It goes to Let Me Google That For You.
In other words, he doesn’t have a source.
My you must be a quick reader!
Did that.
Which one backs up your claim?
I picked the second option, that I wouldn’t believe it. In the sense of not deciding that the claim was true. Not in the sense of deciding that the claim was false, in the sense of “not enough information to decide one way or the other”.
I assume someone who approached me with the claim, as opposed to me reading about it or hearing about it, I would have more information on how credible the woman was. As well as a duty to take it seriously and not immediately begin grilling her. But I can do that without automatically assuming anything.
If she came to me saying that she had been raped and without saying anything further, and then asked me “You do believe me, don’t you?” I don’t know what I would say. I would probably have to dodge the question and say something stupid like “I can tell that something happened”. Maybe that’s not being supportive.
Regards,
Shodan
Both…
I would tend to start with that she believes she was raped by that person.
She believes does not equate to it happened, but would focus and try to get the attention on her, providing safety, encouraging medical help and counseling. I would try to shift her to caring about herself instead of any hatred and justice (justice = legalized revenge) towards the accused.
So first instinct is actually to ignore her accusation, but offer help for her to overcome. In that I both believe and disbelieve at the same time (some quantum state), but all in all it really does not matter as the immediate action for both states is the same.
Now one could say that the woman was intentionally making a false accusation but this also takes care of that as you help the person assuming she is honest and offering help to her without hurting anyone.
Going forward would be investigation, but that’s not the first thing.
Yes I have done this for a woman, it did turn out to be a situation that she regretted who she woke up next to after a night of flirting, and getting a room together and having sex with each other. Was it rape, perhaps technically it could have resulted in such, morally I don’t believe it was. It really didn’t matter though, medical help (morning after pill) and a caring ear was more important to her then anything the legal system could ever do.
The Innocence Project stated a few years ago that about 25% of cases where DNA evidence was preserved and tested by the FBI, the person accused of the crime was excluded.
A few years ago a Mens Right Types looked up the innocence projects website and found that 57% of the exonerations were of men convicted of rape. (note, they have changed their wesbite design since, but, looking at the linked cases on the first page, something like half are for sex crimes.)
That was true. However, we need to note.
-
For the first example given, this does not mean al cases, this means cases which were tested; and cases where such tests are ordered are going to be ones where there is already significant doubts already.
-
The Innocence Project lists are accurate as counted (or were in 2011), however;
i) Many of the cases counted were murder and rape were the question of the victim lying does not arise (on account of being dead). (In several of the cases the man convicted was someone who had had consensual sex with the victim prior to the murder and often was the husband, leading one to conclude the police just went after the first reasonable suspect).
ii) Most of the others seem to be when a person was misidentified by a victim or bu faulty forensics, again where the question of lying does not arise.
iii) LOts of them seem to be either eyewitness or minority men accused by White women. Again, the fact that eyewitness testimony is unreliable or that mimnority men have a higher risj of being accused of and convicted of rape of majority culture/ethnicity women is not exactly news.
As for why women lie (and not going into the incidence of the same) the reasons seem to be
i) Committing adultery; they don’t want spouse to find out, or were from a conservative family.
ii) The woman scorned scenario, where she accused a former lover out of annoyance at being dumped.
I did look at The Innocence Project.
There’s not indication on how they choose the cases to dispute. Obviously, they would choose cases where the convicted swear they are innocent. There’s no control group.
Rape would also show up disproportionately as most other crimes don’t have the potential to leave behind DNA to the extent that rape does.
This claim isn’t even coherent, let alone supported by the data.
Why/how would DNA exonerate an ex-boyfriend who’s fraudulently accused/convicted of rape? In those cases, the issue isn’t whether sex occurred, it’s whether it was consensual. A rape kit/DNA evidence isn’t going to disprove anything, unless you think that a woman, attempting to frame her lover for rape, goes out and has sex with some third party, then claims that her lover raped her. I guess it’s possible that someone might do this, but it’s such an unnecessarily convoluted process (and opens up the possibility that the lover will have an actual alibi during the time the sex occurred), that I have to imagine it’s vanishingly small.
