Should men who are accused then cleared of rape charges be able to file for damages?

[GoldenDelicious]

Re: Should men who are accused then cleared of rape charges be able to file for damag

No. It appears from the article that she didn't committ fraud, she wrongly accused another man. He may look like the man that was implicated (of course, this is an assumption because the article doesn't say). If you have been the victim of a crime like attempted murder, gun robbery, rape, etc. unless you personally know your attacker, identifying someone isn't easy. Everything happens so fast, the only characteristics you may have are eye color, hair color, maybe height (you get my point.) Hence, people are wrongly arrested and let go all the time. Some cases go as far as the grand jury and are let go.

As I stated above, she did not committ fraud. It doesn't appear from the article that they knew each other or interacted in some way and she was out to "get him", thus she should not be sued.

no one said she committed fraud - rather, she was reckless with her accusation. nor did anyone say she should be punished because she was "out to get him" - she may or may not have been, but likely, was wither looking to point the finger asap or (more likely) a bit traumatised.

that fact, however, does not shield the accused from the effects of her accusation; hence, a reaction from him is warranted. if it isnt weighty enough, let that fall as it may in court

just my humble (aka good looking) 2c

 

[velvett]

Yes

OMG LOOK WHO IT IS...

 

[velvett]

I think we're talking about a few different things here.

Wrongly accused covers both the correct/specific innocent guy accused of rape and a random guy wrongly identified and accused.

If possible, please cite said precedents where the person arrested sued the victim that "wrongly" accused him (I believe there's a difference between being wrongly accused and maliciously accused). I'm very interested in this.

^^^^^ just what I mean.

Flip side:

I've identify people in two separate events successfully, two of the three were undercover NYC cops and I went through literaly hundreds of black & white photos to pick them out. Often in traumatic event (or simply an annoying one) it can be quite hard to forget those very details but that depends on the person and on the situation.

 

[velvett]

false rape occusations make me furious and sick. I don´t know if this measure would be righ, though

What is sad is that a false accusation is both hurtful to those falsely accused and those that have truly been victimized.

 

[nycgirl]

I think we're talking about a few different things here.
Wrongly accused covers both the correct/specific innocent guy accused of rape and a random guy wrongly identified and accused.
^^^^^ just what I mean.

Flip side:
I've identify people in two separate events successfully, two of the three were undercover NYC cops and I went through literaly hundreds of black & white photos to pick them out. Often in traumatic event (or simply an annoying one) it can be quite hard to forget those very details but that depends on the person and on the situation.

Exactly. Going by that article, it appears she "wrongly" accused him; not maliciously accused him. If it was me, I would sue the media, not the victim. I have no problem with people suing the victim if it was done out of revenge.

Unlike you, I couldn't identify someone successfully. I was robbed and had my life threatened (he claimed he had a gun). The guy was 6 inches away from me. My chain was snatched, I ran home, called the cops, and had to immediately identify someone. I went through every book, I couldn't identify him because I was so traumatized.

 

[75th]

Re: Should men who are accused then cleared of rape charges be able to file for damag

Exactly. Going by that article, it appears she "wrongly" accused him; not maliciously accused him. If it was me, I would sue the media, not the victim. I have no problem with people suing the victim if it was done out of revenge.

Unlike you, I couldn't identify someone successfully. I was robbed and had my life threatened (he claimed he had a gun). The guy was 6 inches away from me. My chain was snatched, I ran home, called the cops, and had to immediately identify someone. I went through every book, I couldn't identify him because I was so traumatized.

While the events that occured may not specifically constitute slander/libel, there is a certain stigma that goes hand-in-hand with simply being accused of being a rapist.

I personally dont think the media should be held accountable, as they were only reporting what the femal accusor claimed.

 

[nycgirl]

Re: Should men who are accused then cleared of rape charges be able to file for damag

While the events that occured may not specifically constitute slander/libel, there is a certain stigma that goes hand-in-hand with simply being accused of being a rapist.

I personally dont think the media should be held accountable, as they were only reporting what the femal accusor claimed.

They should be held liable for speculating that he was possibly a serial rapist (lacked reasonable grounds for believing it to be true, or acted negligently in failing to properly investigate).

 

[slat1]

If possible, please cite said precedents where the person arrested sued the victim that "wrongly" accused him (I believe there's a difference between being wrongly accused and maliciously accused). I'm very interested in this.

I was pointing out how people sue and get paid for this type of thing all the time. People who have been in jail for years after being wrongly accused get out and get paid!
They sue for damages and win millions from the gov.
My feeling is it is not the gov that makes the accusation but the victim. The victim makes the initial accusation. The gov then does what they can to prosecute. Their main evidence is the identification by the accuser. If there was no identification there would have been no arrest. This guy would have continued to walk home. The arrest happened because of the accuser's action. Therefor, I feel the accuser should pay not the taxpayers when there is a settlement.
After all. There are written statements. The accused saying he did no such thing. The accuser saying he did. They are sworn statements that are signed! She signed a false statement implicating this guy. Her actions alone for ever changed his life. She made him a victim. He should have the same rights and recourse she has.

 

[manny78]

As I stated above, she did not committ fraud. It doesn't appear from the article that they knew each other or interacted in some way and she was out to "get him", thus she should not be sued.

You dont need to commit fraud to be liable under civil laws. That's the "ess levissima culpa" (latin term) philosophy behind civil liability. You're responsible of your acts, even if you didnt have any bad intentions. It's all about what a reaosnable person would have done in the same situation. Was she careful enough when she identified him ? Anyway she screwed up. Too bad but the law is the law.

 

[KillahBee]

FUCK FUCK FUCK yes. Honestly, I think it should be an offense that is punishable to the maximum extent of the law. I had this happen to a friend in college and he lost EVERYTHING because of it. It disgusts me to the point that I saw the little whore that accused him in a bar and people had to hold me back from breaking her pretty little face.