How is historical child abuse proved?

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

I’m fairly certain that prosecutors do bring he-said-she-said cases to court, and I’m even more certain that these don’t get dismissed by judges.

The William Kennedy Smith case is one example that springs to mind, but I recall others as well. (I don’t think there was anything else in the Dominique Strauss-Kahn case either.)

[TBG]

Roy Harper has been charged with child sex abuse.

The Green Arrow is gonna be so disappointed in him.

@Loach

Rereading that and I put that the wrong way. In my state, under 13 no consent can be given. Between 13 and 15.99999 consent can be given if the other party is less than 4 years older. 16 is the age of consent. However it is 18 if it is a relative, teacher or someone in a position of authority over the teen.

As per the statute:

The actor is related to the victim by blood or affinity to the third degree, or

The actor has supervisory or disciplinary power over the victim by virtue of the actor’s legal, professional, or occupational status, or

The actor is a resource family parent, a guardian, or stands in loco parentis within the household;

So in my state Uncle Bill is guilty because of blood or affinity (third degree is great-grandchild, niece, nephew, aunt, uncle or great-grandparent). Cousin is a fourth degree of consanguinity and does not count under this statute. Which is good because cousins can legally marry here.

Wait… does that make all incest (not just cousin or further) legal there if both parties are over 18? Or is this law written with the assumption that they also have some other law to stymie uncle fucker?

[Lemur866]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

I’m fairly certain that prosecutors do bring he-said-she-said cases to court, and I’m even more certain that these don’t get dismissed by judges.

The William Kennedy Smith case is one example that springs to mind, but I recall others as well. (I don’t think there was anything else in the Dominique Strauss-Kahn case either.)

Yes, a “he said she said” case CAN be brought to trial and not dismissed by a judge. Then the case has to go before a jury. And juries are instructed that the case must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Very often it is reasonable to doubt whether someone is telling the truth about a crime that was committed years ago for which there is no other evidence.

But that is for the jury to decide. If a jury finds testimony credible beyond a reasonable doubt, then they can find the defendant guilty. That happens. But it is a pretty high bar to clear and prosecutors hate bringing cases like that because they don’t like losing high profile cases.

You might be offered a plea bargain–admit you raped a kid 20 years ago and you’ll get counseling and probation, go to trial and you face 10 years in jail.

[Loach]

@TBG

The Green Arrow is gonna be so disappointed in him.

Wait… does that make all incest (not just cousin or further) legal there if both parties are over 18? Or is this law written with the assumption that they also have some other law to stymie uncle fucker?

Yes there is no law against incest when both parties are adults. They just can’t get married. I think Rhode Island is the only other state with no incest statute.

@Fotheringay-Phipps

I’m fairly certain that prosecutors do bring he-said-she-said cases to court, and I’m even more certain that these don’t get dismissed by judges.

The William Kennedy Smith case is one example that springs to mind, but I recall others as well. (I don’t think there was anything else in the Dominique Strauss-Kahn case either.)

There certainly is no law against prosecuting using only witness of victim testimony. I’m just saying it’s not that simple. You walk into a police station and make an accusation you are not automatically getting a trial. Prosecutors don’t go to trial with losing cases. Trials are hard work, expensive and time consuming. With no other evidence it is never an easy decision either way. The Strauss-Khan case is a good example. The case fell apart when there were questions about the credibility of the victim even though there was some physical evidence.

[robert_columbia]

First, you collect underpants…