Beyond the basic logic problems, the data is also not with you. Here’s the National Registry of Exonerations, where you can search for people exonerated by DNA evidence. There are 539 cases that come up when you search “rape” (not all of which are DNA exonerations). The DNA-based exonerations start for convictions in the mid-1970s.
I haven’t found great statistics on actual rape convictions, but according to this site, for every 1000 sexual assaults, 344 are reported to the police, and there are 6 convictionsand according to this site (warning, pdf), there are about 70 rapes reported per 100,000 women (annually).
So, let’s put it together, back of the envelope style. The population of the US is ~300 million, ~150 million of whom are women.
150000000 (women) * 70/100000 (rapes reported/woman) * 6/344 (convictions per report), comes out to about 1800 rape convictions per year. So, since the mid-70s, there have been ~72000 people convicted for rape, with around 500 exonerations.
Now, any person wrongfully convicted of a crime is a tragedy, and we should absolutely try to fix every last case. But 0.7% of convicts being exonerated not really “a very high percentage”.
Before any other information comes out, I don’t have any inclination. How could I?
That said, under most circumstances where a woman told me she’d been raped, I would be ethically and legally required to pass it on to the relevant authorities, regardless of whether I believed her or not or how (if at all) I was inclined.
My initial response is to believe the woman. While I find it horrific that a man can merely be accused of this crime and thus be destroyed by the accusation itself, I think the fact that the crime occurs and is not reported out of fear is slightly more horrific. There are probably no numbers to back it up, but I will take some false accusations (again, horrific in my mind) in order to bring forward more of the truthful ones.
My first instinct was to answer the OP’s question something like this:
However, upon further reflection, and trying to take the OP entirely at face value, I think my first natural inclination would be to believe her, because my first natural inclination is to believe anybody when they say something happened to them, provided there isn’t anything implausible about the thing they’re telling or the circumstances under which they’re telling it.
I think Ravenman had the best answer I’ve read so far:
I would hope that initial responses would never cause someone to be destroyed. That’s really not what the OP is asking us to decide here.
The initial response of belief doesn’t have to spur you to do anything more than to say “Let’s find out more so that I can make an informed decision based on evidence.”
I’d believe her claim. However, the man is innocent until proven guilty.
You have only heard of the claim being made. You haven’t heard it yourself. You have a statement made in a vacuum. You have no idea if the person relating the claim has any credibility.
If you asked me if I thought women who claimed to be raped are being truthful more often than not then I’d say yes, but the OP has made the circumstance so entirely vague that I can’t think anything at all of it.
I take such accusations very seriously. And I tend to error on the side of caution, But I don’t necessarily think that qualifies as “tends to believe”.
I can recall one time when I just flat out didn’t believe.
A lady comes strolling into my local neighborhood bar (she was a regular and well known. Also known for not being completely stable). She’s emotionally distraught. She’s pulling up her sleeves exposing bruises she has on her upper arms. She’s claiming her BF “abused” her. And that we all should hate him because he’s obviously such a terrible person.
I tended not to believe that woman because those were the exact same bruises I gave my ex-wife when I was trying to restrain her from physically assaulting me.
So yeah, that particular incident hit a little close to home for me and made it rather hard to buy into her story.
So far, the vote is overwhelmingly (94%) “believe the woman.”
What do you think a statistically representative sample survey of the population at large would give? 80%?
I also think there will be a difference in what people theoretically will do and what their knee-jerk reaction is when faced with it. Like the 911 operator who first needed to know tat the guy wasn’t her boyfriend before sending help to a screaming woman with a guy on her.
No, I think we’re pretty representative of what you’ll get from poll answers.
The discrepancy between poll and real life is the amount of information. Very people make their first rape claim to a complete stranger, and if the accusation is made about a person you know, then you’re automatically incorporating information you already know about them.
For example, you might try that here. Create a new poll and ask “A girl you’ve never met accuses your son of rape. Do you believe her?” I’ll bet that even us enlightened social activists on the SDMB won’t muster 30% in favor of the girl.
Rapists are always those other people, aren’t they?
I tend to wait for some facts.