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.
The standard for kicking a student out of college for breaking the rules has never been the same for throwing someone in prison. If the college had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury of peers it would be very difficult for the college to enforce their rules. They decide who is accepted into the college and they can choose who to kick out. Yeah, it would affect someone’s life and it’s terrible when someone is falsely accused, but why when it comes to rape allegations we’re all of a sudden supposed to pretend the standard has always been so high? I had friends in college who got in a lot of trouble for trying to break into their own car. They had locked their keys in. They had to do volunteer work and they basically couldn’t defend themselves, the school didn’t care that it was their own car. They just dealt with it. And this was many years ago, before the woke stuff.
Wow, thanks for the stimulating and informative response. Are you still an investigator now?
What type, specifically, of investigation did/do you practice? (excuse my ignorance)
Some free flowing responses to your comment:
It is interesting the dynamic (re: "accused of horrific things") that exists. As the more dramatic the accusation, the more disgusted we become with the accused, drooling for the satisfaction of their punishment, or something like that. I always thought that was a certain bug in our collective sense of justice.
When you combine young adult clumsiness, alcohol, drugs, influence from pornography, blurred lines of consent (i.e. "I regret having sex with that person=rape) it is no wonder why college campuses can be a hot bed of accusations and perpetrations. It is a shame that people get caught up in what is largely a cultural climate that ultimately taints legal and administrative settings.
I recently wrote a 2 part piece on why "memes are making us stupid", and the virtue signaling inside them is a big part of it. It is here on Wrong Speak.
In your opinion, what causes the idea of "believe all women" and similar ideas to make such traction? Ultimately many people must see it as "the good" but cannot sniff out the paradoxes/fallacies in many contexts- wouldn't you say?
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.
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.
The standard for kicking a student out of college for breaking the rules has never been the same for throwing someone in prison. If the college had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury of peers it would be very difficult for the college to enforce their rules. They decide who is accepted into the college and they can choose who to kick out. Yeah, it would affect someone’s life and it’s terrible when someone is falsely accused, but why when it comes to rape allegations we’re all of a sudden supposed to pretend the standard has always been so high? I had friends in college who got in a lot of trouble for trying to break into their own car. They had locked their keys in. They had to do volunteer work and they basically couldn’t defend themselves, the school didn’t care that it was their own car. They just dealt with it. And this was many years ago, before the woke stuff.
Wow, thanks for the stimulating and informative response. Are you still an investigator now?
What type, specifically, of investigation did/do you practice? (excuse my ignorance)
Some free flowing responses to your comment:
It is interesting the dynamic (re: "accused of horrific things") that exists. As the more dramatic the accusation, the more disgusted we become with the accused, drooling for the satisfaction of their punishment, or something like that. I always thought that was a certain bug in our collective sense of justice.
When you combine young adult clumsiness, alcohol, drugs, influence from pornography, blurred lines of consent (i.e. "I regret having sex with that person=rape) it is no wonder why college campuses can be a hot bed of accusations and perpetrations. It is a shame that people get caught up in what is largely a cultural climate that ultimately taints legal and administrative settings.
I recently wrote a 2 part piece on why "memes are making us stupid", and the virtue signaling inside them is a big part of it. It is here on Wrong Speak.
In your opinion, what causes the idea of "believe all women" and similar ideas to make such traction? Ultimately many people must see it as "the good" but cannot sniff out the paradoxes/fallacies in many contexts- wouldn't you say?
Thanks for reading More chances, Not less.
JSV
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.
Very True, Josefina.
Thanks for reading.
This may be the worst article I’ve read on Substack yet.
Success of a kind!