The North Carolina State Bar charged the Durham County district attorney with several violations of the state's rules of professional conduct, all tied to his handling of the lacrosse case.

If convicted by a disciplinary commission hearing the case, he could be stripped of his license to practice law in the state.

Nifong won indictments against three lacrosse players last year after a woman hired as a stripper for a team party in March 2006 said she was raped. One of three had graduated, but Duke suspended the other two. Criticism of Nifong's evidence and handling of the case increased through the summer, then when the bar filed its initial ethics charges, Nifong turned the case over to the state attorney general, who dropped all the charges.

[ 12 June 2007: Message edited by: Geneva ]

I wonder how many indigent people of colour who are wrongfully arrested and prosecuted by the cops and legal system it would take for the disbarments to go flying?

Oh yeah, I forgot. Poor people and people of colour don't count. They can be persecuted to everyone's heart's content! It's only when rich white frat brats are wrongfully accused that it's a real problem, and gets national exposure and winds up with prosecutors losing their jobs.

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
What Michelle said.

How anyone can understand this entire horrible farce without a critical race and class analysis is beyond me.

---

You can try and put on a deeper context if you wish, or you can look at the individuals involved, 3 innocent boys who have faced media and public harassment, one women who seems to not really know what happened...

and a zealot district attorney, a zealot media, and 88 zealot professors.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
Boy, it sure is good to be a poor little rich brat, isn't it?

---

Why are they brats?

[ 12 June 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

[ 12 June 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

quote:

---

500: You can try and put on a deeper context if you wish, or you can look at the individuals involved, 3 innocent boys who have faced media and public harassment, one women who seems to not really know what happened...

---

Fuck off.

What do you know about rape and violence against women? Never mind the history of racist sexual assault in the South? Sweet fuck all from all accounts.

We will disagree about what "really" happened, but those young men were not innocent by any account.

(Rape can happen, by the way, without vaginal penetration and without a penis doing the penetrating. Think about it.)

quote:

---

and a zealot district attorney, a zealot media, and 88 zealot professors.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:

Yeah, it was all a conspiracy against those poor sweet white guys who are victims, victims I tell you.

What the fuck ever.

---

I know what an alibi is.

quote:

---

Over the last few days, sources close to the defense have given ABC News an exclusive look at the evidence behind one player's alleged alibi -- evidence that includes electronic records, photographs and witness statements. If that material is authentic, it could prove that it was practically impossible for him to rape, kidnap or assault the alleged victim. Seligmann's argument is simple: He is innocent and he has an alibi. He attended the party that night, but documents, photos and witness testimony show that he wasn't there long enough or at the right time to attack the alleged victim.

---

ABC News

I may not know about rape, but I know about human nature. Human beings make mistakes, they can misidentify. I've misidentified many people many times, most people have.

And in all due respect, do you actually know any of the people involved better than I do, or are you simply applying stereotypes?

I also know there have been many cases of false indictments in the USA. I'm biased, due to a (Dateline?) special I saw a few months back of a US district attorney who falsely accused a bunch of parents of paedophilia and rode it to election. Most were freed 15 years later and given compensation.

You see rape and race as the dominant factors here. Fine. What I se as the dominant factor, is the problem of electing prosecutors.

[ 12 June 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by 500_Apples:
What I se as the dominant factor, is the problem of electing prosecutors.
[ 12 June 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:

500, I'm usually very patient with you when you yammer on about stuff that you have no idea about. Not this time cupcake. Fuck off.
We will disagree about what "really" happened, but those young men were not innocent by any account. What the fuck ever.

---

quote:

---

UBUNTU is Women of Color and Survivor-led. This means that we emphasize people most affected by sexual violence as public representatives of the group (i.e., media, mobilizations, public meetings, events, etc.), and in the group’s internal structure and processes (membership/composition, roles, and decision-making). This is our way of reclaiming power. The name UBUNTU reflects a commitment to a traditional sub-Saharan African concept of the same name, which roughly translated means “I am because we are”.

We have joined together through our rage, our pain, and our hope to generate strategies and actions that prevent, disrupt, transform and heal sexual violence. We are committed to challenging oppression in all forms because we recognize that none of us is free until we all are. We are committed to envisioning a just and loving world. Our goals are three-fold:

1. To facilitate a broad, community-driven demand for justice for the Survivor of the March 13, 2006 rape.

2. To facilitate dialogue, education, support, and accountability for survivors of sexual violence.

3. To facilitate a systemic transformation of our communities until the day that sexual violence does not occur.

---

I can agree with some of the anger over a woman who's complaint has essentially been dismissed. What worries me, however, is the sentiment that somehow reasonable doubt should not apply, or that maybe it should be applied in less of a fashion.

In Canada, as I've said on this board before, a victim of a sexual assault is not required to bring corrobative evidence to ground the offence. I've had many cases wherein an accused was convicted on the basis of testimony from a single complainant.

quote:

---

With the way some people have reacted to the Duke lacrosse case, I would certainly hate to be an accused defendant in court with them sitting as judge and jury.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.R.KISSED:
I'd hate to be a POC anywhere near the criminal justice system in North America but that's not likely to keep you awake at night now is it?

---

Actually, it does concern me.

And, when progressives throw "innocent until proven guilty" into the dust bin, that's frightening...but that's not likely to keep you awake at night now is it?

[ 12 June 2007: Message edited by: Sven ]

quote:

---

And, when progressives throw "innocent until proven guilty" into the dust bin, that's frightening...but that's not likely to keep you awake at night now is it?

---

quote:

---

This has been a tragic case for all concerned. Nifong and the 88 have abused the justice system to suit their agenda's. Pity that only Nifong may be held culpable.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.R.KISSED:
I happen to have a rather strong and nuanced understanding of justice that goes beyond the repetition of inane slogans and an ABC afterschool special reading of history,politics or social reality. There are hundreds of thousands of innocent people rotting in american prisons but you seem only to get upset that it might have in a million years happened to some rich white kids.

---

So, you have a "strong and nuanced understanding of justice" that goes beyond "inane slogans". Good for you. Only "innocent until proven guilty" is not a "slogan", inane or otherwise.

As far as my concern being only for "rich white kids", what the fuck do you know? I worked with several other attorneys in my old firm to represent an Angola (Louisiana) death row inmate (who was not a "rich white kid") . After several years' of effort, we obtained his release.

quote:

---

So, you have a "strong and nuanced understanding of justice" that goes beyond "inane slogans". Good for you. Only "innocent until proven guilty" is not a "slogan", inane or otherwise.

---

In America it is little more than a slogan, if your black, latino or First nations your guilty even before you're charged.

quote:

---

As far as my concern being only for "rich white kids", what the fuck do you know? I worked with several other attorneys in my old firm to represent an Angola (Louisiana) death row inmate (who was not a "rich white kid") . After several years' of effort, we obtained his release.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.R.KISSED:

Well I'm sure your mother's very proud of you.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.R.KISSED:
There are hundreds of thousands of innocent people rotting in american prisons but you seem only to get upset that it might have in a million years happened to some rich white kids.

