February 28, 2006
-
Rape
I want to talk about rape today. Actually, I want to talk about accusations of rape. You notice how the media will protect the identity of the person that is accusing a person of rape. But they don’t protect the identity of the one being accused.
Take the case of Kobe Bryant. He is a super star basketball player. A lady accuses him of rape. His reputation is destroyed. But the lady gets to decide whether she will make herself public. I understand that we need to protect the identity of the potential victim. But it is not fair to protect the identity of the accuser and not protect the identity of the accused.
In my opinion, we need to either protect the identity of both or neither. Both people should be protected.
Should the identity of the accused rapist be private until he/she is convicted of the crime?
Comments (176)
FIRST!
Sure, why not?
WOW! That’ll never happen again!
Wow, I was close.
NO, We know about other crimes why not rape.
~G~
No, but I can see both ways
yes! innocent till proven guilty. when someone is accused of rape it something that will stick with them even when they are not guilty.
RYC: Dan, if you could see my husband on stage even YOU would think he was hot! LMAO
Can you believe I was first?!
i dunno
Hm, I don’t know. Maybe, because its only fair, but in murder cases or any other crime the media tells us everything. I personally don’t think the media should be told of something until it is verified and the person is sentenced. I admit, there are some things I was definately curious about, Schaivo, Michael Jackson, Kobe, but hey, it isn’t my right to know, now is it? Just like it isn’t my right to know who is being accused of rape, or who is accusing of rape. If one is secret, the other should be, if one isn’t, the other shouldn’t be. Simple as that.
Eva.
NO, we need to know about other crimes, so why can’t we know about rape? if we protect the identity of a rapist then we have to protect the identity of murderers, thieves, etc.
actually, i think your suggestion is a good one. but, if we’re going to do that, we should also do that for all other cases, such as murder and adultery and stuff like that. which won’t happen, because those sorts of things should be public
If someone is accusing someone else of something so heines as rape, the accusers identity should be known.
YES!!!!!!!!!!!
and not that I’m against it…I like knowing finally the thoughts of the man behind the brown screen, but when did you start posting your own opinions to your own questions?
i agree.
Absolutely not. I think most women will not lie about rape. That is a very brutal attack on someone and most women are telling the truth. I think the accused should definitely be public.
blame it on the media.
It just drives me nuts that when a celebrity is accused if a crime such as rape the accuser is always “Jane/John Doe”. If you’ve got the balls to accuse someone of rape then you deserve to have your name made public and take the heat. I think either all parties are named or everyone is “Jane/John Doe”.
No, I don’t think that it should. However, the result, if it turns out that the accused did not commit the crime, should be paraded as boisterously, and repeated as loudly as the name of the person was, to exonerate said individual of the connotations attached to the accusal in the first place. If someone did not commit a crime like that, the public deserves to know, and the person has a right to the understanding of others, as we attach such a harsh sentiment to the commital.
Stephen
21?
NO, what if that person raped others who would step foward?
If declared innocent every night there should be a “this person is innocent” broadcast for quite a while… it’s hard to make that up to someone….
RYC: well, being first is the most exciting thing that’s happened to me today. A close second is that fact that I got a free ham sandwich at work today, that was left over from a board meeting! I live an exciting life! lol
No.
Of course. If proven innocent, they will still be looked at shadily. They don’t deserve that if they didn’t do the crime!
definatley not. It can take months, or even years before a case is settled; I have a friend who was raped and it took years until the rapist was proven guilty. I think for the protection of other women ( or whoever the victims may be), the identity should be made known, so that if he approaches someone, they will know what he may have done in the past.
I also agree with the person who mentioned that he may have raped other people in the past. the victims may not have had the courage to step forward with an accusation. By hearing that he did it to another person, they might as well.
yes…
You make me laugh, Dan!
YEAH YEAH I WAS FIRST! ME ME ME! I WAS FIRST! I AM THE GREATEST LA LA LA LA!
their name should be revealed only if the person is convicted and/or there is dna evidence
NO!! People should know…even if the crime is still “just” alleged.
a crime is a crime. and rape is still a crime. people know about all the other big trials that arent about rape and they are realesed to the public before the trial too. plus i believe people should know about rapists. people arent just accused of rape. now coby is a different story i believe the lady wanted money (but thats my opinion) but if some one has the guts to say “he/she raped me” then why would they lie about something so serious? even if u arent being accused people still look at the accuser differently too.
sierra
i like the site….u should poist more and comment back plz
Yes.
