|
lfield posted:You stopped reading before you got to the end of that sentence, I see. Give it another go. I believe in you, Cole. Ok, I read it again. And I'm asking again. Cole posted:Not necessary to who? To you? Why are you the law of the land on what is necessary information? And again I'll ask, why is it necessary to state that they were men? You know, if we're not allowed to state any unneccesary information.
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 10:40 |
|
|
"unless you're trying to assign some meaning to their race." I said it was unnecessary to a discussion to mention irrelevant information. If it is mentioned, it must necessarily have a meaning. AR's mention of race was not purely descriptive. It did have an implied meaning - to prove the woman in the case a liar. That doesn't follow, because it is entirely possible to be raped by men of different races. Unlikely doesn't mean it didn't happen. Dismissing an alleged rape because you think it unlikely is totally fair grounds for being called misogynist.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
I think these last five pages have convinced me to take this thread off my reading list. Thanks....
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
what made it unreliable? 1. Timing and motive to fabricate. 2. Vaguely describing 4 suspects whose combined ethnic makeup results in a suspect list that is basically "the entire base minus a few Southeast Asians, maybe." And I am still not sure how my relaying an anecdote about a woman making a false rape allegation makes me a racist. I really don't understand your logic there. I mean...you're calling me a racist for criticizing someone trying to use the "scary brown person rapins' the white wimenz" trope to get herself out of trouble...something that's been happening since Powell v. Alabama. So, if I understand you, saying "it's bullshit that people use institutional racism and fear topes to try to bolster false allegations against minorities" makes you a racist. I'm sorry... I really don't understand what the gently caress you are talking about. ActusRhesus fucked around with this message at 18:28 on Aug 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:The demographics and cliqueish nature of the military makes her description of events staggeringly unlikely, especially if she is alleging all four assaults occurred during the under aged drinking she was getting NJP'd for. The timing of the revelation also makes it suspect. Yes. This. joat mon was a military defense counsel and prosecutor. would love to hear his take on this. maybe if a man confirms it instead of a self-hating misogynist it will carry more weight.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
I feel like I'm getting the inside line on how to make victims of rape out to be liars, here. It's very interesting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
Yeah this is creepy as gently caress http://www.avclub.com/tvclub/review-falsely-accused-sleep-your-teacher-little-p-223748
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
AR is hardly the first JAG I've heard express that sentiment. The nature of the military system incentivises frivolous counterclaims of all kinds. (I know, hearsay, but this isn't a court of law, right?  )
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Yes. Maybe sexual assault training in the military would be more useful if they teach men not to rape rather than to fear women falsely accusing them of rape.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
Enough is enough! Police are getting beaten up because of the bad press they're getting! We need to give them free rein and show them more respect and not question their choice to shoot people so they can avoid getting beaten up by criminals!
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:Maybe sexual assault training in the military would be more useful if they teach men not to rape rather than to fear women falsely accusing them of rape. which military sexual assault trainings have you been to?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:which military sexual assault trainings have you been to? I haven't been to any, so I've just had to go off the things you've snidely implied. I've been to plenty of them on college campuses though, which you seem to think are similarly worthless.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:Enough is enough! Police are getting beaten up because of the bad press they're getting! We need to give them free rein and show them more respect and not question their choice to shoot people so they can avoid getting beaten up by criminals! Remember, if you don't think cops should kill anyone that threatens them, you're actively wishing death on the police officers! At least according to the police apologists...
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:I haven't been to any, so I've just had to go off the things you've snidely implied. I've been to plenty of them on college campuses though, which you seem to think are similarly worthless. so, if you haven't been to one, how can you comment on their usefulness or effectiveness?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:so, if you haven't been to one, how can you comment on their usefulness or effectiveness? Do you make that same argument about prison sentences?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 20:00
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:I haven't been to any, so I've just had to go off the things you've snidely implied. I've been to plenty of them on college campuses though, which you seem to think are similarly worthless. They're worthless to her as a prosecutor because the standard for the crime is different than the standard for university punishment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
The interim police chief in Ferguson has been accused of falsifying documents, suspended 3 times from his job and the subject of a protective order from a woman who says he hit her.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:The interim police chief in Ferguson has been accused of falsifying documents, suspended 3 times from his job and the subject of a protective order from a woman who says he hit her. Those are only accusations, probably followed by totally bullshit suspensions. Racism doesn't exist anymore, when will you darkie retards get that (Lmao how does a guy like that get to be a police chief of all things, gj america) (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
Illegal Username posted:Those are only accusations, probably followed by totally bullshit suspensions. Also, doesn't this thread complain when people shot by police have their personal lives dragged through the mud? How dare you bring up a police chief's person life! (I haven't double checked with the apologists, but I think this is in the playbook)
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 20:25
|
|
|
I liked the part about 'most' police stations being safe spaces, free of workplace bullying and harrassment. On a leap of faith, they'll just be that way. Everyone loves a rat! loving beautiful.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
