I don’t know if she’s been asked. But we already know that a considerable percentage of sexual assault victims don’t report the assault. Something like 1 in 3 are believed to be reported to the police, as I recall. I don’t know what percentage of of assaults aren’t reported to family or friends, but my understanding is that it’s fairly common as well.
To the extent that this is result of shame, guilt, self-doubt, or fear of being disbelieved, such concerns are going to be heightened when the assault arises out of an initially consensual encounter especially under these circumstances (going to a hotel room, etc.). The police won’t listen to you (it’s exceedingly difficult to establish a criminal case on these facts) and there’s a decent chance that your friends and family will (intentionally or not) suggest that you brought it on yourself. I can certainly understand the desire to keep it yourself.
I don’t know what one does with that. Contemporaneous reporting weighs in favor of the accuser’s credibility. But I don’t know that failing to report weighs for or against it.
I agree with this and the previous post. I have enjoyed debating this with iiandyiiii in the past, and his position is a good one, it is on the side of the angels, but as you said, What does one “do with that?”
He seems to argue that allegations should be taken “seriously” and “investigated.” But as I argued in the Kavanaugh thread, what can you possibly hope to find from a decade or more older allegation?
A contemporaneous report would definitely bolster the allegations of the accuser. In fact, such was a requirement for a rape prosecution under the original Model Penal Code. The rule was eliminated because of the fears that women who were assaulted would not come forward immediately and a rapist would go unpunished. Such a rule would certainly help any sexual assault investigation because the facts could be gathered while witnesses still remember details, while evidence can be gathered.
But, as you said, what do we do now? How can we prove an assault a decade or more later? How can an accused prove his innocence?
Let’s assume for the purposes of argument that both Kavanaugh and Fairfax are innocent and have been wrongfully accused. What can they do to convince their critics that they are innocent? What procedure can they use to get their good names back?
The “investigation” will show nothing and leave those who are predisposed to believe the accuser to label those accused as guilty, and those who are predisposed to believe the accused to label it a political hit job.
So, iiandyiiii, what would your action be after an inconclusive investigation? Say you were the HR manager of a middle sized company. Fairfax and his accuser are not personally known to you and they both seem of equal veracity. Fairfax’s story was that on a business trip he and her engaged in consensual sex in his hotel room. Her story is the exact same as Fairfax’s except that in the hotel room the sex was not consensual, but he assaulted her. What action do you take after your investigation turns up nothing but he said, she said?
I don’t know exactly, other than informing law enforcement (as long as the accuser wanted to). But that there may be the possibility of an inconclusive investigation doesn’t mean we shouldn’t investigate – not all investigations will be inconclusive. I think it will be rare in which there truly is not a single shred of evidence for either account aside from the conflicting accounts of two parties. But I’m not an investigative professional, nor a professional sexual assault/rape victim advocate, nor in any related profession.
So I don’t know exactly. I just know that every accusation should be taken seriously and investigated.
Respectfully, that would be very unsatisfying for everyone in the process. So you tell Fairfax and his accuser that you will “investigate.” What quantum of proof do you need before you fire Fairfax? His accuser for a false allegation? What is the standard of proof? Does your personal belief matter or do you consult others?
How do you gauge certain evidence? Let’s say you hit on your inside straight draw and find hotel video of the alleged victim leaving Fairfax’s hotel room crying and with her clothing disheveled. Would you say, “Aha! Smoking gun!” or would you accept his explanation that while they were cuddling she asked him to come over and meet her family and he told her that he didn’t want such a relationship, that he viewed it as a one night stand, and she hastily dressed and stormed out?
Do you decide or do you take a poll? What if you conclude that you do not fire Fairfax, but later he comes up for a promotion? Do you hold that against him? A little or a lot?
I don’t think any poster here condones or wants anyone to get away with sexual assault. But we do need fair standards and standards agreed upon prior to the allegation so that personal prejudice does not come into play.
Luckily, this process doesn’t need to rely on the sole judgment and arbitration of myself. There are folks out there who make this their profession – from a criminal justice perspective, from a victim’s advocacy perspective, and from a broader societal perspective.
I’m far from certain about this – from my memory of the Kavanaugh thread, at least a few posters thought it didn’t matter at all if Kavanaugh was guilty, or if he lied about it or about the surrounding circumstances.
I think the influence of our patriarchal and misogynistic culture is extremely strong, to the point that many folks really don’t think rape and sexual assault are that big of a deal.
I don’t know how or when we could come up with “fair standards and standards agreed upon”, but however and whenever that is, it shouldn’t hold up or prevent us as a society from striving to treat every allegation of sexual assault with seriousness, which includes an investigation (unless the accuser doesn’t want an investigation).
As we seem to be at an impasse let’s just argue about that last point. Sexual assault is not only a personal tort, it is a crime against society. Why should the accuser’s wishes allow a rapist to remain free to sexually assault other women?
We liberal Democrats are serious about the principles we espouse and are willing to take our medicine.
The Noble Qur’ān says “O you who have attained to faith! Be ever steadfast in upholding equity, bearing witness to the truth for the sake of God, even though it be against your own selves or your parents and kinsfolk.” (4:135)
Emphasis on bearing witness to the truth even against your own selves.
Possible evidence that could come up: A diary or journal from the time of the act. Friends of the victim coming forward to say that she confided in them about it at the time. Friends of the accused, coming forward to say that he bragged about it. Testimony from other women, that he behaved similarly towards them.
Yeah, it’d still be hard to find anything solid. Investigation won’t necessarily bear fruit. But it might.
You’ve been in many threads before with plenty of evidence shown… if that didn’t register, then there’s not much point in wasting time with the same info again.
Why no thoughts on her hiring an attorney? This attorney is going to charge several hundred dollars an hour, right? Is she paying for it out of her own pocket? Why would she do that? Or is a GoFundMe or political group paying for it?
If that was the actual scenario, it might be relevant. But, so far, I’ve never seen that scenario. There’s never “no evidence.”
With Kavenaugh, we had Ford’s account of the rape being told years before when his politics were not relevant, so we know it wasn’t a political hitjob. There’s also the witness that fled testifying and still figured out a way to avoid testifying, which suggests he’s hiding something. There was that document that suddenly existed that had a lot of women saying he had not done anything, which was bizarre, and came out too quickly to have been gathered after the accusation was made public.
There is enough there that, in a world that cared about making sure we don’t have rapists on the Supreme Court, we’d skip over him and pick someone else. It’s not that big a deal. His life or career is not ruined if he doesn’t get on the Supreme Court. That’s why such arguments are so unpersuasive.
And, hey, the Democrats wanted more investigation, to give a chance of finding something that overrode this other admittedly weak evidence, but the Republicans wanted a short investigation that was deliberately crippled in order to make sure they didn’t find anything that might be damning.
The Fairfax situation is different. This is the first I’ve heard of it. We’ll have to wait and see. But, in the meantime, I choose to believe the accusation until such time that I have reason not to believe it. Because I take rape allegations seriously, rather than assume that they are fake.
Another factor to weigh is the general credibility of the accuser. Dr. Ford, for instance, is an accomplished and respected professional with no previous record of accusing people of crimes, no financial need for any potential remuneration from media interviews and so forth, and no indication of being as intensely obsessed with politics as one would have to be to put themselves through such a circus for pure partisan gain. This accuser, on the other hand, appears to be totally anonymous so far.