I don’t know, that’s a tough one. What if he did it and he doesn’t get convicted? Or he didn’t to it but he’s found guilty?
I don’t think the woman should be made public because rape is brutal and humiliating as it is. The public doesn’t need to get in on that. She should make it known to who she chooses.
Good point.
I think the perp should be protected untill proven guilty…
It’s sad that a person can’t have private relations without fearing being accused of rape, however…
Whats to stop a person from developing a relationship and deciding to have sex, and then later going back after the relationship has ended just to get a settlement?
Yes, if I happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time, and somehow was accused of rape, and then later was found innocent, I wouldn’t want everyone I know and more people I don’t know that I was accused of rape. I didn’t do it and I wasn’t found guilty…but some people still would have their doubts and see me as an accused rapist.
yes
If Kobe had robbed a bank, another crime, we would have known. But you’re right, I guess. We shouldn’t know until the verdict is clear.
(That is, if I didn’t have sex at all, if I was just somehow sought to be a suspect)
i believe that the accused should not be disclosed until there has been mucho progress toward his conviction.
Criminals nowadays are tried in the media rather than the courts anyway.
yes, one of my familys friends was accused of rape and it pretty much ruined his life even though he wasnt guilty
I think its fair to protect the accused’s identity until they’re proven guilty. Rape is a big deal though, and unfortunately its hard to prove… a lot of people could get away completely free with not even a smudge on their reputation. Maybe that’s all we have for some cases.
Definitely not. Maybe if our legal system was in a less decadent condition, but it’s not, many people get off when they shouldn’t. Accused people should be made known especially in the case of something as severe as rape.
-Jared
we should definitely protect both or neither. I wasn’t a huge fan of kobe bryant, but I still felt bad for him. just being accused [even if you aren't guilty] can ruin your entire life, and be the only thing you’re remembered for.
which would suck.
yes, as long as they have been apprehended. if they are on the loose, then obviously, no, they can’t be kept secret.
~~~megan
Absolutely. They can protect the names of jurors and the victim. What comes around goes around.
Yes. An accusation of rape will tarnish someone’s reputation forever whether they did the crime or not. Their identity should be kept private…innocent until proven guilty. Once he’s found guilty, do whatever you want with him.
Kate Faber is her name! Kate Faber from Colorado.
now we’re being fair
yes i think both should be protected.
what happened to innocent until proven guilty?
our society is full of double standards, and yet women still complain about equal rights.
what about adults that have sex with a minor!
if a guy commits that crime, he gets big time prison term. Whereas, if a woman commits that crime with a underaged boy, she basically gets a slap on her wrist.
I think so. Its either none or all!
I’m not sure why we should protect possible rapists from the scrutiny of the public eye when we don’t protect possible murderers or burglars. If accusers’ names are made public, that may deter rape victims from seeking help because they don’t want the publicity or the judgement of people. Sometimes even if it is confidential, victims are still terrified of telling anyone. Is letting them suffer in silence worth our refusing to “tarnish” the reputation of the accused? I think a solution is that if the accused is found innocent a big deal should be made out of the innocence. And if afterward some people still persist in believing the innocent person is guilty – so what? There are people who believe the Holocaust never happened. There will always be people who don’t believe the facts and others just need to rise above that.
I’m not sure… if tyhe accused is innocent than I’d say yes, but if they’re guilty I’d say no, because we’d want to protect the public from a rapist but save it from hurting an inocent person. The trouble is, nobody’d know either way but the victim and the person they’re accusing until it was proven either way. So, in short, I don’t know.
Ps. I think I worded my above opinion wrong. I think it’s okay if the accused’s name is kept secret, but under no circumstances should the accuser’s name be revealed to the public until the verdict.
Thats why they say accused or alleged or suspected, and not did or guilty.
