R
Rubato
Guest
This is a rough essay I wrote for some political science thing at my college to stir things up sometime in 2009. I would think it would have some application here, if nothing else, to give you all something to think (and perhaps argue) about. If you would like my citations, let me know, but I will probably refer you to Google or EBSCO (if you have access to it) because it's likely I won't be able to find them anymore.
It begins....
I've got something new for everyone to get upset about:
I've been out of the study of political science for quite a while now, but I don't think I will ever be able to completely tell it "goodbye". I think I'm so attracted to political science, politics, and criminal justice because even though I get really frustrated with people sometimes, there are a lot of really bad things that happen to people that aren't their fault, and they need help fixing their lives. The United State's criminal justice system can and should be used for good, but it can also be used for bad. In our very litigious society, lawsuits have almost become a new form of gambling that offer huge potential rates of return to anyone claiming to be a "victim". Our courts have tremendous power to take away our rights and property, and sometimes (perhaps even often), they take from people who have done nothing wrong.
Prosecutions of rape and sexual assault are great examples of the court's ability to do this. Society has traditionally viewed these two crimes as woman's issues, and I believe strictly as a crime they are because over 90% of sexually related crimes are committed by men against women. However, because of the nature of rape and sexual misconduct accusations, they are difficult to prove and result in a large number of men being convicted for serious crimes they never committed. If men are being convicted of crimes they have not actually perpetrated en mass, that qualifies the administration of sexual misconduct/rape cases as a men's issue.
I realize sexual misconduct is a terrible thing for any woman to endure and that successfully prosecuting a something like this might be as bad or worse than the actual offense [what BS, I was more of an AFC then than I thought. Though I might also have been tempering my language since this was for a school paper article]. In order for a woman to prosecute a case of sexual misconduct, she has to relive the offense multiple times over and deal with a defense attorney's accusations of her being anything from a liar to a slut. I can't imagine dealing with something like that.
Something people don't realize though is that as many as half of all sexual misconduct accusations are untrue. The 1996 FBI Uniform Crime Report says that about 10% of prosecutions of forcible rapes are against innocent people. Journalist **** Haws wrote a literature review on the percentage of rape allegations against innocent people and found that as many as 50% of rape allegations are untrue. Dr. Eugene J. Kanin of Purdue University conducted a study on the same issue and found that 45% of sexual misconducted accusations are untrue. When men are by several orders of magnitude more likely than women to be accused and prosecuted for committing sexual misconduct and it turns out that in nearly half of all cases are actually innocent, there is a serious problem. If the group men was replaced with the group African Americans or women, society would view the problem as racist or sexist. Currently, few people are even aware that it is a problem.
Why are women doing something so terrible? When you really take time to think about this issue, it's absolutely horrible! A sexual misconduct accusation alone can put a man's life, freedom, and future in total jeopardy. It can damage his relationship with his wife and family, hurt his career, influence future job opportunities, cause terrible emotional psychological damage and so much more. If such a case is successfully prosecuted, it can do infinitely more damage to the man because the accusations turn in to “facts” which in turn lead to real repercussions that can last a lifetime – all because of something the man did not do. Why in the world would a woman choose to do something like this? Dr. Kanin offered three possible explanations:
1. To provide women an alibi. For example, the Dr. Kanin made note of a woman who got in a bar fight and sustained several injuries to herself. She was involved in a custody battle for her children and feared admitting to a bar fight would negatively influence the case. She claimed she was raped in order to explain her injuries.
2. To provide women a mechanism of revenge. Women enter in to consensual sexual relationships with men who are not committed to long term relationships or who are strangers and become angry when the relationship ends. According to Dr. Kanin, women will sometimes use an accusation of rape to extract revenge when they are hurt in a relationship.
3. To provide women a platform of sympathy and support. Dr. Kanin described a woman who was attracted to her therapist and in order to gain his sympathy, lied saying that she was raped. He subsequently pressured her to initiated a criminal investigation against the innocent man, which she did. Dr. Kanin also notes that colleges and universities may be more prone to accusations of this nature because of their unique "structural variables" that may not be extrapolatable to other populations.
