Yeah, I’m 100% certain SIL was not lying. And 100% certain that she experienced trauma.
I find this absolutely astonishing. If a bunch of coworkers and I were going on the same business trip, and we planned our respective flights independently of each other, there’s a very good chance that some of us would end up on the same flight.
Also, it’s normal to try to book the same flight. I routinely did that when i was traveling with colleagues.
Yeah. There was a post going around on FB that suggested that if there is “some guy looking at you in a creepy way” you do things like spraying him in the face with oven cleaner or using hair spray to create a mini-flamethrower. Now, I get being uncomfortable, or keeping an eye out, or even leaving, but going straight to Assault with a Deadly Weapon becuase a guy “looks creepy”
is too damn much.
Right. Like the guy who had the cops called upon him as he was sitting in his car watching kids in a playground. Turned out one of them was his kid, and he just liked to come buy and eat his lunch in his car while watching his kid. IIRC he was even arrested.
Right, Believe her, treat her as a victim, but that doesnt mean the guy should automatically spend 20 years in prison either. Believe the woman, but of course evidence must be gathered, etc.
You know of course that “recovered memories” are not only bogus, but often implanted memories.
Which is why those people should be arrested for abuse. The person now has the trauma of something that didnt really happen, and the “recoverer” is the cause of the trauma.
Well, I’ll say that I think they should at least lose their license to practice psychology. But there’s a lot of bullshit in psychology that causes harm so I don’t know where you draw the line. (I’m not anti-psychology. I’m anti-quackery.)
I think the trauma was mostly caused by the creepy uncle, honestly. I just think her memory of the details was wrong. I think he creeped on her verbally and when other people were around, rather than raping her. There’s abuse that’s traumatic without actually being illegal.
Do you have a cite for that?
If one of children was his, it doesn’t seem to be likely.
I also wonder whether that trauma was necessary in order for a recovered memory to be planted. Like, if nobody was protecting her from the verbal harassment, there was some underlying felt need to make it more severe than it was to justify the trauma she felt. Not that she did that intentionally, but that it was there.
Like with Borderline Personality Disorder, there is usually some real trauma coupled with invalidation and that may somehow lead to subsequent imagined trauma, and it just gets bigger and bigger because the validation that was supposed to happen originally didn’t happen. (Not saying your SIL has BPD, that’s just one example where I’ve seen such a phenomenon.)
Also, what would they have charged him with? It’s not illegal to sit in your car.
The police do not need to charge you to arrest you. The DA charges you. IIRC no charges were filed and he was let go quickly.
What did they arrest him for?
I dont know, but again, you dont have to arrest someone for anything.
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/criminal-defense/do-police-have-to-inform-you-of-your-charges/#:~:text=You%20have%20the%20right%20to,to%20tell%20you%20anything%20either.
Police can often detain or hold a suspect temporarily without completing an actual arrest. You have the right to remain silent whether you’re actually under arrest or simply being detained, but police officers don’t have to tell you anything either.
So he wasn’t arrested, just questioned by the police? Did he have to leave the park?
As a dad, I’d imagine that in that situation, the cop might knock on the window of the car, ask what he’s doing there - at which point, the guy would presumably point out his kid and say, “I’m just watching my kid” - no?
Again, all I know is that he was hauled off in handcuffs.The police do not need to tell a person why they are arresting him, or detaining him, or whatever.
This is getting to be a hijack. All I remember is what I posted.
Well, it’s not like police aren’t known to get a bit “overenthusiastic” at times. Still, I don’t think this points to a widespread systemic issue with false accusations - certainly nothing within 3 or 4 orders of magnitude of the problems women face when trying to report real sexual assaults.
No , they don’t have to tell the person on the spot why they are being arrested. . But unless the person is uncuffed almost immediately, there’s going to be a report and that report is going to include what law the person supposedly violated. That’s separate issue from whether they really did violate that law , but the report is not going to say that the man was simply sitting in his car, even if that is in fact all he was doing. It will say that sitting in his car outside the park constituted loitering or disorderly conduct or something. Even if the arrest was voided or the prosecutor declines prosecution there will be some documentation of the reason for the arrest.
Moderating:
Let’s please take the discussion about under what circumstances a person sitting in their car at a playground watching children can be arrested to a different or new thread, please. It’s a hijack to the discussion occurring in this one. Thanks.
nm, saw the moderation note
I think that the biggest thing that’s changed is that there are now a lot fewer people who are ambivalent about rape and sexual abuse. In the past, there were a lot of folks who opposed it in principle, but shrug, what are you going to do? And at the same time, there were a lot of folks who figured it was the man’s right, but would never say so out loud. Nowadays, though, both sides are more vocal.
I think that, overall, that’s an improvement. I have hope that, if forced to pick a side, the majority of people are opposed to rape and sexual abuse. And by getting both sides out into the open, the good people can win. At the very least, if we know who the deplorables are, we can avoid them. But even if it’s overall an improvement, the deplorables getting their voices amplified too is still a downside, and it’s going to take a long time more to deal with that.
There were also a lot of people who, although they acknowledged and sincerely believed that rape is by default wrong, simply assumed that certain forms of behavior by women amounted to handing a man a “rape pass”, so to speak. Went to his apartment without a chaperone? Got intoxicated in his company? Used unladylike language or otherwise failed to meet expectations of “nice girl” conduct? Then, in the idiom of the day, you “had only yourself to blame” if he violated the standard protocol for how “nice girls” were supposed to be treated.
See, according to this mindset, rape is wrong, but the responsibility for its wrongness is conditional on female behavior. If a woman does anything that is popularly considered to qualify as “asking for it”, then if a man rapes her it’s still a bad thing, but the fault ultimately lies with her rather than with him.
That attitude still widely persists, in some cases consciously but IMHO much more often vestigially. This is a major source of all the victim-blaming directed towards rape victims by people who sincerely don’t think of themselves as advocating or excusing rape.