Streamline Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 So I assume if the IMF president has been found or proved to have lied previously then he is automatically guilty? Or does that particular rule only apply to victims? I assume that if I can prove you have lied you are automatically guilty of any crime I chose to accuse you of? Or does that rule only apply to the poor? or women? or 'foreigners'? Lied in a U.S. asylum application that her husband was tortured in jail and died of injuries Lied about having been gang raped by soldiers in Guinea to help her asylum application Lied about waiting in the hall outside the suite of the 'attack' until Strauss-Kahn left Lied by claiming a friend's child as her own for the last two years to get a higher tax refund Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2010498/Dominique-Strauss-Kahn-rape-victim-accused-prostitute.html#ixzz1R7hYyhlN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iuchi_Zien Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 Lied in a U.S. asylum application that her husband was tortured in jail and died of injuries Lied about having been gang raped by soldiers in Guinea to help her asylum application Lied about waiting in the hall outside the suite of the 'attack' until Strauss-Kahn left Lied by claiming a friend's child as her own for the last two years to get a higher tax refund Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2010498/Dominique-Strauss-Kahn-rape-victim-accused-prostitute.html#ixzz1R7hYyhlN Yes, the Daily Hate, that bastion of truth and unbiased journalism! So what? Does that mean that she can't be a victim of rape? I'm curious, the evidence for these lies are? Could they possibly have any connection with the defence team? Innocent until proven guilty obviously doesn't apply to the victim in the US does it? She MUST be lying about being raped because.... So now any woman who has lied about her tax returns, or anything else for that matter cannot be the victim of rape! After all you can't rape a prostitute or a liar or a drug dealer can you My god! What a precedent to set! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 Yes, the Daily Hate, that bastion of truth and unbiased journalism! So what? Does that mean that she can't be a victim of rape? I'm curious, the evidence for these lies are? Could they possibly have any connection with the defence team? Innocent until proven guilty obviously doesn't apply to the victim in the US does it? She MUST be lying about being raped because.... So now any woman who has lied about her tax returns, or anything else for that matter cannot be the victim of rape! After all you can't rape a prostitute or a liar or a drug dealer can you My god! What a precedent to set! Equally SK lied to his wife while having affairs with other women. If you can lie to your wife (family) lying to the authorities would seem kiddy stuff in comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 So I assume if the IMF president has been found or proved to have lied previously then he is automatically guilty? No, because it's the defendant in any case who must be proven beyond reasonable doubt to have committed a crime. If both the defendant and the alleged victim are known to lie under oath, there is doubt in both directions and so the defendant is found not guilty. By the same token, if the maid were charged with perverting the course of justive by fabricating a rape claim, and Strauss-Kahn were shown to have lied under oath before and therefore not be a credible witness, the maid would also be found not guilty. In practice, since all of this is well established legal precedent, it is unlikely that either Strauss-Kahn or the maid he allegedly raped will ever face trial either way. The maid being a known liar does not prove there was no rape, but it guarantees that you cannot prove there was one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 If you can lie to your wife (family) lying to the authorities would seem kiddy stuff in comparison. Your wife cannot send you to jail for twenty years. Lying to the authorities is vastly more dangerous. It's lying to family which would "seem kiddy stuff in comparison." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iuchi_Zien Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 No, because it's the defendant in any case who must be proven beyond reasonable doubt to have committed a crime. If both the defendant and the alleged victim are known to lie under oath, there is doubt in both directions and so the defendant is found not guilty. By the same token, if the maid were charged with perverting the course of justive by fabricating a rape claim, and Strauss-Kahn were shown to have lied under oath before and therefore not be a credible witness, the maid would also be found not guilty. In practice, since all of this is well established legal precedent, it is unlikely that either Strauss-Kahn or the maid he allegedly raped will ever face trial either way. The maid being a known liar does not prove there was no rape, but it guarantees that you cannot prove there was one. So it's open season on anybody who can be proven to have lied under oath? Wow! They might be the victim of crime but nobody will prosecute because they aren't credible witnesses? Isn't that for a jury to decide? Or is 'justice' too expensive? So, if you are rich you can get out of being prosecuted by simply trawling through the history of the victim and pulling out any lies told, present that to the prosecting authorities and walk away? What do you think the publicity about this case is going to do for the reporting rate for rape/sexual assault in the US? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 Your wife cannot send you to jail for twenty years. Lying to the authorities is vastly more dangerous. It's lying to family which would "seem kiddy stuff in comparison." My point was moral rather than legal. Lying to my family has no comparison to lying to the authorities. The outcome may be different but that's another issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Streamline Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 Yes, the Daily Hate, that bastion of truth and unbiased journalism! So what? Does that mean that she can't be a victim of rape? I'm curious, the evidence for these lies are? Could they possibly have any connection with the defence team? Innocent until proven guilty obviously doesn't apply to the victim in the US does it? She MUST be lying about being raped because.... So now any woman who has lied about her tax returns, or anything else for that matter cannot be the victim of rape! After all you can't rape a prostitute or a liar or a drug dealer can you My god! What a precedent to set! Probably a good idea then that the next time you accuse someone of rape, you make sure you have no form when making up stories and don’t pick on seriously wealthy people. What does your bible the Guardian have to say about this? We are not talking about little white lies here though are we, we're talking seriously big ones that you are defending. There's a big difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Streamline Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 Equally SK lied to his wife while having affairs with other women. If you can lie to your wife (family) lying to the authorities would seem kiddy stuff in comparison. The fact is, it isn't actually illegal to have an affair and so where some on here are claiming the women is having her character tainted, they don't seem to mind that an attempt on this guy's character has also happened. Making false rape claims is in the premier league when it comes to lying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evildrneil Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 Probably a good idea then that the next time you accuse someone of rape, you make sure you have no form when making up stories and don’t pick on seriously wealthy people. So are you saying that if you happen to be raped by someone who is wealthy and you may have a dubious past then it's tough and you just have to accept being raped? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.