Truly, I don’t care. Why can’t the news stop reporting on crimes and start reporting on good things. It’s sad that I can’t even think of any examples of good things the news could report. They’ve been filling our brains with negative stuff so long it seems it is all we know. I’ve talked with people who came here from a distant, foreign country, and they seriously thought it was just panic in the streets and chaos all the time here. Because that is all is reported in the news and they didn’t know any better. They were scared to go anywhere unless they just had to, until they found out differently.
Isn’t that sad?
Here’s how it used to be: If a woman was raped, nobody believed her. It was her fault. The courts even took the view that if she didn’t fight back and didn’t prove that she fought back (and there had to be evidence of serious injury to the attacker done by the attackee), then it must not have been bad enough for it to be an actual rape. This is something that women were discouraged from reporting because it made them look as if they’d done something wrong. As a result, rape shield laws have been implemented to allow people who are sexually assaulted maintain a degree of privacy when they make their complaints. Sexual violence is awful and it is humiliating. And for some people, the thought of having their names made public while the case pans out is enough to prevent them from reporting it in the first place.
What happened with the Kobe Bryant case? Was he found not guilty? If so, I wouldn’t say his reputation was destroyed. Look how much sympathy there is for him right here.
Yes, the identity should be protected from the press and the public. Innocent until proven guilty. Even with what has happened to me, I would still not someone to be abused for the crime until it was proven that they did it. There’s no sense in that. The same should be done for murder cases and other crimes. Those people, even if found guilty, are looked down upon in society afterwards.
As long as he is revealed publicly upon conviction.
To make it even, neither of them should have their identity shown only because accusing people of rape has become sort of a trend. After the person accused is guilty, I believe it is fair to show their faces but until then no, plus most people who are accused get shunned and looked down on…. even if innocent. And for the victim, they should never be shown, it’s a humiliating experience.
what if the accused rapist had raped other victims as well and had never been convicted for it? If the accused is then brought to light and other victims see that they aren’t the only ones, the rapist would be then rightfully convicted.
I agree that it is unfair for the accused to be spotlighted, especially if they are innocent, but then again, it might help the case if the accused is guilty and is shown in the public light.
However I disagree that the victim should be spotlighted (because you said either spotlight both or neither). Its brave enough that they had the courage to admit someone had raped them, and for them to receive more attention for it would be abominable. As a female I know how it feels to be taken advantage of…I wouldnt want it to be known. I’m sure it is worse for males since their cases do not seem to be spotlighted as much.
Thats my take on this entry. Good topic
I think Kobe Bryant was specially named because of his celebrity status. That kind of status would draw a lot more attention. Privacy, however, is still an issue. That, of course, only leans over to the issue of celebrity gossip, which is to say that many of the lives of celebrities are closely scrutinized.
And then we have to consult the people who aren’t celebrities – should their names be released? Some might argue that if we can release the names of murderers and such, why not release the names of rapists? I think, to counter that, we have to evaluate the possibilities – is the suspect REALLY guilty, or are we only guessing? So, I guess maybe my answer has changed – it depends on the circumstances.
I can see keeping the identity of the accuser private untill s/he is convicted. But I also strongly believe that there is a much greater need to protect the victim than the accuser. This is b/c there is only a small number of cases where someone is accused of rape and he was innocent, and also we’re still trying to help women get up the nerve to report when they have been abused, which is a lot easier for them to do if they know their identity will be protected.
Yes, it should. After all, it’s not up to the general public to decide if someone was raped and/or did rape someone or not. For example, the situation with Michael Jackson. (yes, yes, I know, it wasn’t rape. Just hear me out.) How many people were absolutely convinced that he touched some little kids? Practically everyone. Did it affect rather or not he was convicted? No, it did not. It doesn’t affect anyone until it’s proven that someone actually did something. Now, if it is proven that someone is a sex offenender/rapist, then their name should be revealed, but only to protect the general public. Otherwise, why should we give a fuck?
Yes, you should always protect the people. There’s always the chance they ARE innocent. Also, it’s just wrong to give out the names.
At my school, a teacher was just accused of having a consensual relationship with a student. But because it was a teacher-student relationship, he was handcuffed and now being put on trial. Both names were released, and it’s been a huge uproar in my school for the past week. The victim is pretending nothing’s wrong, but I’m sure she’s very embarrased because it’s been in the newspaper of our town and neighboring towns, and it’s been on the news almost every night. I would be dying of embarrassment if I were her.