These reasons make a lot of sense and fit well with the image of Potiphar's wife people often conjure up when considering false accusations of sexual misconduct. Anyone willing to potentially destroy another person's life for any reasons, but especially reasons as immature and irresponsible as attempting to cover for a mistake, because of sexually related buyer’s remorse [notice, a PUA term!!!!!], or because they want sympathy is a terrible person. They should be punished with the same degree of severity they were attempting to levy against whomever they were prosecuting. [A point I didn’t pursue because I didn’t want to be too controversial – given statistics mentioned… that potentially greater than half of all “sexual offenders” never actually did anything wrong…. What does that say about the size of the population of women that represents pure evil? Think about how many women would have to be making such egregious lies in order for those statistics to exist. Also consider that both social scientists indicated that the numbers they generated were probably significantly less than the actual numbers, because no person, particularly a woman, is going to want to be honest enough with herself to admit that she did something so terrible]
I grew up believing that in the United States, we have a great legal system and people are innocent until proven guilty [as a degreed political scientist, I do not believe this anymore]. Most of the times they are, but there are some cases (like allegations of sexual misconduct and inherently racist or sexist legal policies) where they aren't. This is very serious because it undermines the entire notion of a system of "justice".
Cases of sexual misconduct are naturally prone to difficulty because they are difficult to prove. When a case like this goes to trial, the only evidence a judge and jury usually has to consider is the woman's word versus the man's. Trials often turn in to a battle to see which party can besmirch the other's character most effectively. Unless a woman becomes pregnant from the assault and carries the child to term, "hard" evidence is almost impossible to obtain. Men usually perpetrate sexual misconduct in private and unless they are interrupted by a third party, there are usually no eye witnesses. DNA testing is impossible if the man doesn't get any semen or genetically identifiable body fluids on or in the woman, and even if he does, there is only a limited window of time where DNA testing is possible. If a woman doesn't get to a clinic or hospital immediately after the misconduct, it is unlikely that a DNA test will provide any help to her case [People don’t realize how short the time window is if a woman wants a scientifically accurate result. It’s so short, it’s almost unrealistic. And let’s not even get in to the details of the reliability of DNA testing.]
These realities give our justice system a very difficult problem: When sexual misconduct represents an extremely serious offense deserving of legitimate punishment, how should it be administered when the greatest source of evidence for victims to use in prosecution cases is hearsay? The justice system is undermining the notions of justice when it allows guilty people to go unpunished, but it also undermines the notions of justice when it punishes innocent people. So what should it do?
Unless there is legitimate hard evidence that a person actually committed sexual misconduct, I don't think the justice department has any business pursuing a criminal case. I think sending someone to jail and ruining their life over something they didn't do is much worse than allowing someone to remain free who did something wrong. Both are very bad and very serious, but I believe I have chosen the lesser of two evils. What would happen if we prosecuted cases like theft and murder on the basis of extenuating circumstances, character, and hearsay? We would all be justified in saying that are justice system was doing just about everything but applying justice.
It begins....
I've got something new for everyone to get upset about:
I've been out of the study of political science for quite a while now, but I don't think I will ever be able to completely tell it "goodbye". I think I'm so attracted to political science, politics, and criminal justice because even though I get really frustrated with people sometimes, there are a lot of really bad things that happen to people that aren't their fault, and they need help fixing their lives. The United State's criminal justice system can and should be used for good, but it can also be used for bad. In our very litigious society, lawsuits have almost become a new form of gambling that offer huge potential rates of return to anyone claiming to be a "victim". Our courts have tremendous power to take away our rights and property, and sometimes (perhaps even often), they take from people who have done nothing wrong.
Prosecutions of rape and sexual assault are great examples of the court's ability to do this. Society has traditionally viewed these two crimes as woman's issues, and I believe strictly as a crime they are because over 90% of sexually related crimes are committed by men against women. However, because of the nature of rape and sexual misconduct accusations, they are difficult to prove and result in a large number of men being convicted for serious crimes they never committed. If men are being convicted of crimes they have not actually perpetrated en mass, that qualifies the administration of sexual misconduct/rape cases as a men's issue.
I realize sexual misconduct is a terrible thing for any woman to endure and that successfully prosecuting a something like this might be as bad or worse than the actual offense [what BS, I was more of an AFC then than I thought. Though I might also have been tempering my language since this was for a school paper article]. In order for a woman to prosecute a case of sexual misconduct, she has to relive the offense multiple times over and deal with a defense attorney's accusations of her being anything from a liar to a slut. I can't imagine dealing with something like that.
Something people don't realize though is that as many as half of all sexual misconduct accusations are untrue. The 1996 FBI Uniform Crime Report says that about 10% of prosecutions of forcible rapes are against innocent people. Journalist **** Haws wrote a literature review on the percentage of rape allegations against innocent people and found that as many as 50% of rape allegations are untrue. Dr. Eugene J. Kanin of Purdue University conducted a study on the same issue and found that 45% of sexual misconducted accusations are untrue. When men are by several orders of magnitude more likely than women to be accused and prosecuted for committing sexual misconduct and it turns out that in nearly half of all cases are actually innocent, there is a serious problem. If the group men was replaced with the group African Americans or women, society would view the problem as racist or sexist. Currently, few people are even aware that it is a problem.