---

What my concern is, I won't speak for NRK, is that there is vanished leftist outrage expressed by babblers and instead there is toeing the US party line BS that everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty. This has never been true for everyone, only a selected elite of everyones, somewhat like the "all men are created equal" of yesteryear, which nobody would argue here, I hope, was ever intended to apply to "all men". Never mind the exclusion of "all women", that phrase only applies to white, property-owning men. That sure as shit ain't "all men" to me.

So you see why the belief of "innocent until proven guilty" scrapes me a bit. It's BS and has always been BS.

What this means wrt the Duke case is, there were perpetrators of a crime that night, they are currently neither apprehended nor going to face justice for what they did. Ever.

My guess is this story will become, if it hasn't already, an anecdote that will be a cause for job interviews in Dad's friend's law firm and jovial joking at promotion meetings.

Some perhaps previous unknown info about the accused, now cleared of all charges, Duke lacrosse players:

quote:

---

there hasn’t been any mainstream media correlation/analysis/commentary/discussion about the fact that:

1. Some of the (White) Duke Lacrosse team members called the two (Black) women “niggers” and “bitches”;
2. One of the (White) Duke Lacrosse members threatened to rape them with a broomstick;
3. Another (White) Duke Lacrosse team member spoke of hiring strippers in an e-mail sent the same night that threatened to kill “the bitches” and cut off their skin while he ejaculated in his “Duke-issued spandex;” and
4. Another (White) Duke Lacrosse team member shouted to the (Black woman) victim as she left the team’s big house, “Hey bitch, thank your grandpa for my nice cotton shirt.”

Instead there were subtle and not-so subtle racist implications (snip) that the Black woman stripper/whore (not daughter, not mother, not college student, not sex worker) lied on/set up the innocent White Duke Lacrosse team members (who hired her and her colleague to perform for them).

So, in this very direct way the corporate owned media message to the American public is that Black people, especially Black women, are the perpetrators of violence against White men

---

and when it`s not sufficient, the case should be dismissed, no matter how much anyone likes/dislikes the accused and their sociological category

kudos esp. to those outspoken black Americans who denounced a potential show trial:
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell041707.php3

If prosecutors can drag people through the mud and keep felony charges hanging over their heads, long after all the evidence says the opposite of what they were charged with, then any of us, anywhere, can be put through a living hell whenever it suits the whim or the political agenda of a district attorney.

the NAACP of North Carolina also exemplary in its fairness:
http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory?id=2806115

"We sincerely believe that the high level of public scrutiny and controversy involved in this matter is unwarranted and threatens to pervert the truth-finding process," said the Rev. William Barber, president of the North Carolina chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.
...
"Nobody knows the totality of the facts," Barber said. "We do not expect, nor should North Carolina citizens condone, a resolution of this case based on biased and political or public pressure from the public or any overzealous supporters on either side. What we must do is insist that we follow the facts wherever they lead and face the facts when they are all in."

[ 13 June 2007: Message edited by: Geneva ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Geneva:
kudos esp. to those outspoken black Americans

---

And BCG, you should be careful what you post. The info you have posted, which I have no doubt it true about the statements made, does not seem to be attributed specifically to those accused of rape. The comments are deplorable, but not grounds for a rape conviction.

[ 13 June 2007: Message edited by: ChicagoLoopDweller ]

quote:

---

However for someone with a "strong and nuanced understanding of justice," the suggestion to balance out this decrepit judicial system by locking even more innocent people away is peculiar

---

Just to clarify my understanding of justice entails an awareness of the awareness of how race and class play out in the criminal justice system as well as the manner in which cases of sexual assault are handled by the criminal justice system.

A) Whether victim or defendent there is a decreased likelihood justice will be served if a person of colour is facing off against someone who is white. The likelihhod of justice decreases dramitically if the POC is impoverished and even more so if the person has the added socially marginalized status of being a single mother and a sex trade worker. COnversely someone with someone with skin and class privilege the assumption of innocence is proportionately higher. THe racist and classist nature of the criminal justice system is well documented. SO everyone is not equally presumed innocent everyone's word is not give equal status. This does not only apply to the CJS but also to the media.

B) In terms of victims of sexual assault and justice it is well documented that the majority of sexual assaults are not even reported let alone prosecuted, tried or convicted. We know that most perpetrators of sexual assault are never held accountable. Does that mean we assume they are innocent? To assume such innocent is to dismiss the experience of women who have been assaulted it is an act of silencing.

We also need to be cognizant of the gross distortions of reality and racist and classist elements of the media.

quote:

---

Summer: ( so many times it's going to come down to he said/she said).

---

That's a really really really sexist and hateful thing to say, indicating a complete lack of understanding about what sexual assault is in relation to the justice system. See NRK's post above.

[ 13 June 2007: Message edited by: bigcitygal ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
That's a really really really sexist and hateful thing to say, indicating a complete lack of understanding about what sexual assault is in relation to the justice system. See NRK's post above.

---

No, it's not. It's not any of that. Even with a total understanding about what sexual assault is in relation to the justice system, and after having seen NRK's post above, where the only evidence that a specific sexual assault has occurred is the vicitm's say-so, it is sometimes not enough to convict. Whether or not the system at its core, or the consequences of the way the criminal justice system is administered, is racist or sexist, pointing out the reality of same, without making excuses for same, is not racist or sexist. In my presumably assinine, bigotted, sexist, racist opinion.

These are the limits of the criminal justice system, it will never, ever, end the persistence of sexual assault in society. Suspending the presumption of innocence until proven guilty in the criminal law context will not help anything.

[ 14 June 2007: Message edited by: RP. ]

quote:

---

That's a really really really sexist and hateful thing to say, indicating a complete lack of understanding about what sexual assault is in relation to the justice system.

---

The difficulty with this comment is that it criticizes (an unfortunate) reality but it doesn't offer a realistic alternative to assessing truth in criminal cases.

If two people are the only people present at the time of an alleged sexual assault and if there is no physical evidence of violence, what are we left with other than her word and his word?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
It's what makes rape such a vicious crime, if you ask me - because it's so easy to get away with it most of the time, due to the fact that you can't convict someone in court based on anything less than no reasonable doubt, and with rape cases, even if there is physical evidence of sexual activity, it's hard to prove to a court that it happened without consent.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sven:
Are the critics here basically arguing for a change to the burden of proof in a criminal case, essentially putting the burden of proving innocence on the defendant and removing the burden of proving guilt from the state?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Slumberjack:
Yes true enough, unless there is physical brusing or other bodily damage that is captured on film at a medical facility immediately after the crime, which certainly in itself causes even more emotional distress to a person who suffered through such a violent crime. That evidence, combined with DNA would make for an airtight case.

---

Does anyone disagree that she was raped that night?

There are women society considers unrapable, and the woman in Durham that night is one of them.