Innocent until proven guilty. If the name is released then the accused should be given the courtesy of a statement prior every time the name is posted, mentioned or published.
protect ‘em both! innocent until proven guilty, no? cheers!
megan
Absolutely not. Rape is much more different a crime than any others, including murder. In my opinion, I think it is a far worse crime than murder. The murdered person doesn’t have to live with PTSD after the crime. Murder can be justified. Rape is the only crime which I believe has NO justification whatsoever. Rapists are sick, sick humans who deserve to rot in prison, and we should definitely protect the survivors of such an unspeakable crime. I know what I’m talking about.
I don’t know if you know anyone who has personally been the victim of such a crime, but I cannot imagine someone of your opinion in this being close to someone who has been raped. Apologies if that was rude. This is a very touchy subject for me. I’ve been raped multiple times, and it is something I deal with every day, and something I will have to continue to deal with every day until I die.
If the identity of either is disclosed, then the identity of the other should be made known.
In any case of false accusation, there should be damages automatically awarded to the injured party or jail time for the false accuser. Nobody should be allowed to get away with pointing the finger unjustly.
L,r
yea, what if u were innocent, then every1 is gonna be like, oh, well, they’re a bad person, the jury didn’t decide correctly..and there goes ur life.
Well, it’s just an accusation. Even though most acusations are right…Just whatever happens should happen, I suppose.
nope….not when they are guilty….not just with rape but with all crimes like murder and such….i want to know for my own safety and for my loved ones if it is in my neck of the neighborhood…..in some cases..and i hate to say this…the person who was accused and proven innocent..is not always innocent….so yea i would still like to know….as for the victims….yes their identities should not be announced when something that horrible happened to them….i wouldnt want my name all over the news if it happened to me because of what happened…i dont want people looking at me in the street going ” oh thats the girl that was raped…was she really raped you think?…or did you hear about the gruesome details about what happened to her?”….no dont want that kind of publicity sorry cause it would just piss me off…..so yes the way it is is fair…names of predators out…yes….victims…no
>I would agree with the notion of either withholding the name of the accused, OR , the declaration of his innocence after the fact has been declared. The Same would have to apply to the sex crime public notification sites; For they are the loudest dogs in the kennel….. so to speak.
Peace
Yes.
People who are comparing this to a bank robbery piss me the fuck off, and insult me as a rape survivor. There is NO comparison at ALL. That’s like comparing a paper cut to an amputation.
Ugh, I refuse to come back and read the comments after this. It will just make me depressed.
Yes
The system is not perfect, but only because people are flawed. Making the accused’s identity public may give courage to those who have been raped by him (assuming he is guilty), and they may come forward and justice can be better served. If he is not guilty, the idea is that he will be acquitted and then his good name restored. Unfortunately, there is still a stigma, and that cannot be changed.
I’m honestly not sure on this one, Dan. Then again, how often is it that the accused are innocent in these cases?
EVERY SINGLE TIME, if you’re in the military.
Sorry, the issue just keeps coming back to me. I’m still really bitter about it.
I can’t think well right now, so I’ll leave this set of thoughts unfinished. Be glad, for I probably would have written another novel for you.
no
not necessarily. in the case of Kobe Bryant, home boy put himself in a precarious situation even though he didn’t commit rape. as a married man, he had committed the crime of adultery….
Interesting thought. I can see the argument….
I think both should be protected.
Thats a tough question. Its a horrible crime, but people proven beyond any doubt to be innocent can have that rep forever. If you get accused of stealing then it will probably slide off you, and honestly I wouldn’t care if people thought that I stole or something like that. But if people thought I was a rapist? That would be horrible! Its unlike any other crime in that manner
certainly
Unfortunately, it has to be that way so that other people can be cautious.
YES! I don’t need a long explanation to back myself up.
“Remind me to write an article on the compulsive reading of news.
The theme will be that most neurosis and some psychosis can be
traced to the unnecessary and unhealthy habit of daily wallowing
in the troubles and sins of five billion strangers.”
– Jubal Harshaw in Robert A. Heinlein’s “Stranger in a Strange
Land.”
Sometimes, no news is the best. Do we really need to know even half of what they call “news”? I don’t think so. What good can it possibly do?
