I think its more complicated than that. In child custody cases its not uncommon for the mother to accuse the father of abuse. While every and I mean every case of abuse should be investigated I believe we should determine that there is evidence before we tar and feather the accused. Its the foundation of our criminal justice system.
But no one is tarring and feathering anyone. She simply told her story, and it’s her story to tell, in any way she sees fit, as long as it’s truthful. If she doesn’t want to name names, that’s her choice, and IMO it’s wrong to criticize her for not telling her story (which we have no reason to believe is not truthful) in the way you’d prefer.
This sort of criticism just adds to that giant pile of reasons for why women don’t come forward and tell their stories. Wouldn’t you rather not add to that? Isn’t it better to be welcoming and encouraging for women (and men) to tell their stories, in the way most comfortable for them, and refrain from any criticism unless there’s good reason to believe that they’re lying?
I didn’t say that I didn’t believe her. I said we must wait for some evidence to come out that supports her version of events. She said that she went to lawyers and they turned her away. Why?
I’m concerned about the man in these cases because they are losing their careers without an adequate way to defend themselves.
Accusations are not facts. If Hardwicke did what his accusor has charged him with then lets condemn him. Maybe she has as ax to grind. Do you think she would be the first to try to hurt an ex out of hurt feelings?
Wait for what?
iiandyiiii - he’s not apologizing for his rush to judgment, he’s apologizing for using the word “coward”. He used a lot of other words that aren’t any better. Despite his own statement to the contrary, he won’t grant that she might be telling the truth until more women come forward, and now he’s conflating her story with what happens in child custody cases. It’s clear that he is not only not neutral on this, he believes she is lying.
Sure lets listen to everyone who claims they have been abused. Its the right thing to do. But shouldn’t we give the accused a forum to respond? Abusers should be punished harshly. But lets try to have a fair system where both parties can be heard.
Bullshit. I said at the very beginning of the thread that she could be right. I also said that we shouldn’t rush to judgment.
Ok, so he says he didn’t do it, what then? what sort of evidence are you hoping to get?
What if she is making up or distorting the truth. Does Hardwicke not have the right to try to defend himself?
Nothing is stopping Hardwick or anyone from speaking, if they wish. What has occurred that’s not fair (aside from folks calling her names for doing nothing more than telling her story)? All she did was come forward and say “this stuff happened to me”. What are you pushing back against?
Who is stopping him from defending himself? Who and what are you fighting?
I have two of them. Ex wives never act like normal people.
So lynch mob mentality, right?
What on Earth are you talking about? Who has called for a lynching, real or metaphorical, of Hardwick or anyone else?
This overheated atmosphere where an accusation can destroy a career and a life.
So you do require enough and appropriate evidence before you’ll believe her. How about believing her until the accused comes up with enough evidence to counter her claim?
What about her career? Implying she’s a liar without any evidence that’s she’s not being truthful could ruin her career.
What does this have to do with Dykstra? All she did was tell her story. Why jump to this conclusion rather than simply wait?
Again. If she had come out and said Hardwicke did this this and this I would view this differently. Its much less convincing making accusations without naming the accuser.
I would like to see some evidence before I believe either.
This is a choice you’re making, with no basis. All she did was say “this happened to me”. You’re making this choice to add to this giant pile of shit that makes it less likely women will come forward in the future. Why are you doing this? No one is lynching Hardwick. No one is preventing him from defending himself. All that happened is Dykstra told her story. It’s entirely up to her how to tell it, and it’s harmful to society to say that victims and survivors must tell their stories in a certain way, even if they’re not comfortable doing so.
What does Dykstra have to do with this discussion?