I have no idea what category I would be in if anything like this were to happen in my life (both the assault and the media circus), but in the grand scheme it matters not. As a feminist I must speak out in her support.

The "he said/she said" is offensive because of what NRK said about how the justice system works, and moreso because statistically women do NOT make false accusations. Why? They see what happens to women who make TRUE accusations. Character assasination, delving into her IRRELEVANT sexual history, etc etc bla bla barf.

Can those who are arguing with me (an argument that I'm not making, by the way, the innocent until proven guilty thing) shift their perspective from "the law, flawed as it is, is all we have" dogma and imagine what life is like for those who the law does not protect, will not support and has never done so? On the micro level, how would someone who has never felt that protection in her life respond when a crime has been committed against her, she KNOWS this about the law and goes public anyways?!?

And where is she now? Where's her agency and autonomy? No justice, nothing. A joke to the right wing idiots and a friggin legal/semantic discussion topic for babble.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Phonz:

Ugh. Not wanting to get too much into details but in fact for some people bruising after sex isn't evidence of much of anything.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
Can those who are arguing with me (an argument that I'm not making, by the way, the innocent until proven guilty thing) shift their perspective from "the law, flawed as it is, is all we have" dogma and imagine what life is like for those who the law does not protect, will not support and has never done so? On the micro level, how would someone who has never felt that protection in her life respond when a crime has been committed against her, she KNOWS this about the law and goes public anyways?!?

---

I'm not sure what I would do if I were such a person. A few years ago, a friend told me her friend got raped and at the time I said it was wrong of her not to report it to police. What my friend said is she didn't want to ruin the man's life. I don't feel the same way now. I'd probably keep it down to be honest with you, not sure. One thing for sure I would do my best to avoid a media circus as much as possible, which is what a lot of the other people involved here (the DA, the 88 faculty) sought. And no, I'm not blaming Cystal Magnum for the media circus, she's definitely a victim of that.

Thinking about this thread yesterday I was trying to think of what would happen if I were raped. It's very hypothetical to me, so I didn't register an emotional reaction at all. Which is weird because the one time I was accused of shoplifting I went ballistic (I assumed it ws due to my ethnicity and my at the time poor clothing). Anyhow, I thought I'd keep it to myself in fear, take some martial arts lessons, and change my commuting trajectories. I don't really know how to confront many problems so I go out of my way to avoid them. One of the reasons I didn't go into law. Let's say I'm a public prosecutor and a biker threatens me in my home, what do i do?

Now of course I realize that my attitude is not entirely constructive. How to make the criminal-justice system better to improve the safety of people from sexual assault? Difficult question. Definitely, more psychsocial studies of sexual aggressors to try and eventually implement preventive measures. Better sex ed in schools with that additional emphasis. There may also be a lot to be said for uncorrelated rape accusations gaining weight. As far as I know, sexual aggression is a crime that with little chance of rehab, the perpetrators will reoffend. Perhaps simply having women go to police, describe what happened, record it all down and wait. If a certain individual gets a few accusations, a trial begins then. I think it might increase victims' confidence if they knew they had the option of not having a trial or delaying a trial until more uncorrelated victims showed up. It would be an intermediary option between doing nothing and a full fledged trial.
Unreported incidences are a serious problem and well-documented as such. I say my past paragraph or two from the perspective that one-time rapists do not make the bulk of the problem.

[ 13 June 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
....As a feminist I must speak out in her support......women do NOT make false accusations. Why? They see what happens to women who make TRUE accusations. Character assasination.etc etc....."the law, flawed as it is, is all we have" dogma and imagine what life is like for those who the law does not protect...On the micro level, how would someone who has never felt that protection in her life respond when a crime has been committed against her, she KNOWS this about the law and goes public anyways?!? And where is she now? Where's her agency and autonomy? No justice, nothing. A joke to the right wing idiots and a friggin legal/semantic discussion topic for babble.

---

Hard to argue with any of that, but the red flag was imposed on the system by the few cases whereby false accusations were proven to be made, and the wrongly accused have done significant jail time before they were found to be innocent of the crime. The provision of an adequate defence shouldn't be seen as regressive in itself. The regression comes from the way the public is presented with the information. Its a disgusting situation when looked at from any angle, especially when observed in conjunction with the way the news and entertainment industry portrays women. On the one hand a victim comes forth, then on the other, a massive open source industry lends itself to a continuance of the degradation.

[ 13 June 2007: Message edited by: Slumberjack ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by 500_Apples:
I don't really know how to confront many problems so I go out of my way to avoid them. One of the reasons I didn't go into law. Let's say I'm a public prosecutor and a biker threatens me in my home, what do i do?

---

What would you like to do? Or think you should do?

The few times a biker has confronted me, I challenged him/they on whatever the confronting was about.

For example, one time, one snapped at me for stepping on his snakeskin boots, I told him to: "get the fuck over it, I am wearing moccasins, and they would hardly hurt your boots, and it isn't my fault someone pushed me back into you". That was the end of that.

Another time, I simply decked one with an right hand upper cut to the chin, snapped his jaw together so fast and hard, that he bit his tongue, and said; "now would you like to pay for that beer?" He had told me he had an use for my mouth other than my talking, telling him he had to pay for that beer. It teed me off a bit, and I found that I had a better use for his mouth too. He paid me and walked away.

quote:

---

The "he said/she said" is offensive because of what NRK said about how the justice system works, and moreso because statistically women do NOT make false accusations.

---

The logic train:

Women (statistically) do not make false accusations.

A man is accused of rape.

Therefore, he raped.

Why bother having a trial?

Obviously, that's simplistic, but, really, what's your point? I would help if you could articulate, in concrete terms, what, specifically, you would do differently, procedurally, when there is an accusation of rape, no witnesses and no evidence of physical violence. Would you put the burden of proof on the criminal defendant to prove his own innocence?

So instead of answering your inane questions, I'll post this piece of news from the UBUNTU site. If you don't get it after reading about the following story, then I'm not sure what else could assist you.

quote:

---

A Call to Action: Justice for Erika Keels
31 05 2007

letter from a friend in Philly:

dear friends,

I am writing to ask you to support work that I’m doing with the Justice 4 Erika campaign here in Philly. Erika Keels was murdered on March 22, 2007 on North Broad Street in Philadelphia. Witnesses saw an assailant eject Erika, a 20-year-old black transwoman, from his car, and intentionally run her over four times, killing her and leaving the scene. A medical examiner’s report supports these eyewitness accounts. But police ruled Erika’s death an accident and have refused to conduct an investigation. The driver, Roland Button, was later apprehended, but he has yet to face criminal charges–including “hit and run” charges.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
Why do I get the feeling that listening to this Thomas Sowell guy on race issues is kind of like listening to Phyllis Schlafly or R.E.A.L. Women on women's issues?

---

Uh...gee, I dunno...cause it IS?

