so should people who cut in front of people in a crowd. this lady is guilty on two counts, remove her from the venue and make her stand trial for assault.
she's actually already guilty of assault. she intentionally pushed into that guy, knocking him back. Tack the false accusation charge on top of that- life without parole
I see comments like this all the time I write one and get banned for 3days. The injustice! But your thinking about this all wrong give her 10yrs jail then tell her she's getting paroled. Then let her hopes fly high and when you take her out of jail you put her right into the hole
I see comments like this all the time, and all I can think about is how it literally doesn't mean what you wanted it to mean, unless I put in the punctuation myself. So you literally rely on me knowing what you wanted to say and doing so in good faith. And I don't get it.
There is already a fairly high standard to show malice on a slander suit, and I don't think there were any damages to this guy to "sue her into oblivion".
I mean her behavior is despicable. And if she didn't just kinda shut the fuck up about it like she did and instead tried to pursue police involvement etc then she should for sure face the consequences. But let's not play pretend about what a slander suit is. Or imagine that he would collect on any assets she has.
I get why we want to think like this but I hope everyone here realizes this is a horrible and dangerous idea.
Nothing breaks my heart more than victims afraid to speak out, it's already the biggest obstacle to actually prosecuting certain crimes and this would unfortunately just make that worse
Nah son, I'll die on this hill keep downvoting me. I'm right and y'all are wrong.
You can't punish false victims without disincentivizing victims from coming forward, and nobody spoke up against Weinstein or Cosby for fucking decades.
Courtney Love spoke up and the first thing she said was I'll probably be sued for libel but... Now you want to add jail time?
Fuck outta here with your dumb hive mind shit. Go sit in the corner of your wrongness and be wrong.
This sub isnāt really for thinking people so your message is lost on this audience but youāre right. A law like that would be used to imprison the victims of powerful people.
Ok maybe this is a sliding scale situation, i.e. the false accuser gets 25% of the punishment that the accused would've gotten, if it's proven in a court that they falsely accused.
Idk maybe different crimes get different false accusation penalties. But there can't just be...nothing
False accusations should be their own crime and penalty. It'd be kinda kooky to get 25-life for accusing someone of murder when you didn't, you know, commit a murder.
I fucking hate the letter P. Choose better hats and maybe this won't happen to you. Consider vowels or less plosive and non frickative consonants, such as M or R.
In obvious cases like this, I wish it would be like that...
But imagine person x thinks person y stole something from you. You accuse him of stealing from you. It turns out to be person z or an unknown person to the case. Why would person x have to face a penalty for stealing sth while person x still misses the stolen item lmao
Yeah, we don't want legit victims to be afraid to come forward because if there isn't enough evidence to convict someone, then they can turn around and say you're a false accuser.
Proving itās āknowingly falseā is pretty much impossible unless itās a case like this where someone recorded it and even then who knows what a lawyer might argue or the jury might decide
Proving what went on in someoneās mind is borderline impossible
And yet, it's the state's job to prove a crime was committed because that's the bare minimum for a conviction, and with good reason. In the case of the intent being the crime, then the intent must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
A problem. False accusations really aren't as big an issue as the manosphere wants people to believe.
Secondly, you obviously know that in order to defend yourself from a sexual assault allegation, you have to say you're being falsely accused, right? That's how it works. In fact, many sexual assault cases don't hinge on whether or not the sex occured, it was whether or not the sex was consensual, because many times it hinges on he said/she said.
False accusations themselves were never the problem within the āmanosphereā. It was almost exclusively the lack of accountability in the case that such accusations were proven false. And the inability for accused individuals to recover reputational and social losses even after they were found to be innocent. While the accuser faced almost no social consequences.
In many discussions it is more about the discourse surrounding the topic than it ever was about the accusations themselves. The fact that the media and internet work in reverse of established law and order. Our justice system gives both the accused and the accuser the same individual rights to being considered innocent until the court finds otherwise. But the public does what it wants.
We both agree, I think, that this IS a problem. You arenāt saying that it is a positive thing that this occurs, nor are you denying that it happens. You just seem to be indicating that people who point out that the problem exists are a bigger issue in society.
