When court cases rely only on “he said, she said”
In some cases, prosecutors are only able to incarcerate someone for committing a heinous act through the testimony of witnesses. But courts need to tread carefully through such convictions as there are too many known cases of false accusations sending an innocent person to prison.
Several years ago, five female high school students falsely accused a male lifeguard of sexual assault on two occasions. The male student was subjected to incarceration before the girls admitted they had lied.
Apparently, law enforcement thought that the testimonies of five girls was enough to know that the lifeguard was guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. The parents of the boy were the ones who had to gather the evidence that their son was innocent, which was easily accomplished.
It appears that the five girls suffered no academic or personal consequences for falsely accusing this young man of crimes that he did not commit. This inaction on the part of the local school district and law enforcement only encourages others to seek revenge through false accusations. In today’s society, it is particularly effective if you are a female.
One of my closest friends has been in prison for about 12 years because his deputy sheriff wife falsely accused him of molesting their very young child. The trial lasted all of a day and now that ex-wife is married to the sheriff’s investigator who handled the case. Justice? “Law enforcement”? NOT!
As former law enforcement, I saw shady crap like this go on ALL the time. If there was video evidence of all the things I saw other officers doing on and off the job, about 1/2 of them would not be officers.
When I was a rookie, my training officer was stealing stuff from quickie marts. I did not know if it was real or I was being tested to see if I would snitch. I finally said something to him. He said he would stop and it was just a test but I do not believe him. A few years later he took an early retirement after being accused of exhorting store owners for money.
I could have testified against him but by that point, I was already dealing with my own downfall and had already left the department anyway not related to the job. A lot of officers feel like they have unlimited immunity because they wear a badge. And a LOT of stuff is covered up and swept under the rug even after coming to light. No department wants to deal with controversy. When it does make the news, heads start to roll.
That was my case to a “T”. No evidence no DNA nothing except her word against mine even tho she was known to lie. My lawyer said in a case like this its up to the jury to decide who they want to believe, and they always want to believe the alledged victim after all why would someone make up such a horrible story.so take a plea or go to prison for the rest of your life. what I really don’t understand is its supposed to be proof beyond reasonable doubt. I’m sorry but to me I would think that there is always a possibility that either side could be lying there for reasonable doubt exist without corroborating evidence. But they still convince.
Exact same situation as our son and he said she said, no dna no evidence and no innocent until proven guilty – pushed to take a plea and then after we found evidence of innocence they said no one cares and just got kicked out of appeals saying time barred.
Our system is so bad.
I agree.
Scenarios like this is why I get nervous being around children and hesitant date anyone. It’s definitely PTSD. Don’t get me wrong. I take full responsibility for what I did. However, once your background is tarnished with a sex offense, you are all to vulnerable to situations like this. A neighbor, girlfriend, ex, or acquaintance could disagree or get mad at me for whatever reason. ie. My political/religious views, breaking up with a gf, just they just simply deem me evil due to my background alone. They could make a false accusation that I molested their kid or that I raped them or anything along those lines with a background like mine it would more than likely land me in jail, no questions asked. Fear of these types of scenarios definitely hold me back.
I’m definitely with you on this, Tim. Although reasonable caution rather than PTSD is the driver. I make it a point to never be alone with a woman or children. The possibility of a false accusation is quite real, and usually the accuser prevails. With an SO background one is considered guilty until adjudicated guilty.
Unfortunately, you are absolutely right.
Tim
I once was accused by a neighbor back around 2003 of doing something.(Neighbors wanted me gone) I went with my lawyer to the police station and agreed to take a polygraph exam. I aced it. Thankfully the judge agreed and threw out the accusation. Even though never arrested, the lawyer cost me $1,800. So I still lost in a way.
BTW $1,800 was super cheap for an attorney even back then but still hurt my pocket book
I personally would never submit to a polygraph unless the accuser has passed one first. The burden of proof is on their side and I could care less what any LE officer says otherwise.
This is exactly why I never believed in our justice system. The fact that word alone is enough, and no consequences for those who lied to get someone convicted, is why this country is literally trash.
Tereto
But many who DID have a real crime committed against them got no justice because an officer, prosecutor or judge said the same thing “It is your word against theirs”.
So it goes both ways. Damn if you do and damned if you don’t.
And that’s why there should have to be some type of corroborating Evidence
And for any crime than a sex offense, it is.