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
Can those who are arguing with me (an argument that I'm not making, by the way, the innocent until proven guilty thing) shift their perspective from "the law, flawed as it is, is all we have" dogma and imagine what life is like for those who the law does not protect, will not support and has never done so? On the micro level, how would someone who has never felt that protection in her life respond when a crime has been committed against her, she KNOWS this about the law and goes public anyways?!?

---

I don't think anyone here really has to make that shift, one can hold both things in their mind at once. I don't understand what you think the solution is. It is a deficiency of my intellect that I cannot fathom one that is both practical and would create further, other injustices.

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
A Call to Action: Justice for Erika Keels

---

Witnesses saw Erika run over four times and killed by another driver. The police appear not to be doing any investigation into the matter. Letter writers want police to conduct thorough investigation.

So, you simply want more thorough police investigations of alleged rape cases? And you believe that the police have simply been delinquent in the Duke lacrosse case and that further investigation will reveal the evidence that will clearly point to a rape having occurred?

Other than learning in a generalized way that people in non-dominant positions very often do not receive justice, the Erika Keels matter you posted about could only lead a reader, who is trying to understand your concern, to ask the above questions.

BCG, there is no meat to what you are saying. You are decrying something but not offering any concrete alternative, such as alterning the burden of proof. To simply say people in non-dominant positions are getting shafted will get you nowhere with your concerns (how can anything constructive be implemented?). If you want something to change, you need to articulate what you think the specific change needs to be.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sven:
You are decrying something but not offering any concrete alternative, such as alterning the burden of proof.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RP.:

In fairness, she's already said that she doesn't want to do that.

---

quote:

---

Sven: So, you simply want more thorough police investigations of alleged rape cases?

---

No.

I'll type slowly this time just for you, sweet adorable Sven.

Erika was killed in front of witnesses (something that the Duke victim did not have which you all above are frothing at the mouth about). Erika's was a murder that has medical evidence (also something the Duke victim did not have, ditto you all above, froth, etc.).

And the police refuse to utilize their own procedures in following up properly.

I'll wait a moment until this sinks in.

.
.

*whistling*

.
.

Okay, so I said above that there are women (according to the police, mainstream society, and apparently, some babblers) who are unrapable. It appears that there are also people who are un-murderable. This matters whether there are witness or not, and whether there is "medical evidence" or not.

Do you understand now?

The call to action is for action by the state (actions that the state claims are rights of citizenry, yes?), and it's the only option inthe way our society is structured (aside: handy, that).

In real terms, it is not the state who will provide justice in this case or the Duke case, since the police are of course the armed footsoldiers in the state's war against anyone not in the white mainstream. It is not the state who I look to for justice.

Slavery was legal. So was lynching.

(We can debate how both of these continue in modifed forms but this is not ther thread for that.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:

The call to action is for action by the state (actions that the state claims are rights of citizenry, yes?), and it's the only option inthe way our society is structured (aside: handy, that).

In real terms, it is not the state who will provide justice in this case or the Duke case, since the police are of course the armed footsoldiers in the state's war against anyone not in the white mainstream. It is not the state who I look to for justice.

Slavery was legal. So was lynching.

---

I think people get your point.

But identifying a problem (which you have done) is only the first step. The second is to conjecture a good solution.

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
Do you understand now?

---

I, for one, am left wondering a few things:

1. "The call to action is for action by the state" to do what, specifically? I don't want to assume anything because it's all too possible that I would be wrong.

quote:

---

500: The second is to conjecture a good solution.

---

quote:

---

We demand a thorough investigation of the circumstances surrounding Ms. Keels¹ death. Her case must be re-opened. Now and in the future, the police must follow their mandate to protect and serve all Philadelphians, including
those targeted for hate because of their gender expression and identity. All levels of city government and administration must ensure that policy meant to protect human rights of people in this city is followed in letter and
spirit.

---

This doesn't sound much different then what Sven proposed of more thorough investigations.

I see no revolutions in the link, nor do I believe in delegating hope of social change to some idealized dream of a revolution. They never turn out as promise or occur when predicted.

[ 14 June 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

I hope you don't think I'm trying to hound you, I just suspect you have a good insight into what kind of justice there can be for rape survivors, when the criminal justice system offers them nothing. Perhaps I'll just eff off.

[ 14 June 2007: Message edited by: RP. ]

quote:

---

I hope you don't think I'm trying to hound you

---

quote:

---

I just suspect you have a good insight into what kind of justice there can be for rape survivors, when the criminal justice system offers them nothing.

---

I do have good insight. Many women who work in VAW do. I don't exist in a vacuum, my insights weren't made up from my brain alone.

After the hounding I've received you may understand my reluctance to share any insights at this point in this context.

500, from freedominion, born in 1983 (I have shirts older than you) lecturing me on revolution is very very amusing. You're lucky I just had lunch and am in a good mood.

How about you boys enjoy the rest of your thread?

As someone who's been assaulted, I find these threads sickening at this point. Outside of the feminism forum, I will not participate, after years of trying. I just don't feel like ripping my heart out again and again, to start at the beginning once more when the pot is stirred a few months down the road. Usually by guys.

I will not open up about my experiences, what I've read, and what I've learned through speaking with others, just to inevitably have someone toss off a dismissal, claiming that I've got a chip on my shoulder.

The criminal-justice system does not work. It profoundly, deeply, thoroughly does not work. There are other models. I have written about some, here on babble, several times over. Others have written about them. Feminists have written about them. Those who work to counter and end VAG have written about them. Jane Doe has written about them.

Women's bookstores, various websites, and several other sources are available for you to educate yourselves. If you really do care.

On occassion, a thread will start in babble's feminism forum, and you might see a few brave souls attempt to open this up to something beyond the suffocating, male-dominated, crime-and-punishment obsession we see in this thread.

If you care, please do your own homework. It really is insulting to go through this again and again with those who claim to want to work in solidarity, who are instead using extremely judgmental and dismissive language, and demanding that we conform to cluck at the comforting sounds of the status quo, or be prepared to answer their questions so they don't have to do the work, or be hounded.

The last time I was assaulted, I didn't cry. When I spoke with police in the specialized, sensitive sexual assault squad, they tried to break me. I would not cry in front of them. They asked me about what I wore, what I was doing, how I asked for it ...

This was more traumatic than the assault. Because they had authority. Because they represented the state. Because they hinted about how I could be punished if I was jerking them around.

I cried after the police tried to rip me apart in their polite, efficient way.

Do you get it? Do you fucking get it? I am a white, middle-class professional with English as my first language. I was talking to white, middle-class professionals who were fluent in English.

So yeah, once you've seen it close up, it isn't too hard to take that leap across the crack in the sidewalk to imagine what happens to those who are "unrapeable".

"I just suspect you have a good insight into what kind of justice there can be for rape survivors, when the criminal justice system offers them nothing."

It offers us worse than nothing. It is an exercise in having our oppression shoved down our throats once again. It offers us a hard lesson in how we are not the norm. It reminds us that we are nothing.

Which was the point our attacker had already made, quite effectively, thanks. Really, no need to get the state involved in the pile-on more than it already is.

