Rapist Wants his Victim's Browsing Records in Court Case

[Anxious Girl]

http://todaynews.today.com/_news/2012/1 ... cords?lite

Warning: Don't read half the comments. It'll make your stomach churn. :evil: :cry:

[debrand]

I followed your advice and did not read the comments. It is depressing the type of comments that follow articles like these.

[OkToBeTakei]

I followed your advice and did not read the comments. It is depressing the type of comments that follow articles like these.

I did the same. I am happy she not only did this. But also that her rapist was convicted.

I also followed the link to the horrific story of the woman raped at age 8. What a very strong lady.

[Guest Anonymous]

I read some of the comments, and maybe different ones were top for you, but the ones I got were mostly in her defense, a couple with the claim that an accusation is all that should be needed for automatic conviction (how does this forum feel about that?), while only a few said the defense should have the right to search for evidence that she may have been lying.

And then there are a couple comments about how the Catholic church should be allowed to deny birth control to women because it would violate the church's rights somehow.

[debrand]

I read some of the comments, and maybe different ones were top for you, but the ones I got were mostly in her defense, a couple with the claim that an accusation is all that should be needed for automatic conviction (how does this forum feel about that?), while only a few said the defense should have the right to search for evidence that she may have been lying.

And then there are a couple comments about how the Catholic church should be allowed to deny birth control to women because it would violate the church's rights somehow.

Everyone deserves a trial. An accusation doesn't mean that someone is guilty.

[Guest Anonymous]

...I got were mostly in her defense, a couple with the claim that an accusation is all that should be needed for automatic conviction (how does this forum feel about that?)

I don't imagine that this forum feels one way or the other about that since it consists of lines of coding, and I don't think Skynet has taken over quite yet. Individual members of the forum will undoubtedly all have their own opinions.

Personally I think that the burden of proof should be met in a rape trial in order to secure a conviction. I also think that rape victims are often treated terribly by the justice system and I wish that wasn't the case.

[OkToBeTakei]

I don't imagine that this forum feels one way or the other about that since it consists of lines of coding, and I don't think Skynet has taken over quite yet. Individual members of the forum will undoubtedly all have their own opinions.

Personally I think that the burden of proof should be met in a rape trial in order to secure a conviction. I also think that rape victims are often treated terribly by the justice system and I wish that wasn't the case.

OT. But that really just made me laugh. :lol:

[Guest Anonymous]

OT. But that really just made me laugh. :lol:

Awesome. :P

I get so many chuckles reading here, I'm always happy when I give one back.

[Guest Anonymous]

I was asking because on another forum I used to go to the matter of whether or not a trial should even happen got heated with some people saying it re-victimizes someone who claims she was raped by making her relive it because no woman would ever lie about it and because it can be hard to prove it happened when there are usually just a couple witnesses (the accuser and accused) and so it's sometimes word against word and not taking her word at face value is also re-victimizing her, and some saying that lying does happen sometimes and that the accused deserves a full trial, the right to search for evidence that may show innocence, and not to be condemned before evidence has been presented. The debate got so heated that the admin has called for a cool-down period and closed the forum for a while. So now I'm scared of saying my own thoughts on an issue like this.

[duplessis3]

So you posted something that a 2 second pause in thought would tell you was ridiculous? Or maybe you just wanted to stir something up by asking a provoking rhetorical question?

[Kaylee]

the claim that an accusation is all that should be needed for automatic conviction

I disagree, because I think anybody accused of any crime should have a right to a trial and defense.

I do wish that rape was successfully prosecuted more often and that the courts and media didn't turn on women in a way that often victimizes them all over again, but I don't know how that could happen. I think that the numbers of "false reports" are widely exaggerated by rape apologists, but they do happen sometimes and it is only fair for the accused to be able to defend themself.

[OkToBeTakei]

I was asking because on another forum I used to go to the matter of whether or not a trial should even happen got heated with some people saying it re-victimizes someone who claims she was raped by making her relive it because no woman would ever lie about it and because it can be hard to prove it happened when there are usually just a couple witnesses (the accuser and accused) and so it's sometimes word against word and not taking her word at face value is also re-victimizing her, and some saying that lying does happen sometimes and that the accused deserves a full trial, the right to search for evidence that may show innocence, and not to be condemned before evidence has been presented. The debate got so heated that the admin has called for a cool-down period and closed the forum for a while. So now I'm scared of saying my own thoughts on an issue like this.

Say your own thoughts. You will get all kinds of reaction but rest assured although relatively new here, I feel safe to say the forum will not be closed. Rape and prosecuting it is always a very heated topic. But here you will be heard and very likely learn.