Illegal Username posted:Those are only accusations, probably followed by totally bullshit suspensions. He's black, so obviously there is no racism involved. Just putting a black person in a position of power doesn't fix everything. Are they trying to prove this is a systemic issue?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:I haven't been to any, so I've just had to go off the things you've snidely implied. I've been to plenty of them on college campuses though, which you seem to think are similarly worthless. hobbesmaster posted:They're worthless to her as a prosecutor because the standard for the crime is different than the standard for university punishment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Actually, while I don't buy the "false accusation epidemic" touted by the men's rights lobby, false rape allegations are not uncommon at all, especially in the military and college environments where you have trainings that literally teach "one drink of alcohol = no consent" and people who enter into ill-advised consensual sexual encounters now incorrectly believe it was "rape" because they had consumed 2 zimas. This does't mean they were lying. they probably do feel victimized. And maybe on a moral level they were, but it's not rape. Ergo false report. What in the world are you talking about? No one is saying that allegation is proof of guilt in individual instances. It is just simply extremely likely (barring some really unusual influence/motivation) that if a bunch of accusations for a particular crime/action exist that the crime is happening to some of those people. The chance that 500 people who make rape accusations are all (or even most) lying is negligible, and the same applies to accusations of workplace/hiring discrimination. The fact that false accusations occur is completely irrelevant to the claim that "the crime/action in question is occurring," unless you can give some reason why large numbers of people would all be lying about something. When many accusations of something exist, the burden of proof is far stronger on the person who is claiming that the accused action isn't happen (or is happening to a negligible extent). It's also important to take into account he expected outcomes of assuming the crime/action is taking place vs assuming it isn't. If wrong about the former, the worst case is that maybe some people waste some time/money trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. If wrong about the latter, you're allowing things like workplace discrimination and retaliatory firing to continue. A world where people wrongly assume that retaliatory firing is taking place isn't nearly as bad as a world where people wrongly assume that it never takes place. Again - no one is going to prison just because you assume that - broadly speaking - a crime is taking place. No one is assuming that specific people are guilty on this basis (well, I guess some people might, but at least not me or most of the other people in this thread). I also noticed in this post that you seem to have a really easy time imagining dishonest people filing false accusations of workplace discrimination/wrongful firing, while being unable or unwilling to take seriously the alternative. Have you considered that *gasp* you might actually be biased in favor of the sort of people you work with and associate with on a regular basis? Everyone has bias; the problem is when people refuse to acknowledge their own.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:When many accusations of something exist, the burden of proof is far stronger on the person who is claiming that the accused action isn't happen (or is happening to a negligible extent) So if a lot of people say something happened it becomes a reverse onus situation?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:When many accusations of something exist, the burden of proof is far stronger on the person who is claiming that the accused action isn't happen (or is happening to a negligible extent). I seem to have missed that standard of proof. I am familiar with probable cause, preponderance of the evidence, clear and convincing, and beyond reasonable doubt. Where does "well a lot of people say it, so it's probably true" fit on the continuum?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:They're also useless in general because the facilitators are handcuffed by an unwillingness to embrace the ambiguity inherent in human interactions and a need to draw a universal, concrete policy for fear of condoning sexual assault. This is hardly a novel or unique problem (See the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in R. v J.A.) but the military does a terrible job of it because, y'know, it's the government. I'd guess most college symposiums don't do much better. Bill Cosby isn't a fan of removing "ambiguity inherent in human interactions" either: http://www.mediaite.com/online/bill-cosby-wrote-about-scorn-for-sexual-consent-rules-at-colleges/ quote:Cosby blasted affirmative consent (the idea that only “yes” means “yes”) as an unrealistic way for men to get permission to make moves. One passage reads that campus authorities are always “ready to charge you with sexual harassment if you put your hand on any woman besides one who had asked you for help in crossing the street.” Cosby has his own opinions on how best to engage a woman correctly, and to navigate issues of consent. quote:I don’t hear her say anything. And I don’t feel her say anything...I take her hair and I pull it back and I have her face like this. And I’m talking to her ...And I talked to her about relaxing, being strong. And I said to her, come in, meaning her body.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 21:00
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:When many accusations of something exist, the burden of proof is far stronger on the person who is claiming that the accused action isn't happen (or is happening to a negligible extent). Ytlaya posted:It's also important to take into account he expected outcomes of assuming the crime/action is taking place vs assuming it isn't. If wrong about the former, the worst case is that maybe some people waste some time/money trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. If wrong about the latter, you're allowing things like workplace discrimination and retaliatory firing to continue. A world where people wrongly assume that retaliatory firing is taking place isn't nearly as bad as a world where people wrongly assume that it never takes place. Again - no one is going to prison just because you assume that - broadly speaking - a crime is taking place. No one is assuming that specific people are guilty on this basis. Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 21:09 on Aug 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 21:07
|
|
|
can someone just clarify for me which categories of accusations are to be taken at face value, and which accused persons are entitled to due process? I'm getting confused.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 21:09
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Where does "well a lot of people say it, so it's probably true" fit on the continuum? Out here. Where people actually live.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 21:10
|
|
|
