By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
mornelithe on 15 January 2016
Edit Thread
SvennoJ said:
mornelithe said:

Yes, but having a shower with someone you don't know in a hostel? Because that's where she was...she'd left her apartment because apparently she'd been sick a couple days and had cold water in her place, went to this other place, where apparently she was hit on by a guy who she wasn't interested in.  She started kissing this dude, then decided to go take a shower with him.  Still isn't consenting to sex...I guess.  On the other hand, it wasn't a friend.  Should probably look into the facts before drawing conclusions.

Should probably read the rest of the thread before posting :p
Yeah I saw the facts afterwards, she did go to the police, it was not the friend she agreed to go in the shower with but some other guy.
The way she acted and handled what happened makes her a very bad role model for anti rape activist. Some of the comments she invited are even worse.

See, I don't know what actually happened.  And I feel that the volume of high profile cases that turned out false, is giving me pause everytime I see one of these situations arise now (which really disgusts me...not going to lie, it makes me very angry at the people who are abusing the system).  I Think the fact that she live tweeted it, before going to the police really bothers me.  But, coming from the US, there's a history of false accusations leading to horrible things here (post slavery accusations against black people by white people, usually ended up in lynching and other horrific shit).

That's the problem though, when you put this stuff online first, without actually going through the legal system, you invite wholesale mob justice.    And humans know, that's just not how justice is served, and usually results in high volumes of collateral damage (nevermind if the accusation is false).  The concept of innocent until proven guilty isn't a patriarchal protection to keep rapists out of jail, it's there for a very good reason.  For one, it's almost always impossible to disprove a negative (A common request when having a theoligical debate...prove God isn't real...well, you haven't actually proven any God is, so yeah..no). Secondly, if youre populace ingrains in themselves innocent until proven guilty, you've less of a chance for mob rule to break out, thirdly, it protects the identify of the victim and the accused.  This prevents a whole slew of issues from occuring such as the mob mentality as described above, it also keeps someone who's very likely in a vulnerable position (rape/sexual assault victim) from the limelight which is usually not where they want to be.

There are reasons the criminal justice system has been setup the way it is, these issues have far wider implications than just the two people involved, and I really wish people would be more aware of that before automatically assuming guilt (or innocence), when the facts haven't even begun to be collected yet.  At this point it's 1 persons word against...nobody, because the other person hasn't even been given a chance to tell their side of the story.  And yes, it's important to hear both sides of it.

If you need another example of why mob rule is bad, just look at:

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/10/india-muslim-hindu-beef-akhlaq/409405/

or that poor woman in Afghanistan who was accused of burning pages from the Quran, who was beaten and kicked, thrown off a bridge, the body set on fire, and then thrown in a river.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/06/asia/afghanistan-woman-killed/

This is why you don't allow mobs to mete out justice.  Because mobs are fucking crazy, and while doing so online may not result in the exact same consequences (it can), it's still catering to mob justice which more often than not, gets it wrong.