So everyone just can say that they were convinced their lie was the truth then? They were CONVINCED.
At the end of the day, even if you neglect that, someone has to pay for all the time and money that was spent on this victim - even if she did it accidentally. I assume that even if you kill someone accidentally, it's not just OK.
Whatever it is, based on all this faulty logic, this man can do awful things to this woman and we can just say it's understandable and it can keep occuring over and over until everyone on this earth is damaged - all because of this one woman. But I guess if this man chooses not to do that, then that means that the logic has failed and it's not understandable if someone has broken out of the cycle.
-Rudey
Quote:
Originally posted by breathesgelatin
No, of course I don't know if she lied. It's not my job to know. None of us on this messageboard know. I didn't say that she said "I don't know if it's him." I said that perhaps she wasn't able to ID him at first but upon seeing other evidence, working with her lawyers, etc., she became CONVINCED that it was him. She then knew it was him--even if this was a false piece of knowledge.
If and only if this was the case, then there's no case against her. It's entirely possible that she genuinely believed that this man did it. If so, she didn't perjure herself. Yes, she was speaking on a false knowledge. But that's not a lie.
However, if there was a doubt in her mind or if she lied, clearly there may be grounds for a criminal case against her.
Regardless of whether she lied or not she may be liable for a civil suit. I don't know anything about that.
The fact of the matter is that none of us here have any knowledge of whether she did in fact lie or not. I just think it's a bit too early to assume that she's a liar who should be punished. And it's entirely inappropriate to suggest things like "freebies". I am actually really appalled at that. To do so suggests not only no understanding of the crime of rape and assault, it represents an inability to be so much as tactful or mature about the issue. Granted, only one person in this discussion did that.
I think that what many of the other women in this thread are responding to is women's fears of victim blaming. It is often common to blame the victim in sexual assault cases---"If she hadn't been so drunk...", "If she hadn't been out that late...." "If she hadn't been wearing that outfit..." This is a common fear of women who have been assaulted and it is done to them all the time. Now, in this case, there MAY have been a case of a woman lying about the identity of her attacker. MAYBE. None of us know that for sure. When people are immediately ready to jump on the bandwagon saying "Punish her!" or "Give him a freebie!" that sounds a bit premature and like victim-blaming to most women. Whether it was meant that way or not.
I hope that explicates the position of most of the women on this thread a bit better....??? Personally, I'm not accusing anyone of victim-blaming or being offensive except for James for his lovely freebie comment. I just think it comes from the fact that men and women, though they usually agree that rape is a horrible crime, have very different perspectives on the issue. They often cross arguments without really understanding one another.
I am really interested in the ethics of lying and secrecy so this is quite the interesting discussion.
|