Who thinks rape shield laws should cover the accused too?

Question

I was having this argument with my mother (Who has a degree in womens studies and is a feminist, go figure.)

So I think rape shield laws should cover men and women accused of rape from having their names thrown all over the place by the media unless the accused is found guilty in a court of law. Then the man or woman gets sentenced and is put in a s*x offender registry.

My mother, however, does not agree with this, but why? She did not even give a reason to why she does not agree.

It isn't fair for a man or a woman to have their reputation ruined by an accuser when the accusations prove to be false. (Who the h**l am I kidding?) For the mans reputation to be ruined by the woman or man accuser. (Men rape other men too you know.) Since men commit rape more than women stastically.

Also I think people who waste court time with false accusations should be sentenced in prison for a few years with parole, then pay damages to the accused for ruining the accused reputation and apologize to the falsely accused face. (My mother disagreed with this too.)

So I am asking what you all think of this? Fair, un-biased, and it would apply to men and women under all circumstances.

Answer 1

You are correct. It's not reasonable at all.. The name of the accused of many ALLEGED crimes should be shielded until proven guilty. It's human nature to lean toward guilt even if someone was only accused. Those associations tend to linger for too long as well..  

Answer 2

Would you extend this to other crimes?  As far as I know, anyone accused of any crime can be named in the press (unless they're minors, in some places).  If someone is accused of murder or burglary or fraud, should their identity be protected to preserve their reputation in case they are acquitted ?

Obviously being accused of rape is a very serious matter.  But then, so is being accused of fraud - and sentencing for fraud is often much more severe than for rape.

If we're going to protect people's identities, I think it should apply to all crimes, and not just to rape.

Of course, another issue here is that the media wouldn't be able to cover big trials in the same way.  Think about the OJ Simpson trial or the Michael Jackson trial - and imagine how different it would have been if the identities of the accused had been protected.  It could actually be a very good thing to keep sensational cases out of the media - it might be more in the interests of justice!

As for false accusations - your suggestion might work if there could be conclusive proof that the offence could not have taken place.  Unfortunately this kind of proof is virtually impossible to get.  An acquittal certainly doesn't provide that evidence.  And if we criminalise women who admit they made it up, then women won't ever admit they made it up, and innocent men could end up being convicted.

There are always problems in deciding the best way to deal with these issues, but I'd be happy enough to see the identities of people accused of crimes protected until they're convicted.  (Presumably acquittals couldn't be reported at all.)

Answer 3

Your mom is a sexist. No way around it. If I where you I would stop speaking to her unless it was absolutely necessary for a month or so.

      Feminist's do not care about equality they only care about superiority. It is like a Klansman raising an African American child.

    Your better off once you hit 18 to figure out a way to make a clean break and ignore her.

It might sound harsh but you don't need hostile hate full people in your life.

--------

The thing feminist misandrics do not understand or care to understand that if I accuse someone of burning my house down but it turns out that I was the person who did it then I would go to jail.

Rape is the only felony that you can blindly accuse someone of even if the intent was malicious and not spend one day in jail even if a videotape confession surfaced.

     Feminist want to keep it that way because it is one of there many terror tools.

Answer 4

I agree that men shouldn't get their face plastered all over the news as rapists just for being accused. Thats just retarded.

I also agree that if the accusation is PROVEN to be false, that the accuser should face prison time, a couple years actually sounds about right. Its alot less than their victim would have got if he/she(less likely) if they had been convicted.

The huge problem in these cases is that if your accused you instantly have a bad rap and everyone assumes your guilty, and people sitting in their dining rooms watching the news say "oh what a monster, i hope they hang him" when he hasn't even been found guilty yet is just disgusting to me.

Take the Duke Lacrosse Case, the accuser, Crystal Mangum, is actually writing a book about her ordeal, even when they proved that the rape never occured, not beyond a reasonable doubt, without a doubt, 100% proved(DNA evidence) that the rape didn't occur.

She also faces no charges for falsely accusing the 3 boys.

Your mother just may need to take a look at the bigger picture, if i may be so bold as to judge your mother without knowing her.