So the criminal-justice system actually offers a lot, now that I think about it. It offers us lesson #352,687 that we live in a woman-hating, classist, homophobic, racist, oppressive and unfree society.

Don't know how many are clambouring for this lesson, though.

Jesus H. You want to talk about wearying.

[ 14 June 2007: Message edited by: writer ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
Do you understand now?

---

That post was very helpful because it says something that you had previously left unsaid: You are not asking for “the state” to do anything differently because you have no expectation that the police, prosecutors, or courts are willing to do anything differently. Instead, you are looking for non-state action—a revolution—to revolve this problem.

That eliminates the need to discuss—at least within the current structure of police, prosecutorial, and judicial organs—matters such as “presumption of innocence”, “burden of proof”, etc.

And, a generalized “call to action” makes more sense now—a revolution to replace the current police-prosecutorial-judicial structure.

I can appreciate that. If a person views the current state structure as unchangeable, then that structure must be replaced in order for change to happen.

So far, so good.

But…

Addressing the issues of “presumption of innocence”, “burden of proof”, and the like cannot be escaped merely by having a revolution. Once the revolution has occurred, an alternative state structure has to be put in place (unless one is simply seeking anarchy—and I’m assuming you are not seeking anarchy).

The ultimate question therefore remains: What alternative state structure and procedures would you like to see put in place after the revolution?

Very specifically, how would you envision a post-revolution state handling this very common occurrence: There is an allegation of rape, only the accused and the accuser were present, and there is no physical evidence of violence. How would you avoid the “he said/she said” dilemma? Would you expect the accused to have the burden of proving his innocence given your statement that (statistically) women do not make false accusations?

[ 14 June 2007: Message edited by: pookie ]

As for the rest, I should have known better than to persist.

[ 14 June 2007: Message edited by: RP. ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by writer:

The criminal-justice system does not work. It profoundly, deeply, thoroughly does not work. There are other models. I have written about some, here on babble, several times over. Others have written about them. Feminists have written about them. Those who work to counter and end VAG have written about them. Jane Doe has written about them.

Women's bookstores, various websites, and several other sources are available for you to educate yourselves. If you really do care.

---

And all that's been asked is an example of what kind of alternatives have been proposed. I've been here for about 12 months and I see a good proportion of the threads. I've never seen a suggested alternative, though in this thread BCG called for revolution. I have no idea what that really means.

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:

500, from freedominion, born in 1983 (I have shirts older than you) lecturing me on revolution is very very amusing. You're lucky I just had lunch and am in a good mood.

How about you boys enjoy the rest of your thread?

The revolution will not be typed!

---

I found out about babble from lurking on FD. I've lurked on lots of forums. The CBC when it was around was good. CanadaWebPages too. I also sometimes read BreadAndRoses but I'm hesitant to further damage my productivity by making more user names.

These are some of the revolutions I've heard of in my life.

The ultra orthodox Jews I grew up with would say Mashiach is coming, all the Jews would move to a clean greater israel then. The dead would rise from their graves, and women would give birth in a die rather than 9 months, with no pain.

I've heard communists say the banks are going to be nationalized.

Some say many of the world's wealthy elites are orchestrating a new world order, of no nations and transnational wealth and legal bodies.

Pardon my skeptical nature.

But I'd really be a happier person if I was as good at laundry as you are. None of my shirts are older than I am.

[ 14 June 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
The revolution will not be typed!

---

BCG, you are very good at critiquing things in society that you do not like but you are not so good at articulating positive—and specific—alternatives. Generalized “calls for action” will lead to nothing without substantive alternatives.

Glad to see you stepped back from this toxic thread.

Those men, who repeatedly here, "hound" those feminist voices, and multi-cultural ones, are pretending obtuseness, that is really geared to grind one down. And when one is finally ground down and refuses to discuss, their sense of male supremacy is rewarded.

When we have a boy man, who lives with his parents, has sex with his "girl" friend at 24, but is afraid to tell his parents, trying to pretend to discuss fundamental societal transgressions against women, one has to realize it is hardly worth the effort, at some point.

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
...the call to revolution is being heard as are the solutions.

---

Envision a world in which every major and minor decision is made by elder women of colour and FN women (the majority on the planet after all) from all countries around the world and you may have a beginning of a glimpse of the potential of what I see. It's happening already.

The next most powerful group are women from other age groups. At the front of the line: Poorer women. Indigenous and displaced women. Sadly for you, Sven, this world contains little to no structural power for men or for white people. Awwww.

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
Envision a world in which every major and minor decision is made by elder women of colour and FN women (the majority on the planet after all) from all countries around the world and you may have a beginning of a glimpse of the potential of what I see. It's happening already.

The next most powerful group are women from other age groups. At the front of the line: Poorer women. Indigenous and displaced women. Sadly for you, Sven, this world contains little to no structural power for men or for white people.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
Cross-posted with remind. Thanks. And I'm stepping back this time, I swear I am.

---

No thanks necessary, as I know, the non-perception of priviledge, of those who are, and how extreme it is, and how wrong it is, and that it is overwhelming that it is not perceived. And one gets sucked into the trap that maybe, just maybe, this time, will be the moment they get it.

When it is those who are identifably right, it is really a waste of time, unless one is going to be blunt, and transgress their boundaries, beyond which that they have normally experienced. And then it is pretty much only for one's personal entertainment value.

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
No thanks necessary, as I know, the non-perception of priviledge, of those who are, and how extreme it is, and how wrong it is, and that it is overwhelming that it is not perceived.

---

remind, you must not have read BCG's last few posts. She (finally!) made it crystal clear what she sees as an ideal world: She will not be satisfied with equality between women and men but, instead, is demanding a dominant privilege for women.

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
writer, I wasn't sure if you were out there, although I should have figured you were. Thank you for your post, thank you thank you.

Envision a world in which every major and minor decision is made by elder women of colour and FN women (the majority on the planet after all) from all countries around the world and you may have a beginning of a glimpse of the potential of what I see. It's happening already.

The next most powerful group are women from other age groups. At the front of the line: Poorer women. Indigenous and displaced women. Sadly for you, Sven, this world contains little to no structural power for men or for white people. Awwww.

P.S. The revolution will not be online.

---

quote:

---

And if you get your dream I hope in your next life you are reincarnated as a white man.

---

I guess in your last life you hoped to be reincarnated as an asshole.

However, the ideals of our justice system and our Charter are sound and are what I want hardworking progressive lawyers, police officers, social workers and judges to continue striving for, whatever race and gender these individuals are. I hope they gain strength from the gains that have been made in the past few decades to continue improving things.

I'm quite confident and relieved that the type of revolution that bcg speaks of will never come about in Canada. Only female POC in power? Well what if that POC female is Condoleeza Rice or Michelle Malkin? Who decides which women get the power? Who has this power?