Mm. I’m kind of mixed on that. Some people pretty obviously did rape someone, but they get off anyway.. And I’d want their names up. But people who seem to have really been innocent don’t need their names up.
But how many people get taken to court for rapes they didn’t commit? Supposedly a lot of rapes go unreported. And that seems to be what’s happened among victims I know.
The accusation of rape can truly ruin one’s life. I don’t see it being an issue of keeping one’s identity private if the crime is alleged. It’s a double-edged sword because if the “victim’s” identity is kept private and the accuser was found “not guilty” then that “victim” could continuously accuse others of rape & never have to worry about their identity being revealed.
no other accused criminal is given that benefit so why should someone accused of rape. However, the identity of the alleged rape victim whould also be public.
Would this help women feel more protected? I mean, hiding both identities is complete anomosity, instead of .5
Hmm.
Aah… I dunno.
its definitely unfair, but when you’re a celebrity your life is always in the spotlight.
Okay well. What happen to you leaving xanga?
We are sick and tired of you taking up featured
spots on the list. Yes, you are actaully really insightful,
and I (the commenter) sees eye to eye with you
on several things. Personally, I just hate how you
say you are leaving and then never do and keep
posting and posting and posting.
yes
yes- they deserve rights too. most may be guilty, but for those unfortunate innocent ones, having your identity disclosed to the public is humiliating and unjust.
well, our legal system says legal untill proven guilty. unfortunatly, i don’t think our press really follows thru w/ that becasue of what you said. as soon as they give the name out, people who, i hate to say it, have no clue decide that if the media is saying that they are being accused, that they are guilty. so yea, the identity should be kept secret… but there are those who say that not telling is against our right to know. *throws hand up in the air* i think they shouldn’t be revieled to the public
Even if the person is innocent, the rumor or the THOUGHT that the accused person was guilty is enough to give him/her a bad rap. I believe that the identity should be protected- on both sides.
Definitely. Equal rights for all, right? If they’re proven guilty, then they could be exposed.
yes of course i should because if he or she didnt do it then theyre whole life will be ruined if they arent protected
yes
In Kobe’s case, the girl probably was wantin money and she thought that she could get some, but she turned out to be mentally unstable and didn’t get shit…and I think that the person should be protected because if someone raped my girlfriend or wife then I would want to go after his ass and beat him up, so it probably would be a good idea if he goes to jail before I/You find out their name
Yes, because, even though I was raped, I can imagine how horrible it would be for a man to be accused of rape when he didn’t. Rape is probably taken worse than murder, and anyone accused of that will always be looked at as “somewhat evil”. Unless there is plenty of evidence stating the accused rapist is guilty or just charged as guilty, I think it should be kept secret. But I’d change that in the case of men already accused of rape before.
That’s actually a good thought. I would have to agree with you to keep the identity of the accused private until it is found that he/she is guilty.
I say yes…because to be accused of something so serious will stay with you for the rest of your life, even if you’re not guilty.
Good question. Had never considered this one. As others stated, it’d be a serious issue were they to attack another person, however we are an innocent-until-proven-guilty society (supposedly).
If proven innocent, they will still be looked at shadily.
Not to be picky, but the legal system never proves anyone innocent; it proves people guilty, or not guilty.
Because innocence is presumed, it need not be proven.
But guilt, since it must be proven, is also not proven.
Therefore, it is wrong to say ‘proven innocent,’ when ‘not guilty’ is the phrase.
And, not proven guilty is not the same is innocent. not proven guilty just means the state could not come up with evidence beyond a shadow of a doubt. You could very well be guilty, but just not have left enough ecidence for a conviction.
As to Dan’s idea, I like it, under innocent until provn guilty and equality under the laws.
Yes, I agree. Either protect both or neither until proven guilty!
Rape is almost as bad as murder. Would you protect the identity of a vicious, serial killer?
yes.
Funny you should mention this. In my city, people are in hysterics because of a serial rapist who has been un-apprehended for three years now. So, earlier this winter, a young woman was raped, and the description of the rapist matched that of the serial rapist. The police picked up a suspect and the victim identified him. She said something definite like, “I’m *positive* that’s the man who raped me.” The mans face and name were immediately plastered all over the media, along with the hope that he might turn out to be the serial rapist. A few days later, it was discovered that the suspect was innocent.
