NZGames.com Forums - View Single Post - Labour: all sex is rape unless you can prove otherwise

Jodi · 4th May 2017, 14:32

The way rape is treated in NZ is crap.

The knee jerk reaction would be "believe the accuser and assume the accused is guilty until proven innocent ... but just for rape"

The right then wring their hands "but then all the girls would accuse all the men of being rapists." Well, of course the would. But I would assume in roughly the same numbers of rapists that get away with it atm.

The last graphic I saw said that for every 100 rapes, 13 are reported, 5 go to trial and only 1 is a false accusation (or thereabouts).

So there is that knee jerk again "I would be happy for 1 innocent to be imprisoned if it meant the other 99 rapists also go to jail" (bonus points if you mention the French legal system)

No, as Ab mentioned, innocent unless proven guilty please. Because we're all fucking grown ups and can actually appreciate nuance.

No, what _needs_ to change, is the way the rape victim is treated when the accusation is processed. Hey, maybe, instead of treating the victim as a slutty man hater who was asking for it and also wants to ruin the accused's life. Just maybe, assume they are correct while also assuming the accused is innocent.

*GASP*

I have an idea on a better way, but I'm far from an expert, and I'm pretty sure the argument could be ripped to shreds.

1) Get the information needed for a conviction and then never bother the victim again.

Yea, that's the hard one. Most convictions drop because fuck reliving the rape over and over again while being aggressively questioned whether you're making it up. And then repeat that every 6 months for 3 years.

Instead the victim should have a statement taken, any physical evidence taken, and then be left alone forever (with name suppression). The prosecution should function from that point without the victim's involvement.

That's it. That's my fix.

4th May 2017, 14:32	#31
Jodi	The way rape is treated in NZ is crap. The knee jerk reaction would be "believe the accuser and assume the accused is guilty until proven innocent ... but just for rape" The right then wring their hands "but then all the girls would accuse all the men of being rapists." Well, of course the would. But I would assume in roughly the same numbers of rapists that get away with it atm. The last graphic I saw said that for every 100 rapes, 13 are reported, 5 go to trial and only 1 is a false accusation (or thereabouts). So there is that knee jerk again "I would be happy for 1 innocent to be imprisoned if it meant the other 99 rapists also go to jail" (bonus points if you mention the French legal system) No, as Ab mentioned, innocent unless proven guilty please. Because we're all fucking grown ups and can actually appreciate nuance. No, what _needs_ to change, is the way the rape victim is treated when the accusation is processed. Hey, maybe, instead of treating the victim as a slutty man hater who was asking for it and also wants to ruin the accused's life. Just maybe, assume they are correct while also assuming the accused is innocent. GASP I have an idea on a better way, but I'm far from an expert, and I'm pretty sure the argument could be ripped to shreds. 1) Get the information needed for a conviction and then never bother the victim again. Yea, that's the hard one. Most convictions drop because fuck reliving the rape over and over again while being aggressively questioned whether you're making it up. And then repeat that every 6 months for 3 years. Instead the victim should have a statement taken, any physical evidence taken, and then be left alone forever (with name suppression). The prosecution should function from that point without the victim's involvement. That's it. That's my fix.