jfood posted:Out here. Where people actually live. so if enough people think someone is guilty, can we just dispense with the trial?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
jfood posted:Out here. Where people actually live. SedanChair posted:Bill Cosby isn't a fan of removing "ambiguity inherent in human interactions" either: "Adjuicating interpretation of a person's state of mind is real hard for institutions that rely on writing explicit rules, and they are often confounded by conflict with real world norms." "I guess that means you agree with Bill Cosby raping women?" Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 21:22 on Aug 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
http://abc7.com/news/3-chp-officers-attorney-arrested-on-suspicion-of-murder/931517/ SAN FRANCISCO -- Three current and former California Highway Patrol officers, a prominent criminal defense lawyer and five other people were arrested Friday in connection with the disappearance and killing of a Central Valley man, officials said. Law enforcement officials announced the arrests during a brief news conference in Modesto. The officials said the nine people all played a part in killing Korey Kauffman, 26, who was reported missing in April 2012. Kauffman's body was found by hunters in August 2013 in a remote area of Central California. An arrest warrant says attorney Frank Carson orchestrated the killing and enlisted the help of two brothers who own a liquor store in Turlock. Investigators say Carson believed Kauffman was stealing valuable antiques from storage containers on his property and arranged for his death. Carson's attorney Percey Martinez said his client is innocent and his arrest was politically motivated. Carson ran unsuccessfully for district attorney last year. Carson has been under investigation for two years, Martinez said. "We welcome the opportunity to fight this in court," Martinez said. The CHP officers were all associated with the brothers and the Turlock liquor store. CHP officers Scott McFarlane and Eduardo Quintanar are suspected of obstructing the investigation. Former CHP Officer Walter Wells is suspected in the killing. "The entire department and I are appalled at the mere thought that one former and two current employees played any role in this incident," CHP Commissioner Joe Farrow said.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:so if enough people think someone is guilty, can we just dispense with the trial? How is that bin Laden chap doing?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
Bel Shazar posted:How is that bin Laden chap doing? While I think aspects of the drone policy outside recognized theaters of combat pose some real due process red flags, are you seriously trying to equate military force against a legitimate military target, who was the subject of an entire Congressional AUMF with regular civilian law enforcement? That's pretty much comparing apples to nuclear warheads. I mean...the big theme I am getting from this thread is "the criminal justice system is evil an oppressive...unless it's someone I want convicted, in which case, gently caress your rights."
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:so if enough people think someone is guilty, can we just dispense with the trial? wrong question.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Studies vary and numbers are higher in areas with concentrated populations of younger people (e.g. college and military) , but for general population, most reputable studies converge around the 2-10% range. The only things worth reading there are the Lisak study, which as far as I can tell is a fairly solid piece of scholarship and is pretty interesting, especially their lit review, and the Rennison and Addington article cited in that second Slate article, which is possibly worth reading although their methods are like weirdly simple and their format is also weird. Who fuckin puts their results on page 2? Maybe that's the standard in Social Work stuff, since according to Sage that's a really highly ranked journal. You'll need journal access for it though. The Slate articles themselves are garbage though, and the Washington Times can just flat out be ignored. Glad ya linked the the Lisak study though it's a good one, I'm pretty sure. Seems like definitional issues are a really huge problem in the study of sexual violence, which isn't surprising at all because welcome to social sciences.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 21:36
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:can someone just clarify for me which categories of accusations are to be taken at face value, and which accused persons are entitled to due process? Everybody is entitled to due process. Do you think that minorities receive equal treatment and equal due process in our current judicial system? From a recent post in another thread it seems to me that you think that there is no racial bias in the system, I'd be interested to see the evidence you have that contradicts the evidence that I've seen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 21:37
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:so if enough people think someone is guilty, can we just dispense with the trial? Not in any individual case, but if a lot of people are independently complaining about reprisals for whistleblowing or sexual assault or whatever in an organization, it's reasonable to suspect a genuine institutional problem exists. Dead Reckoning posted:They're also useless in general because the facilitators are handcuffed by an unwillingness to embrace the ambiguity inherent in human interactions and a need to draw a universal, concrete policy for fear of condoning sexual assault. This is hardly a novel or unique problem (See the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in R. v J.A.) but the military does a terrible job of it because, y'know, it's the government. I'd guess most college symposiums don't do much better. If the government is so terrible and incompetent at everything, why should we trust it when it kills a citizen, investigates itself, and says it was justified? VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 22:07 on Aug 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:If the government is so terrible and incompetent at everything, why should we trust it when it kills a citizen, investigates itself, and says it was justified? Comedy answer: we should trust the government, because if they were intentionally killing people and covering it up they'd be doing a terrible job at that too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 22:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 10:40 |
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Comedy answer: we should trust the government, because if they were intentionally killing people and covering it up they'd be doing a terrible job at that too. What are you talking about? The government regularly and intentionally kills people and covers it up with only internal "oversight". If they're doing such a terrible job at it, why is it an ongoing practice and everyone involved is getting away with it? http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/24/obama-drone-memo-secret-law-transparency
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 22:46
|
|
