them in a lie, or confuse them, and likely has been doing this work for years.

      No, this couldn’t possibly be a good reason for kids to shut the fuck up when a teacher or another kid molests them. Being a kid is already hard enough, going through a sexual assault is hard, so let’s pile a huge media spectacle (that will likely make it onto everyone at school’s social media feeds) on top of all that trauma AND force them to relive it in front of everyone for the express purpose of the defense lawyer trying to catch you in a gotcha.

    • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      36
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      Of minors in a court setting.

      Hopefully, this is mostly about colleges. I really don’t want to think that minors raping minors is a common issue in the US. …Somehow, I am afraid to check now.

      What better way to intimidate children into not coming forward than the idea of being put into a spectacle to relive your horror.

      I am not saying it is ideal, but it is not an unmoderated spectacle either. There generally are protections for underage witnesses and witnesses in general even in courts, which this is not. Between that and just assuming a person is guilty, it is the lesser evil to have them testify.

      In addition, the fact prosecutors repeatedly refused to prosecute for false accusations when those came to light clearly shows this policy was never done in good fate. Life destroying consequences for the accused with next to no recourse but no consequences for the accuser when they are caught lying is just ridiculous.

      • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 hours ago

        There’s no “hopefully” or benefit of the doubt for this guy. He has been proven to be a rapist in court.

        • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          20 hours ago

          You made me think for a moment it was only about K-12 since you left out the “and colleges” part.

          Anyway, it is even shittier if they forced minors to face such serious accusations without a lawyer or other adequate representation.

      • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Which would you rather have: more rapes, or more kids kicked out of school for false allegations?

        If this is a hard question, then I hope you gain experiences that make it easier to decide. Learning is important.

        Plus, the false allegation thing is kinda bunk. If it happens, then sue them for libel. Since there isn’t a lot of that going on, I think it’s less of an issue than, ya know, rape.

        Anecdotally, I know four rape victims that didn’t come forward. I know zero men who were falsely accused. I’m sure I’m not special in this regard.

        • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          edit-2
          20 hours ago

          Which would you rather have: more rapes, or more kids kicked out of school for false allegations?

          It’s a false dichotomy. There are other ways to prevent rape at schools without throwing away due process.

          Plus, the false allegation thing is kinda bunk. If it happens, then sue them for libel. Since there isn’t a lot of that going on, I think it’s less of an issue than, ya know, rape.

          Yes, because common students routinely have 10s of thousands of $ to pay for lawyers to probably not even get back the same amount.

          Anecdotally, I know four rape victims that didn’t come forward. I know zero men who were falsely accused. I’m sure I’m not special in this regard.

          So you are saying throwing away due process did not even work to make them come forward in the first place, since this was repealed just now.

          • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            12 hours ago

            If there were other ways to prevent rape, they would be there already. So you’re clearly wrong.

            I agree we should provide free law services to people without money so they can get justice just like the rich people. Let’s do that. And we can do that without endangering young girls.

            There is no due process being thrown away. These people aren’t going to jail. They’re being kicked out of school. A school can kick out a child for literally anything that isn’t a protected class. Rape allegations seems like a pretty good reason to kick someone out, especially compared to some other reasons people have been kicked out, like protesting.

            • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              9 hours ago

              If there were other ways to prevent rape, they would be there already. So you’re clearly wrong.

              Ah, my bad. I did not realize a good government healthcare is not possible because it is not already there.

              Also a shame safer roads are impossible to build, otherwise they already would have. Or walkable cities. Mass transit.

              Yeah, something good not already existing clearly means it is not possible. I will give up any attempt to improve anything at once. /s

              There is no due process being thrown away. These people aren’t going to jail.

              Oh, my apologies. Did not know anything that does not put you in jail does not deserve due process. You must be so angry at Luigi and his fans since clearly rejecting insurance claims is also not putting you in jail and does not deserve any due process. It is just financial ruin, same as having student loans without a degree. Not an issue at all. /s

              A school can kick out a child for literally anything that isn’t a protected class.

              Ah yes, the “things are already bad so we should make them worse” argument. Also, its not even really true.

              Seriously, what the fuck are these arguments of yours? You can’t possibly believe them yourself. Are you just trying to retroactively come up with arguments for a policy you just insist on believing because the guy who said it had (D) after their name? Just making up arguments for others, without actually using them to shape your own opinions?

              • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 hours ago

                Ok, so you agree there aren’t things in place to prevent rape. Only that there could one day be. Great. Go do that. The lack of its current existence makes it irrelevant to the conversation. That’s my point.

                Due process is very very clearly a legal term. Private institutions aren’t required to follow anything like it. You need to differentiate between what IS and what you wish were the case.

                I don’t care who made the rule. Fuck the Democrats. I care that women who are raped are being silenced. It’s literally that simple.

                • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 hours ago

                  Go do that.

                  Go elect me for office and I will. Until then, there is nothing I can do for you.

                  Due process is very very clearly a legal term. Private institutions aren’t required to follow anything like it.

                  What the fuck do you think we are talking about this whole fucking time? Title IX mandates a process schools have to follow. Trumps changes bring it closer to what is considered a due process. The whole fucking conversation is about whether that is a good thing.

                  You need to differentiate between what IS and what you wish were the case.

                  It literally IS. You are the one seething that men are now actually granted reasonable due process protections.

                  I care that women who are raped are being silenced.

                  How the fuck are they being silenced? It literally requires the opposite, that they testify properly.