Now, the former suspect is suing the victim for something like $400,000 and the Virginia state legislature is working on a law that will govern whether a wrongfully accused person can sue (or for how much he can sue) the person who accused him.
Yes. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty, hwy give them any negative PR?
[ariana]
why*
I want you to put yourself in the victim’s shoes… in my shoes. I was horribly raped and left for dead. Did I shout it from the roof tops that I was raped… no I was scared for my life so when respected people found out, they were more concerned for the saftey of other women so did they know who it was absolutely. This person was well know as it was, as was I from a small town. But I can guarentee you that every girl knew about it and every girl knew not to get in a car alone with him. Someone made the comment that murder victims don’t have to deal with PTSD and I agree. I was raped 8 years ago and I am STILL healing from it, to this day I will not get in a specific car, I don’t like my husband on my left side etc… Not only does this horrible crime affect the victim, but it also affects their family. My brothers were friends with this man until they knew what happened, if my brothers didn’t know who it was, they would have eventually found out. I think for the saftey of other women rapists should be made known. There is a sexual offender website that one can go to to find out where sexual offenders live – as a means of saftey. Likewise, someone else made the comment that if they have raped, it is probably not the first time. So absolutely their identity should be known, if it saves another girl’s life. After time people will forget just an “accusation” but people will NOT forget a convicted.
Tell people who the rapist is. That way other women who have been abused or raped by him in the past also have the chance to come forward, which can only help to convict him. Keep his identity a secret and many women may never have a chance to talk. Yeah, they had many chances before, but trust me, it would be much easier to come forward once he’s been accused by someone else. Less chance that it’s a ‘he said/she said’ sort of case.
So you’re basically talking about rape sheild laws. I believe that the identity of both parties should be protected that way if proven innocent, the raper doesnt have to deal with being sterotyped.
But I dont have any problem with the accusers identity being kept secret, even if the rapers isnt. If there is even a slight chance of rape, I believe that that’s already too much the accusers been through.
Side note- another part of rape sheild laws is that during the trial, the rapers sexual past is allowed to be dragged out as evidence but the accusers isnt. I’m for that but in case you wanted to extend this topic.
I think it would be really really embarressing for the person who did the raping. And some have mental disorders and stuff! Like skitso!! So yes, I think they should be protected. And I think some of the media need to get sticks out of their a**es cause all they enjoy doing is ruining someones reputation. It is not fair at all!! I think it is even embarressing for the person who got raped for them to say who did the raping. I would want no one but the cops to know! And I have a friend who got raped and they thinks the same way! (notice the NOT TELLING part)
So I say that they both should be protected and the media need to stop sticking their noses into this type of stuff!!
who as in a physical person or as in my Savior? there have been many people but I wouldn’t be who I am with out my Savior.
:0)
On the other hand, I have to agree with BatYa, revealing the identity of the accused rapist can open doors for other victims to come forward. I do wonder if there is a way to do that so that the identity is not revealed to the general public until there is some definite evidence of the rape as in pubic hair or DNA/semen evidence?
the accused is innocent in proven guilty, so…i say let it be public.
since the victim didn’t do anything wrong & has nothing to actually be ashamed of, so…i say let it be public.
everything else is.
You live in Bushland. Gulity, executed, then proven innocent. Only in a just society would you be innocent until proven guilty. This is the new oppressive america!
Yes, innocent until proven guilty. How would you feel if you were accused of such a thing, then it wasn’t true? Your reputation is ruined!
God Bless,
Right Winger
Maybe…
Why should the identity of the accused rapist be concealed to the public if there is some chance they may try to engage in another criminal activity? There’s no excuse for hiding someone’s face if there is a possibility that they really are guilty. The people must acknowledge the fact that there is yet another rapist somewhere out there and be aware of his presence.
Out of curiosity, how is it that you come up with these topics?
Yes, innocent until proven guilty. Being accused of rape is a serious thing. It can damage a very respectable very innocent persons life. It’s not fair to ruin someone life especially if they are innocent
Yes–what has the rapist done wrong that is confirmed? And surely he is being watched closely during the trial, so he won’t try anything funny during it.
yes because from what i see you make a very valid point
I was going to say no… but I think a yes is in order, why ruin the reputation of a person unless you know it is true. once the person is proven guilty that is when it can be more publicized. On the other hand we publicize everything else that people are acused of…. therefore I prefer to ride a fence right now. oh what a double standard !