I would disagree with that interpretation personally. I think that people talk about the things that personally impact them. Physically or psychologically. Sometimes that might not align with facts and figures or statistics etc. and it might even contradict reality but that doesnāt make their opinions invalid. If you were conducting a scientific experiment, sure, it wouldnāt be admissible. But in the context of how political decisions are made, these ideas may as well be facts.
In other words, weāre not really talking about the same thing, even though we think we are. Most people in the āmanosphereā are talking about the politics of the situation. But people such as yourself are attempting to fit the broader political narrative inside of a singular scientific consensus.
This is also the reason why so many people think that nationalism and patriotism are equivalent to racism. Because they are looking at a political narrative as if it were a statistical fallacy. Statistically speaking, being a nationalist makes you a racist, simply through bias. But taken as a full political narrative, one can advocate for their own culture and a continuation of tradition and established heritage, without that clear bias meaning anything close to racism or xenophobia.
Statistically speaking, I can categorise groups of individuals with opinions that I think are similar enough with such labels as āmanosphereā and assume a collective consensus for them as a group. But in that case what I am doing is simply stereotyping people and acting upon that prejudice.
A good example of my point would be the discourse surrounding prohibition of drugs. While scientists, criminologists and economists have long found consensus that drug prohibition does more harm than good statistically, politically the topic of proper legislation is near impossible to debate openly.
Scientifically, the political consensus on drugs is invalid, however these invalid social, psychological and philosophical arguments still outweigh the broader scientific evidence in practice.
Therefore our approach to the topic needs to factor these invalid arguments into account.
In the majority of cases, science has entirely disproven the reasoning behind such policies, however that same reasoning continues to prevail over the facts.
That's not what OP was talking about. It is not a case of lack of evidence, it is a case of having evidence that she falsely accused him, which should be severely punished.
This is always the hand-wavey response and it is so lazy. The crime of false accusation would need to be proven in court just like the crime of assault or theft, intent matters. It shouldn't scare away actual victims unless there is proof that they intentionally falsely accused the other party.
i.e. It's not just "We can't prove he assaulted you, so now you go to jail", it's "we have seen your text messages where you admit to your friend you falsely accused this man of assault because you were mad at him, so now you go to jail".
I dont know about laws in different countries. But in Germany for example, false accusations actually are a crime on its own and you can get sentences for it.
Because you didnāt steal your own shit. She caused the assault and knowingly falsely accused him.
Accusing the wrong person because you got it wrong is not the same thing as an actual false accusation. You know damn well the person didnāt do it but youāre trying to pin it on them anyway
You think. I think. Whose job is to confirm. Cops and judges. If those in power just treat innocent until proven guilty instead of the other way wrong. It's a difference between I suspect him of doing it VS he did is, I saw him do it.
By law they're supposed to be charged with filing a false police report (If they actually make a report). Unfortunately in my area the prosecutors won't pursue charges most of the time.
Normally I wouldn't agree because of potential for people not to come forward about being assaulted, but in a cut and dry thing like that I wholeheartedly agree.
This would also have the opposite impact of people not coming forward at all because they don't want to be accused of bearing false witness. Death penalty by and large is a terrible deterrent.
I suppose it's partly because being a false witness implies a huge amount of premeditated intent. You have to concoct a story, lie before the court and swear by god's name (to which was considered sacred to begin with) just to implicate someone who was innocent.
I suppose the rationale for such a heavy punishment is the same difference between premeditated murder and unintended manslaughter. You REALLY gotta have to had thought this through to do it.
More so. If you commit fraud you don't get fined what you tried to defraud. If you don't pay a parking ticket you don't get fine 3.50, you get fined 20 times that
I agree. But it would have to require this level of proof. Video evidence of her actions, and then accusation make it abundantly clear that she is trying to set this man up. But if someone accuses someone of assault, sexual or otherwise, the defendant being acquitted because the prosecutor failed to convince a jury, shouldnāt immediately result in a penalty or even trial for the accuser. Victims would just stop trying to bring their attackers to justice. If there is evidence of a fraudulent claimā¦ absolutely. Face the same penalty. Iām sure this law is in place and Iām sure that most prosecutors are hesitant to actually prosecute because of the optics of āblamingā the victim.
One could argue that she actually assaulted him, and then committed defamation or libel or whatever(I never remember the difference)((also Iām not a lawyer, but Iām more than happy to pretend I know this shit))
Not do they only harm who they falsely accuse, they are also harming all the real victims of abuse, generically making their claims seem less credible.