Shiphrah: I agree, why not? If it applies to rape, it should apply to all crimes, for all people.

Why not? The whole premise of the justice system is innocent until proven guilty, and you dont name an innocent in the papers and besmirtch the name of the innocent do you?

After they are convicted i have no problem naming them in the press.

Answer 5

The laws do protect the accused as well as the plaintiff.  The subject is extremely difficult overall for the law.  Before newer evidence laws were passed, extraordinarilly few rape cases were even reported.  Alleged rape victims were the ones put on trial and it was far too painful to come out with.  Now that the law protects both parties better, we get false cases.  But...do not blame the system for that...

Answer 6

The damage is obviously done when an innocent man is accused of rape.

Women who falsely accuse a man of rape likely do so with the intent of destroying his reputation and good standing among his acquaintances.

These women are able to do so because rape shield laws enable them to make such accusations without the scrutiny of the public.  What's more, there is no penalty for false accusations.

I understand the issues surrounding rape.  Perhaps rape shield laws made sense 20-30 years ago, but now, with a greater awareness of rape, and the withering of attitudes such as "she must have been asking for it", it seems that rape shield laws are abused more than they actually help.

The other issue is that trials in the USA are supposed to be public.  Concealing the identity of both the "victim" and the accused would only create secret trials, and once that pandora's box is opened, we can conceivably go down the slippery slope where all trials some day are held in secret.

Better than concealing the identity of the accused would be to divulge the identity of all.

Answer 7

In Australia, once charges are laid the name and details of the accused cannot be publicised.

This is true  in many other countries also, but in the US the media have pushed hard to get the right to print and broadcast whatever the want to and it is allowed under the US constitution.

And, unless you don't have 'nuisance' or similar laws where you live, people who make false accusations can already be charged, that is a matter for the cops, plus they can usually be sued in civil court.

And as to "why" your mother thinks one way or the other, I've no idea. She is entitled to her views, just as you are to yours.

Cheers :-)

Answer 8

What about if they maintained a registry of false rape accusers just like registery of s*x offenders and both registries should serve equivalent purpose i.e such a woman if she reports rape in future should not be taken seriously to begin with and should have to undergo same process of proving conclusively before law as is with any crime other than rape.

Answer 9

i agree with you

until proven guilty and sentences the person/s should have their identity's protected, try this argument with your mother even if the person is later found guilty or not what about the families who's lives would be ruined

Answer 10

If this were to happen, it should be the same for other crimes.

False accusers are given jail time.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk...

Answer 11

Because its public information; the last time I looked the United States wasn't run as a dictatorship with secret prisons and kangaroo courts.  Forgive me if I am wrong, and that this has changed under the Bush Administration:

"Freedom of information legislation, also described as open records or (especially in the United States) sunshine laws, are laws which set rules on access to information or records held by government bodies. In general, such laws define a legal process by which government information is required to be available to the public. In many countries there are constitutional guarantees for the right of access to information, but usually these are unused if specific legislation to support them does not exist.

Over 70 countries around the world have implemented some form of such legislation. Sweden's Freedom of the Press Act of 1766 is thought to be the oldest.

Other countries are working towards introducing such laws, and many regions of countries with national legislation have local laws. For example, all states of the United States have laws governing access to public documents of state and local taxing entities, in addition to that country's Freedom of Information Act which governs records management of documents in the possession of the federal government."

Answer 12

Do people get to have their identities hidden if they're accused of any other crime?

Answer 13

You're pretty upset, Imagine how Kobe felt....

He had to pay a "Feminist" Woman who led him on millions of dollars.

This whole feminism thing is ridiculous. I am a feminist, Women and Men deserve equal rights. But women should realize that they have way more power than men.

Answer 14

I'm pretty sure it already works that way in Canada, but if it doesn't where you come from, it should.

As for false accusations, yes, a perjury charge and damages for character defamation would do it.

Answer 15

Absolutely..  being accused of rape(or any other serious crime for that matter) is terrible and can seriously damage a person reputation.  Unless the accused has been found and proven guilty, their name should be protected