According to Wikipedia - “the phenomenon of blaming the victim is well established in human psychology and history; for example, there are plenty of examples in the Old Testament where tragedies and catastrophes are justified and the victims blamed for their faults as sinners
With the increase of public interest via social media in criminal justice pet projects such as the "believe all women" campaign, there has not been a similar increase in actual knowledge about how the law actually works. For example, if you were to ask these same warriors if they believe the criminal justice system treats black males disproportionately unfairly, they are likely to say "yes." They are likely to tell you these males are innocent before being proven guilty, have rights to an attorney, a thorough and objective/fair & legal unbiased investigation- including an investigation that addresses the credibility of the victim and their account, unless of course it involves a crime that involves something close to home, like sexual assault or rape. Then all bets are off, they're guilty no matter what & the victim is right and should never be questioned or their account investigated. And therein, lies the hypocrisy that I found crazy making as an investigator. I never asked questions designed to harm or re-victimize, I asked questions because I knew that each alleged perpetrator/suspect or defendant - should the case be charged, will have an attorney. I knew the attorney for the defense has the constitutional responsibility to advocate for their client -even if they're guilty or they're accused of horrific things, or they don't like them, or they're just generally jackasses. That duty will include questioning the victim and challenging their account. Why then would the investigator not be proactive and prepare for that in advance ? A good investigator conducts a thorough, objective investigation by not taking a side, remaining unbiased and asking questions, following the evidence that allows you to rule evidence in & out as it comes. Not playing favorites simply because someone has the label of victim or perpetrator. Recently @ a FIRE event that was played on the the Fifth Column Lara Bazelon a professor of law & the director of the Criminal Juvenile Justice and Racial Justice Clinical Programs at the University of San Francisco School of Law spoke about the hundreds of young people who have been accused & caught in this climate of believe all victims on college campuses. These are not your Stanford Swimmer/rapist & I got away with it cases, these are your brown, black, Asian -and white kids who are from poor - lower socio economic class who get caught up in a system where there is no due process, no attorney to protect their civil rights, no discovery, no thorough or legally solid investigation completed. And yet, the decisions that are made, affect their lives possibly forever. Believe all victims, believe all women, has not helped make victims safer nor has it made investigations better or the court process more equitable. It's just made more memes & more virtue signaling.
When an alleged crime of rape has been committed, it’s important to gather facts before you reach a conclusion about guilt. A female rape victim may be more comfortable being questioned by a female investigator. If the alleged rapist is arrested then he should be questioned to obtain all pertinent facts. If there is DNA evidence matching the victim then his innocence or guilt will be determined by a court of law. You can’t just believe a person’s account of a crime without verifying their statements and comparing it to the evidence found.
This may be the worst article I’ve read on Substack yet.