I agree with you Cherokee. The problem is as it always is with the law they see and issue and try to fix it by going to the opposite extreme. Like with this it went from the days of the 40s and 50s where a woman.a. almost needed pictures of the crime being committed against her and 3 or 4 witnesses to even try to get anyone to believe her and do something about it to today where she says you did something your arrested ( just in case , so you don’t attack someone else ) Then your found guilty , again we don’t want to take a chance that if you get out then attack someone else How it might hurt they’re careers or political ambitions. So her word alone is enough. It has nothing to do with the truth or justice just how they look to the people.
Although maybe not as bad as what happened to him but I had something similar happen to me when I was 11. I was sent off to a private Christian School. We went on a field trip to a library and these two girls close to my age came over and handed me a book and walked away.
I started thumbing through the book and realized it was a human anatomy book with photos of nude bodies. About a minute later a teacher came over, grabbed the book away and stated that I was a pervert and should not be showing those girls that. In my head I was like WTF just happened. I was totally set up but I got 2 weeks expulsion and my grandmother beat my arse and also did not believe me.
This was only one of numerous things that happened to me before and after that age that caused me to have bad relationships throughout my life.
Anyone who intentionally lies and knowingly accuses someone of a crime he did not commit should receive the same sentence the innocent person received.
I don’t see the big deal.
For centuries, juries have relied on testimony of accusers and witnesses, cross-examined by the defense.
Cross-examination can be particularly useful where a witness is “known to lie,” as one poster put it below.
Has something changed?
Is it FAC’s position that abuse cases that rely solely on testimony, should be dropped?
(Can’t wait to make some new friends with this post).
Being older than you, Jacob, I remember the days when schools taught that someone could not be sent to prison only on the testimony of one person. There was no need for an explanation as it was obvious why.
This was all changed in Florida some years ago to help children put people in prison who had truly abused them. It all sounded good on the surface. But as is true of most new laws, because of the constant overreach by law enforcement, courts, and legislators, it entrapped people for whom it was never intended.
I was also taught in school that a spouse could not be forced to testify against his/her husband/wife. This was a no-brainer, too. Now, unlike other criminal cases, a person can be forced to testify in alleged sexual abuse cases against minors.
Yes, for centuries some societies have relied on just the testimony of a witness(es). Think of the women who were burned at the stake in this country because of the “testimony” from some individuals.
Cross-examination is not always going to determine if a witness is lying or not.
Don’t worry, Jacob. You will always be my friend.
Thank you for the powerful and timely Weekly Update addressing these very issues. It happens that you’re not much older than me (don’t tell anybody).
The mere fact that the defense won’t go out for blood on a child victim is a no brained everybody is concerned with not putting them thru no more trauma then they have already allegedly endured so they instead try to use double talk to try to trip them up. Oh but wait now your confusing them as I was told children make mistakes. Like when several of the days she said incidents occurred and I was not even in the state . it was well she don’t have to know the exact dates . or when they ask her 3 times when the last incident occurred it was two weeks ago then changed to a couple of days ago then changed to it was yesterday. When asked why she said it was a couple days ago her answer was oh I forgot .never mind that she was in they’re custody yesterday. But again it was well children make mistakes and can forget but they don’t lie about stuff like this . really ? Cross examination only works if its used correctly the idea is to get at the truth not seeing how well they remember what they are told to say
I’ve said a million times and will say a million more – Prosecutors and judges only care about convictions, nothing more. Law, truth and justice be damned. DAs just want to maintain their precious 100% conviction rates and many (if not all) judges campaign on sentencing however many criminals whatever number of years during their terms and pledge to increase it.
Both love sex crime in particular because the burden of proof is non-existent. A simple accusation, even a recanted one, is sufficient. In many states, accusers don’t even have to testify in court and if they do, aren’t subjected to any meaningful cross-examination due to rape shield laws that somehow courts interpret as not denying the right to confront one’s accusers.
Of course, if the lifeguard had not been locked up before being found innocent, the MeToo folks, the SJWs, and the Lauren Books of the world would have had the prosecutor and/or police involve with the case fired.
People may not realize this but feminists played as much a rule in our overly punitive system as the conservatives.
As a person who was recently falsely accused of a crime, there is no worse feeling of helplessness than sitting in a jail cell not even knowing why you are there other than the formal charge and you have nothing to do but think about it for days/weeks/month on end.
We seem to have forgotten the very concept of “innocent until proven guilty.” Anyone who’s been locked up can tell you jail is worse than prison because you are more restricted.