Why are women doing something so terrible? When you really take time to think about this issue, it's absolutely horrible! A sexual misconduct accusation alone can put a man's life, freedom, and future in total jeopardy. It can damage his relationship with his wife and family, hurt his career, influence future job opportunities, cause terrible emotional psychological damage and so much more. If such a case is successfully prosecuted, it can do infinitely more damage to the man because the accusations turn in to “facts” which in turn lead to real repercussions that can last a lifetime – all because of something the man did not do. Why in the world would a woman choose to do something like this? Dr. Kanin offered three possible explanations:
1. To provide women an alibi. For example, the Dr. Kanin made note of a woman who got in a bar fight and sustained several injuries to herself. She was involved in a custody battle for her children and feared admitting to a bar fight would negatively influence the case. She claimed she was raped in order to explain her injuries.
2. To provide women a mechanism of revenge. Women enter in to consensual sexual relationships with men who are not committed to long term relationships or who are strangers and become angry when the relationship ends. According to Dr. Kanin, women will sometimes use an accusation of rape to extract revenge when they are hurt in a relationship.
3. To provide women a platform of sympathy and support. Dr. Kanin described a woman who was attracted to her therapist and in order to gain his sympathy, lied saying that she was raped. He subsequently pressured her to initiated a criminal investigation against the innocent man, which she did. Dr. Kanin also notes that colleges and universities may be more prone to accusations of this nature because of their unique "structural variables" that may not be extrapolatable to other populations.
These reasons make a lot of sense and fit well with the image of Potiphar's wife people often conjure up when considering false accusations of sexual misconduct. Anyone willing to potentially destroy another person's life for any reasons, but especially reasons as immature and irresponsible as attempting to cover for a mistake, because of sexually related buyer’s remorse [notice, a PUA term!!!!!], or because they want sympathy is a terrible person. They should be punished with the same degree of severity they were attempting to levy against whomever they were prosecuting. [A point I didn’t pursue because I didn’t want to be too controversial – given statistics mentioned… that potentially greater than half of all “sexual offenders” never actually did anything wrong…. What does that say about the size of the population of women that represents pure evil? Think about how many women would have to be making such egregious lies in order for those statistics to exist. Also consider that both social scientists indicated that the numbers they generated were probably significantly less than the actual numbers, because no person, particularly a woman, is going to want to be honest enough with herself to admit that she did something so terrible]
I grew up believing that in the United States, we have a great legal system and people are innocent until proven guilty [as a degreed political scientist, I do not believe this anymore]. Most of the times they are, but there are some cases (like allegations of sexual misconduct and inherently racist or sexist legal policies) where they aren't. This is very serious because it undermines the entire notion of a system of "justice".
Cases of sexual misconduct are naturally prone to difficulty because they are difficult to prove. When a case like this goes to trial, the only evidence a judge and jury usually has to consider is the woman's word versus the man's. Trials often turn in to a battle to see which party can besmirch the other's character most effectively. Unless a woman becomes pregnant from the assault and carries the child to term, "hard" evidence is almost impossible to obtain. Men usually perpetrate sexual misconduct in private and unless they are interrupted by a third party, there are usually no eye witnesses. DNA testing is impossible if the man doesn't get any semen or genetically identifiable body fluids on or in the woman, and even if he does, there is only a limited window of time where DNA testing is possible. If a woman doesn't get to a clinic or hospital immediately after the misconduct, it is unlikely that a DNA test will provide any help to her case [People don’t realize how short the time window is if a woman wants a scientifically accurate result. It’s so short, it’s almost unrealistic. And let’s not even get in to the details of the reliability of DNA testing.]
These realities give our justice system a very difficult problem: When sexual misconduct represents an extremely serious offense deserving of legitimate punishment, how should it be administered when the greatest source of evidence for victims to use in prosecution cases is hearsay? The justice system is undermining the notions of justice when it allows guilty people to go unpunished, but it also undermines the notions of justice when it punishes innocent people. So what should it do?
Unless there is legitimate hard evidence that a person actually committed sexual misconduct, I don't think the justice department has any business pursuing a criminal case. I think sending someone to jail and ruining their life over something they didn't do is much worse than allowing someone to remain free who did something wrong. Both are very bad and very serious, but I believe I have chosen the lesser of two evils. What would happen if we prosecuted cases like theft and murder on the basis of extenuating circumstances, character, and hearsay? We would all be justified in saying that are justice system was doing just about everything but applying justice.