[OkToBeTakei]

Awesome. :P

I get so many chuckles reading here, I'm always happy when I give one back.

Well you did..and now all those lurking guests are googling Skynet :lol:

[2xx1xy1JD]

In some cases, search records can be relevant. In the recent "honor killing" case here, part of the damning evidence against the accused was the fact that he googled things like "where to commit a murder" and google maps of the murder site.

In a case like this, evidence of a google search "how to fake a rape charge" would obviously be very different than a google search "rape crisis center".

Things like counselling records and medical records have been admissible in court cases for some time.

Perhaps, if violation of privacy was the issue, there could be some sort of "voir dire" or process by which the information would be released to the lawyers only, and there would be a motion to the court needed to use the evidence at trial and release it to the accused.

No, I don't want to see anyone automatically convicted without a trial. I'm in the middle of a trial right now where nothing is quite as it seems, and real digging was necessary to get at the truth.

[Kaylee]

In some cases, search records can be relevant. In the recent "honor killing" case here, part of the damning evidence against the accused was the fact that he googled things like "where to commit a murder" and google maps of the murder site.

In a case like this, evidence of a google search "how to fake a rape charge" would obviously be very different than a google search "rape crisis center".

I get this, but I also see where it could go all sorts of wrong in a rape trial. ie, if the victim was searching for anything sexual or browsing dating sites, or anything like that beforehand, I could totally see certain types of prosecutors using that to try to paint them in a bad light. I'm also not at all comfortable with that sort of personal information being available to a (accused) rapist.

OTOH, I can see where it might be the only way to get the truth if there is other evidence it may be a false accusation, but I think that information should be restricted to the lawyers or judge and not released to the accused. There's a situation on another forum a visit that might end up being one of those cases - woman admits to a relationship with a man involving consensual rough/kinky sex, now says she wants to press rape charges not because she didn't consent to what was done, but because she consented "only within the context of a monogamous relationship", is pissed off since she found out he had another girlfriend at the time, and says that her consent didn't count because she only agreed to monogamy. Her own posts in that forum about him and the situation would probably be enough to clear him of the charges.

[2xx1xy1JD]

I know the "rape shield" law in Canada prevents defense lawyers from using evidence of general sexual behavior of the victim, so here evidence of visiting dating websites would be excluded.

That's why I think that a motion regarding the evidence would be useful before it gets revealed to either the accused or the jury. You want to ask if it is relevant, and if the relevance outweighs the privacy and/or safety concerns. In some cases, I could see a court ordering the removal of information about other people, for example, before allowing the info to be given to the accused.

[valsa]

I get this, but I also see where it could go all sorts of wrong in a rape trial. ie, if the victim was searching for anything sexual or browsing dating sites, or anything like that beforehand, I could totally see certain types of prosecutors using that to try to paint them in a bad light. I'm also not at all comfortable with that sort of personal information being available to a (accused) rapist.

I have a friend who has been sexually assaulted in three different incidents by three different men. She also occasionally enjoys reading fictional erotica stories featuring rape. Considering that we live in a world where just last year a cop told women that to avoid being raped they should "avoid dressing like sluts", I can definitely see a defense attorney trying to use the fictional stories about rape she reads to try to convince a jury that she wasn't really raped or that she actually secretly liked it.

[OkToBeTakei]

I know the "rape shield" law in Canada prevents defense lawyers from using evidence of general sexual behavior of the victim, so here evidence of visiting dating websites would be excluded.

That's why I think that a motion regarding the evidence would be useful before it gets revealed to either the accused or the jury. You want to ask if it is relevant, and if the relevance outweighs the privacy and/or safety concerns. In some cases, I could see a court ordering the removal of information about other people, for example, before allowing the info to be given to the accused.

You could be sitting at home every night on a dating site, watching porn, checking out the latest lingerie, be a member of this site, be a member of just about anything you choose.

You walk out your door next day, get raped. Go on a date, get raped. Never mind how you were dressed, it may now be this.

It has always been difficult to 'prove' a rape charge, this will totally add to the difficulties that already prevent many victims both male and female from doing so.

:(

[debrand]

I was asking because on another forum I used to go to the matter of whether or not a trial should even happen got heated with some people saying it re-victimizes someone who claims she was raped by making her relive it because no woman would ever lie about it and because it can be hard to prove it happened when there are usually just a couple witnesses (the accuser and accused) and so it's sometimes word against word and not taking her word at face value is also re-victimizing her, and some saying that lying does happen sometimes and that the accused deserves a full trial, the right to search for evidence that may show innocence, and not to be condemned before evidence has been presented. The debate got so heated that the admin has called for a cool-down period and closed the forum for a while. So now I'm scared of saying my own thoughts on an issue like this.