Ironically, this thread started about white men who were apparently not considered innocent until proven otherwise. Would they have stood a chance in your brave new world, bcg? Why do you feel the need for vengence and retribution against specific white men who are privileged? I thought anti-oppressive theory was about ending privelege and about equality. Having white men only in power until very recently was awful and not right. Two wrongs don't make a right. Like it or not, the way forward is equality, not a revolution of reverse discrimination that bars certain races and groups from holding positions of power.

Just because some white men unjustly convict POC, and didn't follow the rule of law and due process doesn't mean that white men as a group should be punished.

I would like to express further disgust at the recent remarks of kropotkin1951, Sven, Caissa and to some extent EmmaG, who seem to think that support of difference somehow equates with supporting a new totalitarian model. While it might be facile to flatten race relations into thinking of everyone as exactly identical and treating everyone exactly the same, that's a pipe dream, and is a deliberate disavowal of the imperative accommodation of racial, sexual, class and gender difference. What is most sickening is the suggestion that "man-hating" is actually a legitimate criticism on a progressive board. Shame. Seriously, shame.

Finally, I think those who are calling, perhaps sincerely, for critics of the justice system to provide a new model that accommodates and repairs the current paradox surrounding rape charges before their criticism can be accepted to revisit their arguments and analysis of this extremely problematic case. Why is the onus on critics to provide a new schema? Were emancipation activists forced to provide an alternative to slave labour that would continue contemporary production levels before they agreed to abolish slavery? Race relations, particularly in the United States, particularly in the South, are a much more difficult thing to "fix" than simply rewriting a new jurisprudence, yet many (men) have demanded that bcg simply provide an entire legal, social and governmental system before agreeing that this Duke case is a perfect example of why there is no justice for black sex workers in America.

quote:

---

This may not seem self-evident but I'm not a monster.

---

To point out what is embarrassingly obvious to anyone who has been raped: Who sees themselves as monsters?

quote:

---

Originally posted by writer:

To point out what is embarrassingly obvious to anyone who has been raped: Who sees themselves as monsters?

Most rapists don't.

---

What a flattering analogy.

I'm implied to be a sex offender. I really don't know what to say. Well, I've yet to be called either a nazi or a communist, so that's something.

[ 14 June 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by 500_Apples:
What a flattering analogy.

I'm implied to be a sex offender. I really don't know what to say. Well, I've yet to be called either a nazi or a communist, so that's something.

---

I did not see any analogy in writer's comments.

I saw writer ask, "what person looks at themselves as a monster?"

Then gave the response that rapists don't. That was NOT pointing fingers at you, that was making an actual factual statement.

Edited to add: Thanks, remind.

[ 14 June 2007: Message edited by: writer ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:

I did not see any analogy in writer's comments.

I saw writer ask, "what person looks at themselves as a monster?"

Then gave the response that rapists don't. That was NOT pointing fingers at you, that was making an actual factual statement.

Now, I could say that I feel you are a monster, as you completely brushed off Catchfires post, in order to attack writer.

---

Pfffftttt... you are one to jump to accusations. Catchfire's post is a lot longer, and I didn't have an immediate reponse to it that I was comfortable typing and posting. I'm still thinking about it. Writer's block happens to a lot of us, maybe not you. Here's a suggestion to you, give people the benefit of the doubt, and ask.

quote:

---

as you completely brushed off Catchfires post, in order to attack writer.

---

And now, the protesting, distorting, enlightened guys who make great efforts to avoid uncomfortable truths when they come too close to comfortable illusions portion of the evening's entertainment.

G'night.

[ 14 June 2007: Message edited by: writer ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Catchfire:

Finally, I think those who are calling, perhaps sincerely, for critics of the justice system to provide a new model that accommodates and repairs the current paradox surrounding rape charges before their criticism can be accepted to revisit their arguments and analysis of this extremely problematic case. Why is the onus on critics to provide a new schema? Were emancipation activists forced to provide an alternative to slave labour that would continue contemporary production levels before they agreed to abolish slavery? Race relations, particularly in the United States, particularly in the South, are a much more difficult thing to "fix" than simply rewriting a new jurisprudence, yet many (men) have demanded that bcg simply provide an entire legal, social and governmental system before agreeing that this Duke case is a perfect example of why there is no justice for black sex workers in America.

Instead, we call for the heads of 88 academics who imagined a better world, rather than those who on a daily basis think of cutting off the skin of black sex workers ejaculating onto her exposed flesh.

---

I think I saw anyone here reject the criticisms of the coloured-favouritism and classism of justice in north america, the often callousness of police, and the problem of underreported sexual assault. (I can't believe the first sentence of the wikipedia article on this incident). These problems arise from very clear causes, have been very-well explained and documented on this site and elsewhere. I think it's clear it would have been exacerbated in a case such as this one, with the media hurricane. The question then was what can be done? No, it's not obvious. If it were obvious, nobody would bother asking. Have there been proposed solutions? I've had trouble finding some. Writer said many have been posted on babble and many books have been written... she could have posted a link. I don't think being told of an impending revolution is very convincing. I've been hearing of impending revolutions for as long as I can remember. If people are honestly not sure how to proceed next, then that's fine, they should just say so.

In the south, slavery was not abolished in a day. The alternative to follow was much simpler, pay farmer workers and give them nominal freedom. It turned out to be a weaker start that humane-minded people of that era would have hoped, but it was definitely a concrete start. It set a precedent and made the Martin Luther King Jr. and Lyndon Johnson possible.

In your second paragraph, you refer to my first post. I have high expectations for faculty, and when they fail, something is obvious, they might not merit their position. With respect to sadists, I don't know at all. I posted some ideas above, for all I know they might already be in practice, or might be completely discredited.

Good night.

[ 14 June 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sven:
As long as we’re thinking wishfully, and in ideal terms, wouldn’t it be nice if all people in this hypothetical post-revolution world were equal, rather than merely replacing a patriarchal structure with a matriarchal structure?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
Nope.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sven:
And as this thread nears its conclusion in a merry little lovefest among BCG supporters, BCG's reluctant admission that she ultimately wants to see a world based on privileged dominance for women, not gender equality, is blithely and happily ignored.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by 500_Apples:
And all that's been asked is an example of what kind of alternatives have been proposed.

---

This comment of yours 500_apples is why you should've read catchfire's post. That you did not says much as to actual truthfull interest level...

quote:

---

This may not seem self-evident but I'm not a monster. I am however very curious, and sometimes cynical. I searched for alternatives a while back and could not find any.

---

Now is where you state you are not a monster, and state you have "searched" alternatives. However, a google of alternative justice models provides one with instant hits of over 3 million. Now this could lead one to believe that you are putting on an act and truly just intent upon hectoring, as opposed to simply being interested and open. This notion was further bolstered by your brushing past catchfire's post to attack writer.

quote:

---

then certainly some of the more knowledgeable people here could post a few, very specific links.

---

quote:

---

And as this thread nears its conclusion in a merry little lovefest among BCG supporters, BCG's reluctant admission that she ultimately wants to see a world based on privileged dominance for women, not gender equality, is blithely and happily ignored.