Yes because of the chance, however slim, that they could be innocent.
Sounds good to me.
are you for real?! oh, hell no the accused shouldn’t have their names be withheld! in my experience working with victims of rape, it takes a lot of courage to even press charges; i doubt they would just accuse anyone. i’m glad they expose the accused and keep the victim’s identity private. being raped is horrific in and of itself and for it be publicly broadcast is yet another trauma they’re risking themselves. and in a lot of cases, the punishment of the accused is equivalent to a slap on the wrist. having their name known to the public is nothing. fucking everyone still loves koby. my brother still loves him cuz of his basketball skills. look at r. kelly. what a sick fuck and he’s still making money, people still love and play his music on the radio! face it, the accused get off easy while the victim is sentenced to a lifetime of torture and i know this shit for real. uh uh, i can’t believe you said that both their names should either be protected or not. read up on rape, the dynamics of rape, the victims of rape and the rapists themselves and tell me what you think then.
yes
Nope.
i agree.
Well, the problem seems to be that when they are not convicted, they don’t really go crazy proclaiming their innocence, like they blow up the initial rape coverage.
they shouldnt be protected, but it shouldnt be made a top story either.
yes
Wow, what a not yes or no question! I had a yes or no answer, but after reading the comments, I dont have it anymore.
The media is not to inform. The media is to sell. Titillation sells. Rape is titilating. Rape is in the media.
hmmm… would the rules be the same for all suspects? in any crimes?
it makes sense… it’s bad press for a lot of ppl who don’t deserve it… having that kind of media attention on you is really hard
yes! Innocent til proven guilty.
I think that in all major crimes, the identity should be kept private until they are convicted.
My first impression was to say no, as he could go on to rape more, BUT! Innocent until proven guilty in this country.
rape is about violence, not about sex. if someone is accused of beating someone or of physically abusing someone, their name appears in the paper and in the police blotter. the same thing should be true of an alleged rapist.
as for the victim, until the public at large realizes rape is not a sexual act but an act of violence, the accuser’s name should be protected. men especially need to be protected when bringing allegations of rape, since society still presumes to believe that men cannot be raped.
i cannot believe we are having these same discussions after 30 years… i would have hoped we would have progressed beyond this by now …
Yes but then how do you get other victims to come forward. You tell the media to stop … they won’t listen. They still will leak the identity of the victim in high profile cases.
Hmm… but if they’re *not* convicted and *are* guilty…
innocent until proven guilty…
THEY DON’T JUST “GO AFTER” SOMEONE UNLESS THEY HAVE EVIDENCE THAT POINTS IN THAT DIRECTION. I DON’T THINK THERE IS ANYTHING WRONG WITH ALLOWING THE ACCUSED NAME TO BE KNOWN…WHAT IF THERE ARE OTHERS OUT THERE? THIS MIGHT BRING THEM FORWARD. KEEP YOURSELF OUT OF SITUATIONS THAT COULD LAND YOU IN THE HOT SEAT & YOU WON’T HAVE ANYTHING TO WORRY ABOUT.
no because if he really is other people may need to come foward && also if his name is not said he could still harm others.
“If someone did not commit a crime like that, the public deserves to know.”
Yes, I agree.
If it involves a celebrity, it would certainly be best to keep his/her identity secret until a verdict is reached. For one thing, that would take a lot of the media pressure off of the trial; for another, the alleged rapist has to live with that suspicion surrounding him/her for the rest of their life. It’s bad enough when it’s just a regular person, but there’s just that much more pressure on a celeb.
No because the stigma attached with a false rape claim (for the accused) is horrible afterwards and I don’t think that’s right. So, the identity of the accused should not be posted either, IMO.