I've never heard or read anyone claim that suspects don't deserve trials. That doesn't mean that you are being dishonest, just that I've never come across that idea and it strikes me as bizarre. Can you tell us what the name of the forum was?

[debrand]

OT. But that really just made me laugh. :lol:

Lissar made me smile too. Actually, I had to think a moment before I recalled the Terminator movies. :lol:

[Guest Anonymous]

I know the "rape shield" law in Canada prevents defense lawyers from using evidence of general sexual behavior of the victim, so here evidence of visiting dating websites would be excluded.

As it should! Even prostitutes have the right to say no, even if she's turned a dozen tricks that night. It doesn't matter. NO is NO.

[Guest Anonymous]

OTOH, I can see where it might be the only way to get the truth if there is other evidence it may be a false accusation, but I think that information should be restricted to the lawyers or judge and not released to the accused. There's a situation on another forum a visit that might end up being one of those cases - woman admits to a relationship with a man involving consensual rough/kinky sex, now says she wants to press rape charges not because she didn't consent to what was done, but because she consented "only within the context of a monogamous relationship", is pissed off since she found out he had another girlfriend at the time, and says that her consent didn't count because she only agreed to monogamy. Her own posts in that forum about him and the situation would probably be enough to clear him of the charges.

On my goodness, there's a case, I think fairly recent, or at least I was hearing about it last week on the news, with BDSM, and they had a contract signed with their limits, and he violated the contract by ending the relationship early, so she's now considering the whole ting void and said she wouldn't have agreed to any of it if she knew it would all end early. The news compared it to 50 Shades of Gray, and I didn't know what that was. There were a couple attorneys debating if the contract would exonerate someone and if it should, and what about when it's violated by one person deciding no more.

These sorts of cases make it tougher for women who really were raped. Someone cheating doesn't make rape, someone deciding no more BDSM sex doesn't make it all rape. Thank goodness these are the minority of cases, but they're the ones that get the most attention and make it harder for actual victims to come forward.

I think all cases should be heard in closed courtrooms and the name of the accused only given if there's a conviction.

There is just no easy way to handle all of this. Rape is one of the oldest forms of control and terrorism in the world

[2xx1xy1JD]

Here is the text of Canada's "rape shield" law:

http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/r ... ec2_smooth

Basically, you can't produce evidence of past sexual history of the complainant in a rape trial and try to suggest that the victim is a slut. The fact that a victim consent to sex before, or even consented to sex with the accused before, is not proof that she consented at the time in question.

Certainly, dating sites, erotica sites, etc. are NOT relevant evidence in my humble legal opinion. OTOH, googling "how to fake a rape charge" or posting about the specific incident and really that you may have consented but then got angry at the accused and charged him would be relevant.

General info on rape shield laws:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_shield_law

[valsa]

On my goodness, there's a case, I think fairly recent, or at least I was hearing about it last week on the news, with BDSM, and they had a contract signed with their limits, and he violated the contract by ending the relationship early, so she's now considering the whole ting void and said she wouldn't have agreed to any of it if she knew it would all end early. The news compared it to 50 Shades of Gray, and I didn't know what that was. There were a couple attorneys debating if the contract would exonerate someone and if it should, and what about when it's violated by one person deciding no more.

These sorts of cases make it tougher for women who really were raped. Someone cheating doesn't make rape, someone deciding no more BDSM sex doesn't make it all rape. Thank goodness these are the minority of cases, but they're the ones that get the most attention and make it harder for actual victims to come forward.

I think all cases should be heard in closed courtrooms and the name of the accused only given if there's a conviction.

There is just no easy way to handle all of this. Rape is one of the oldest forms of control and terrorism in the world

This is interesting to me because, if anything, I think a situation like this involves a grey area in the reverse of what's being claimed. Essentially, the woman who is claiming to have been raped because she wouldn't have agreed to the BDSM if she knew the relationship was going to end early seems to be using the threat of a rape accusation to force someone to continue a sexual relationship they won't want to continue. That brings in questions of consent on the part of the person who is basically being blackmailed into staying in the relationship.

[luckystone]

Did they explain why that information could be relevant? I don't understand at all. I can understand why they would ask about past sexual behaviour etc. (I think that's horrible too, but there's more of a reason), but computer searches? Why? In case she was secretly having a relationship with him? In case she googled rape porn or how to get someone convicted of rape?

The BDSM one is odd because it does seem like pressure. And I don't think it's a crime if you say you'll only do certain things if they stay and they don't.

But misrepresentation can void consent and turn otherwise consensual sex into rape in some unusual cases. Not sure how I feel about that.