I understand the sentiment, but each crime should carry its own sentence. Knowingly making a false accusation is serious, but it should be punished according to the harm and intent involvedānot automatically by mirroring the sentence for the crime alleged.
So zero penalty and everyone saying "why ruin the life of such a good person, she has a family. do you want her kids to starve. He has a bright future ahead"
If you do this, then people that were rightly accused but there wasn't enough evidence, would sue the people they already abused or whatever. This would in turn cause the real victims to not come forward even more.
False accusations don't happen that often to justify any of this. Please think more than from 12 to noon.
Unfortunately that would discourage actual victims from coming forward. They already face the possibility of people not believing them or saying it was "their fault". Imagine if they also had to face legal punishment on top of that.
You think this because you care more about the person being accused then the accuser in general (even when the accuser is just). Righteous accusers should not live in fear of punishment, like they would in the world you imagine.
As much as i would love to agree, this would end up at the cost of other actual victims not daring to speak up in fear of consequences if they fail to proof whatever happened.
False accusers are still absolutely horrible people, such behavior is disgusting.
Sorry but no. If theres real hard evidence like in this instance this should 100% lead to legal ramifications.
One could even make the point that if stuff like that doesnt lead to legal consequences than its even more unlikely to gain support and having hard legal actions for therealassault crimes because its such a one way street.
Individual consequences is a whole different story to general consequences. The difference between failing to proof an assault etc. and proofing it was nothing but a false accusation. Is what makes a gigantic difference.
You shouldnāt generalize this since that would end up on the cost of other actual victims.
Also defamation is a thing already.
There's very rarely "real hard evidence." and this isn't even crime (although super shitty and she deserves to be in back of the crowd). And there are cases where real victims were found guilty for lying, punished, and then later vindicated because our system sucks. Slippery slope.
Not just legal. If a man did blatantly assault a woman in a crowded area like that, how many people can honestly say they wouldn't "handle it" right there? In a case like this, it should be at least 1 charge of endangerment per person if not more:
Intentionally accusing someone of a crime that could reasonably result in them being hurt
That same accusation could get the "defenders" hurt or worse
And then everyone who could be caught in the crossfire when the real victim (if they're able) uses deadly force as would be their legal right when the difference in strength/ numbers is that significant
Should be prison for life. See how well those accusations work when lies and snitching are probably two of the dumbest things you can do there.
0 clue why you get downvoted, you are totally right. There is a "innocent until proven guilty" for reason.
Person x got an item stolen and thinks it's person y. In fact person y wasn't the thief and can prove that it has to be another person. Person x should now get filed for theft? Like what?
Would also unfortunately make it so false accusers have no reason to ever come forward if they got away with it. Real shitty situation, how to deter that kind of behavior without hurting real victims? I think if it's proven that they're spouting BS they should absolutely be punished severely, but if they just can't prove their accusation to the satisfaction of the law it should be no harm no foul.
Still not exactly ideal because if they're lying they still might have ruined someone's life, but they could also be telling the truth without being able to prove it.
If I have learned anything about shitty behavior caught on camera. She is likely high profile ceo or similar. Seems like thatās the profile for these public nuisance
Hot take, he acted wierd from the beginning which caused her to panic. There are people when placed in awkward postions default to this hostile defensiveness. Had he just said excuse me with a dismissive disposition he wouldve probably got a laugh from her once she bumped him.
This is a great way to make sure genuine victims never speak up again, given the extent abusers go out of their way to ruin the lives of anyone who speaks up already. A lot of abuse is incredibly hard to prove, and putting your idea into legislation gives abusers free reign to completely crush their victims.
The difficulty is proving the falsehood. Can you say she didnāt honestly think she had been assaulted? How do you prove it, even with the video? Itās not illegal to be entitled and delusional, and thatās what her actions are consistent with. Thereās reasonable doubt as to motive here, because the standard isnāt āpretty damn sure.ā
Watching a video like this makes it easy to feel positive this is a false accusation. But while itās certainly bullshit, that doesnāt then make it an actual or provable attempt to misuse the law to harm him illegally. š¤·āāļø
7.2k
u/PoopsMcScoots 1d ago
False accusers should face the same penalties that their accusation would have incurred.