---

Might be a nice change of pace.

Speaking of ignoring, how neatly you side-stepped Catchfire's post.

P.S.

quote:

---

merry little lovefest among BCG supporters,

---

I bet that comes as much as a surprise to BCG as it did to me, we aren't known to be close. Just both women. I guess that's enough for you be rudley dismissive of our general agreement.

[ 14 June 2007: Message edited by: Scout ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
Really, this toxic thread needs to come to an end.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChicagoLoopDweller:
How is advocating a world where only elder women of colour and FN women are allowed to make decisions not a racist statement? Forget the implications regarding men, what about white women? And this from the one of the moderators of the anti-racism forum. Awesome.

---

True, Sven. The revolution will not take place in a court of law.

[ 14 June 2007: Message edited by: ChicagoLoopDweller ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.R.KISSED:
Ah...the scavengers and vermin have come to pick at the bones

---

And, of course, you'll never address, head on, the fundamental issue that BCG and I were debating today: If "he said/she said" is sexist, what's the alternative when there is an alleged rape, only two people were present, and there is no evidence of physical violence?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sven:
Indeed. I don't know how I will be able to read another critique that BCG writes of patriarchy knowing that she wants to replace that system, not with equality, but a system of privileged dominance based on matriarchy. That's toxic.

---

Wow, you write this, yet you still do not get it, nor get what she was juxpositioning for you to realize.

Who controls this world? White old men.

Who has the priviledged dominance in this world?

White oldmen.

Who has the least amount of racial numbers?

White oldmen

Now, why do you not think this current system is toxic then? But yet think BCG's quite obvious juxposition/anaology/exact opposite of what we have today, is!

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
Now, why do you not think this current system is toxic then?

---

I'm not arguing that it's not. Can you point to a single post that I've made here that indicates otherwise?

No, my point is that in her criticism of the "he said/she said" battle, she has no viable alternative to advocate. Nothing.

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
...you failed to see the allagory in her words.

---

Oh, so now it's merely an "allegory"? Nice dodge.

Allegory or not, she could not come up with a viable alternative to the condition she is critizing (other than a generalized "call for action")...

Do you have a solution?

[ 14 June 2007: Message edited by: Sven ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChicagoLoopDweller:
The sad part of this discussion is that there really is a need for a different method, but no matter what system you use in the end you are left with the same problem: he says A, she says B.

---

Precisely!!!

Yet, I'm all ears (and eyes) to hear (see) a practical alternative solution to address that.

remind?

scout?

writer?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Catchfire:
...I would like to express further disgust at the recent remarks of kropotkin1951, Sven, Caissa and to some extent EmmaG, who seem to think that support of difference somehow equates with supporting a new totalitarian model. While it might be facile to flatten race relations into thinking of everyone as exactly identical and treating everyone exactly the same, that's a pipe dream, and is a deliberate disavowal of the imperative accommodation of racial, sexual, class and gender difference. What is most sickening is the suggestion that "man-hating" is actually a legitimate criticism on a progressive board. Shame. Seriously, shame.

Finally, I think those who are calling, perhaps sincerely, for critics of the justice system to provide a new model that accommodates and repairs the current paradox surrounding rape charges before their criticism can be accepted to revisit their arguments and analysis of this extremely problematic case. Why is the onus on critics to provide a new schema? Were emancipation activists forced to provide an alternative to slave labour that would continue contemporary production levels before they agreed to abolish slavery? Race relations, particularly in the United States, particularly in the South, are a much more difficult thing to "fix" than simply rewriting a new jurisprudence, yet many (men) have demanded that bcg simply provide an entire legal, social and governmental system before agreeing that this Duke case is a perfect example of why there is no justice for black sex workers in America.

Instead, we call for the heads of 88 academics who imagined a better world, rather than those who on a daily basis think of cutting off the skin of black sex workers ejaculating onto her exposed flesh.

---

Here sven, read it, it tells you all you need to know, and stop hectoring. As that is your only point in this.

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
Here sven, read it, it tells you all you need to know

---

There is no need to "provide an entire legal, social and governmental system". No, the task is much, much simpler than that: What do you do to avoid the "she said/he said" issue?

Can you answer that one little question?

ETA: Probably not.

[ 14 June 2007: Message edited by: Sven ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sven:
There is no need to "provide an entire legal, social and governmental system". No, the task is much, much simpler than that: What do you do to avoid the "she said/he said" issue?

Can you answer that one little question?

ETA: Probably not.

---

Yes actually there is the need, and if you really thought this system was toxic you would understand that, just as you would understand what the solution is to the she said/he said.

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
... just as you would understand what the solution is to the she said/he said.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
Yes actually there is the need, and if you really thought this system was toxic you would understand that, just as you would understand what the solution is to the she said/he said.

It has been stated to you here over and over, yet you still fail to see, or you are trying to gain ego satisfaction out of hectoring.

---

Another solution would be to reduce the standard of proof from "beyond a reasonable doubt" to a "preponderance of the evidence". Again, that's problematic and I can articulate why.

But, no one has posited any solution anywhere near as concrete as those alternatives.

Instead, we are treated to "calls for action" (with no specific action articulated) and similar nonsense. You might as well say we should hold hands and sing kumbaya.

[ 14 June 2007: Message edited by: Sven ]

Bad cases make bad law.

If you switch the burden of proof how does an innocent man ever go free? How does a defendant prove he didn't rape someone, if they say he did?

[ 14 June 2007: Message edited by: ChicagoLoopDweller ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sven:
One obvious solution, which I touched on earlier, but no one embraced (and I hardly fault anyone for that), was to shift the burden of proof to the defendant. Make the defendant prove his innocence. I don't favor that solution (and I can articulate why if any one is interested).

---

Nobody wants that.

quote:

---

Another solution would be to reduce the standard of proof from "beyond a reasonable doubt" to a "preponderance of the evidence". Again, that's problematic and I can articulate why.

---

That's lowering the bar to the civil case standard: 50% + 1% means you win. Nobody wants that either.

quote:

---

But, no one has posited any solution anywhere near as concrete as those alternatives.

Instead, we are treated to "calls for action" (with no specific action articulated) and similar nonsense. You might as well say we should hold hands and sing kumbaya.

---

No. What we want is, in the awful event of a rape, for a victim to be able to come forward without a jackass cabal saying things like "She was a stripper. What else do you need to know?" or [edited to remove a me-o-centric example].

ETA: Seriously, I can't really remember when this case originally broke but I do remember that the fact of this woman's occupation was way, way, way too over-emphasized for my comfort level.

[ 14 June 2007: Message edited by: Phonz ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Phonz:
No. What we want is, in the awful event of a rape, for a victim to be able to come forward without a jackass cabal saying things like "She was a stripper. What else do you need to know?" or "She was being medicated for bipolar disorder. What else do you need to know?"

---

There have been significant attempts to do that (rape shield laws). Maybe those laws need to be further re-examined. Personally, I don't know enough about the parameters of those various laws (the specific restrictions they impose on defense counsels' cross-examination questions).