In general, until trial all names are kept hush-hush, so as to prevent discrimination, etc. However, in the case of Mr. Bryant, he is a public figure, meaning that lible and slander laws (hence, defamation of character) don’t extend as far for him. Unless he can prove actual malice from the people releasing his name (good freakin’ luck), they’re fine. Hence, they’ll do what they want.
are you for real?! oh, hell no the accused shouldn’t have their names be withheld! in my experience working with victims of rape, it takes a lot of courage to even press charges; i doubt they would just accuse anyone. i’m glad they expose the accused and keep the victim’s identity private. being raped is horrific in and of itself and for it be publicly broadcast is yet another trauma they’re risking themselves. and in a lot of cases, the punishment of the accused is equivalent to a slap on the wrist. having their name known to the public is nothing. fucking everyone still loves koby. my brother still loves him cuz of his basketball skills. look at r. kelly. what a sick fuck and he’s still making money, people still love and play his music on the radio! face it, the accused get off easy while the victim is sentenced to a lifetime of torture and i know this shit for real. uh uh, i can’t believe you said that both their names should either be protected or not. read up on rape, the dynamics of rape, the victims of rape and the rapists themselves and tell me what you think then.
Okay, and you read up on American Law. Innocent until proven guilty is the foundation of our justice system, and beyond a shadow of a doubt is our standard of proof.
Of course convicted rapists, in my view, should be publicly flogged, registered, and/or executed. But not until they are convicted should they suffer anything for the alleged crime.
Hmm… but if they’re *not* convicted and *are* guilty…
Then justice is in the hands of God.
But, for purposes of American Justice, if you are acquited, you are proven not guilty, and cannot be made to suffer consequences.
Yes, the standards of proof are high, but better ten guilty go free than one innocent suffer is the mantra of American Justice.
I forgot Kobe was even accused of rape.
if you protect both sides, how does anyone know if there’s an actual offense being done. Black basketball player rapes white prostitute. You give people at least one person to focus on, it’s enough to appease our curiosity. Just my thought.
hi im new here
my first response is no, but I can see more to it…like what if they are out on bail and have opportunity before being convicting of committing the crime again?
In terms of whether it should or shouldn’t be made public, this topic makes sense. But sadly, in real life and the way the media words, there is no way that the identity of the accused rapist would really be protected. That’s just the way the nosy media works. Rumours are always fabricated and pushed forward, and while in a way measures are and should be taken to stop them, it is also pointless because people like the paparazzi (sp?) will always be waiting in the shadows.
That being said though, I have to say that for the most part I agree with this statement:”In my opinion, we need to either protect the identity of both or neither. Both people should be protected. “
The only ‘but’s’ I could offer would be that people might see the accused BEING accused and be inspired themselves to come forward. However, if you’re going to accuse someone who is renown or well-known, you really have to expose yourself too. And I say that just because I think that if that were true and it worked both ways, and one wasn’t protected after accusing someone of rape, people who FALSELY accuse others of rape would think twice about it. Just the thought of people using the media as a tool for national sympathy or to gain millions of dollars for an injustice that never occured makes me sick. But hey, I guess I don’t really know everyone’s situation. :/
Overall, I think that both identities should be protected. At the very least, just because if that person goes to trial, then the bias inherent in those who pay attention to the media might not be present.
Yes.
have you been raped?
b/c if not you have no idea!
you don’t reall y rape people do you whats your name
Yep
yes! innocent till proven guilty.
Yes but when they are proven guilty then they should be public
WHY DO PEOPLE EVEN ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS?
Are you supposed to make us realise something?!
Well, actually you are educating those less fortunate or those too lazy to pay attention to news.
i believe their identity should be let known, because they are rapists for one, and two they should be publicly as a threat. Why should they get the privilege of being unknown? it is a very serious crime.
I AGREE AT ALL POST ME IF U CARE!
I think that the the accuser and the accused should both be secret it’s just how it should be I don’t know though it’s just one voice, you can’t change them all.
yes, reputations should be protected, especially from people who are only looking to destory them
i think that if they r gonna protect the identity of one, then they need to protect the identity of both
No. Just as with other crimes, the defendant’s name goes on the record, so that other people are warned in case he or she commits similar crimes again.
no.
people that comment “First” on your xanga should be shot in the sphinter muscle
and your idea poses interesting options
because you dont quite get over a reuined reputation even if you are found innocent
sphincter^
NO…IT SHOULD BE PUBLIC
Here is a prime example of ‘rape’ charges
They happen.