In this particular instance, those laws never came into play because there was no trial. Instead, the whole thing played out in the media. Maybe counsel should be gagged so as to not taint the jury pool through media revelations. But, that will not prevent the media, on its own, from snooping around for background information about the defendant and the accuser.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sven:
we are left with leaving it up to the jury to determine which person to believe. I just don't see any way around that.

---

I agree but I can also imagine a circumstance were "he said/she said" could lead to a guilty verdict "beyond a reasonable doubt."

I agree with you about the media. It's not just the jury pool problem. It's the court of public opinion, unfortunately, being a higher court than the court of law sometimes. I'm sure you'd agree that some of the coverage and thus public attitudes about this case were disgusting. Read the comments page on Wikipedia if you're in any doubt. Mr. Duke53 on that page is a prime example.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Phonz:
I agree but I can also imagine a circumstance were "he said/she said" could lead to a guilty verdict "beyond a reasonable doubt."

---

Undoubtedly. Our prisons have thousands of innocent people locked up--for murder, rape, theft, etc., etc., etc.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sven:
Undoubtedly. Our prisons have thousands of innocent people locked up--for murder, rape, theft, etc., etc., etc.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
Envision a world in which every major and minor decision is made by elder women of colour and FN women (the majority on the planet after all) from all countries around the world and you may have a beginning of a glimpse of the potential of what I see.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Makwa:
It appears that, for many, merely suggesting a model of authority which the Cree and other FN peoples followed for millenia is cause for more outrage and anguish than than caused by the actual public backlash against of a women of colour. Not terribly surprising. (The revolution will not be emailed.)

---

I expressed my complete disgust at the treatment of the woman involved in this case, as well as the treatment of cases all over north america where the victims are women, or from a minority group. I also expressed disgust at what bcg's hopes are the results of the "revolution" - complete and total racial and gender preferencing. As a said before white male domination is the history of Canada and is wrong. But, reversing it for an undetermined amount of time doesn't seem to be the model of authority that FN people followed for millenia. FNs were fairly homogenous in terms of race and I thought they had men and women in positions of authority?

I am too sick of this shit to post about my own experiences, and too tired to be explaining the rape discourse that is dominant in this country and America. I am also too fucking tired to tell idiots who have no FUCKING CLUE about how the justice system does NOT work for rape.

There are many solutions I could make a giant list of.

1. How about the police actually do the fucking DNA they say they do?
2. How about the police stop re-victimizing the victim with 6 fucking testimonies (on camera, off camera, on and on)
3. How about we face up to the FACT that rape is more than likely not a false accusation, because we all fucking know men can do it, get away with it, and do it again. Sometimes with the backing of their buddies, who think it's a joke
4. How about we get the courts to stop victimizing the victim. Doesn't anyone find it a tad fucked up that the victim can have her past brought up and the offender, even if he had past or current similar charge, cannot?
5. How about we stop framing rape in such a sanitized way? How about we start talking about the real pain, the real violence, and address that?
6. How about we admit that the police use discretion when investigating solely on arbitrary terms - the victim does drugs, the victim was raped in the past, the victim is not white?

As a rape victim, who went to the police and did my fucking duty 3 YEARS AGO I have not heard one word from the police. Fuck the police and fuck the justice system. It is inherently flawed when it comes to rape.

An Sven, fuck off with your attack on BCG. You men have been running this world for thousands of years and frankly, you suck ass at it. Yes, wouldn't it be nice if for once, women were allowed to run things you have all fucked up do badly, perhaps we wouldn't see so much war, rape, murder, corruption.

And to end - thanks Catchfire and Writer and those who stood up to these freaking fools who think they have a clue about rape, the rape discourse and the justice system's handling of rape.

quote:

---

Originally posted by EmmaG:
However, Makwa you seem to have missed the post where it was pointed out that bcg wasn't even being serious. Her ideas about the revolution were merely allegorical.

---

According to remind, that is.

quote:

---

Finally, I think those who are calling, perhaps sincerely, for critics of the justice system to provide a new model that accommodates and repairs the current paradox surrounding rape charges before their criticism can be accepted to revisit their arguments and analysis of this extremely problematic case. Why is the onus on critics to provide a new schema? Were emancipation activists forced to provide an alternative to slave labour that would continue contemporary production levels before they agreed to abolish slavery? Race relations, particularly in the United States, particularly in the South, are a much more difficult thing to "fix" than simply rewriting a new jurisprudence, yet many (men) have demanded that bcg simply provide an entire legal, social and governmental system before agreeing that this Duke case is a perfect example of why there is no justice for black sex workers in America.

---

This obviously bears repeating.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scout:
This obviously bears repeating.

---

As does this (which captures the essential debate I had with BCG yesterday):

quote:

---

Originally posted by Summer:
so many times it's going to come down to he said/she said

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BCG:
That's a really really really sexist and hateful thing to say

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sven:
If two people are the only people present at the time of an alleged sexual assault and if there is no physical evidence of violence, what are we left with other than her word and his word?

---

BCG simply could not articulate an alternative, which did not require, as Catchfire said, creating a whole new system of government at the same time.

[ 15 June 2007: Message edited by: Sven ]

How about not being able to walk properly for two days? Not violent enough for you? Do you honestly fucking believe that in order to rape their must be physical violence?

I'm said many similar things to you in this thread.

I think this thread has reached an impasse, and most everyone has already said what they're willing to say. We've all agreed on what the underlying problems are, with less agreemant on where to go from there.

There's a few more things I'd like to say myself here, especially responding to stargazer's post which was one of the most well thought out posts in this thread, but it will just hit mostly deaf ears at this point anyway.

128 posts is more than sufficient.

[ 15 June 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stargazer:
hey Sven, how about and psychological evidence of violence? Or does that not count in your world?

---

It can be described to a jury. Of course it would be evidence.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stargazer:
How about not being able to walk properly for two days? Not violent enough for you? Do you honestly fucking believe that in order to rape their must be physical violence?

---

It's about the glaring news that the criminal justice system works for people who wear more layers of privlege than I have socks.

It is about an issue which is perfect for analysing through the critical lense of race and class analysis.

For those who are open to having their outlooks challenged, or who enjoy being challenged to stretch a bit, it's been great. I admit I started from the point of "well, it appears the guys didn't do it, so charges were dropped, so what's the beef". Some persuasive arguments have at least for me, pointed in the direction of the beef.

For those who aren't aware of the distinction, this can be what comes of listening to understand, rather than listening to oppose. That's why I often prefer to just listen on a thread and not comment unless I need to do something moddish. I could have, too, because tempers flared, but that needn't always be a negative thing.

Speaking of being moddish, this is pretty long so I'll close it. There's lots and lots more to be said about this, and my hope is that a new thread can build on this one and evolve, rather than rehash the obvious and just get stuck in vitriol.

[ 15 June 2007: Message edited by: oldgoat ]