|
Post by ts on Jul 23, 2012 23:32:22 GMT -5
I wonder where all of those that were reported to be coming forward are? The case must be weak if it can't stand on it's own. Does a weak case mean it is a false accusation? How many "weak" cases came out all of the sudden against Sandusky? Why did they wait so long to bring out the accusations? What is wrong with a prosecutor discovering that that there might have been more than one victim and gathering evidence and testimony against the accused? Isn't it sensible to make sure that justice is fully served and that all potential alleged victims get heard? You don't know but what all eight alleged victims each have strong cases.
|
|
|
Post by Linford Bledsoe on Jul 24, 2012 5:50:55 GMT -5
I'm not saying it is a false accusation. I'm saying that I feel there has to be a stronger case than she said he said. Remember as part of the investigation, the accused has to talk to the investigator as well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2012 8:15:00 GMT -5
I would expect that the only "strong" rape case is one which was reported shortly after the alleged offense and the story is corroborated with physical evidence. Even then, unless there is physical evidence of violence, the issue of non-consent wouldn't be easy to find evidence to corroborate the allegation.
It seems to me that this case for the prosecution will practically require other unrelated complainants to establish a pattern of coercive behaviour if there is no physical evidence.
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jul 24, 2012 8:41:25 GMT -5
Rat, you have not gone to meeting in how many years? 40+ How do we know what you say about your experiences in meeting is true?? Do you have a better memory then the rest of us?? When was the last time the workers had a meal or stayed at your house. Oh that right they don't go to your house. If you have not experienced these things in so many years how do you know what you remember is true??? You like to go after people that have experiences things in the past few years or months. You love to tell us your experiences that were many years ago, and we are to believe they are true?? Thanks, Marie, we can't have it both ways, that is if we follow what Rat has said on this thread....
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jul 24, 2012 8:42:49 GMT -5
I'm not saying it is a false accusation. I'm saying that I feel there has to be a stronger case than she said he said. Remember as part of the investigation, the accused has to talk to the investigator as well. But is it not known that the accused in this case has likely not talked to the investigator, for wouldn't that probably cause him to have to back to the state where the allegations were made?
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jul 24, 2012 8:46:18 GMT -5
I would expect that the only "strong" rape case is one which was reported shortly after the alleged offense and the story is corroborated with physical evidence. Even then, unless there is physical evidence of violence, the issue of non-consent wouldn't be easy to find evidence to corroborate the allegation. It seems to me that this case for the prosecution will practically require other unrelated complainants to establish a pattern of coercive behaviour if there is no physical evidence. Is it possible that because the investigation has taken an unusual amount of time, that it IS because there is NO physical evidence from any of the complainants.....and is it possible this is why the accused's lawyer has been holding him back from going to that state....that the evidence is weak enough to extradite him is an unwise cost, while if they caught him in the state of the allegations, then the "costs" would not be so hard on the state? Plus, I think this case WILL get a back seat due to all of the deaths in different states....watchin g out for copycat massacres, etc.?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2012 8:52:44 GMT -5
I would expect that the only "strong" rape case is one which was reported shortly after the alleged offense and the story is corroborated with physical evidence. Even then, unless there is physical evidence of violence, the issue of non-consent wouldn't be easy to find evidence to corroborate the allegation. It seems to me that this case for the prosecution will practically require other unrelated complainants to establish a pattern of coercive behaviour if there is no physical evidence. Is it possible that because the investigation has taken an unusual amount of time, that it IS because there is NO physical evidence from any of the complainants.....and is it possible this is why the accused's lawyer has been holding him back from going to that state....that the evidence is weak enough to extradite him is an unwise cost, while if they caught him in the state of the allegations, then the "costs" would not be so hard on the state? Plus, I think this case WILL get a back seat due to all of the deaths in different states....watchin g out for copycat massacres, etc.? Of course the prosecution case started out very weak. In the beginning, I would expect all they had was that she said he did it, while he said he didn't do it. What jury will convict on that basis? In a case like this, particularly being reported some time after the allegation, the prosecution will have to have something to tip the case in their favour. "He said, she said" is a very weak case otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Jul 24, 2012 9:02:39 GMT -5
Back to the topic- is it fair for some of the friends to be spinning the case as a "memory" that was fabricated under the influence of a psychiatrist?
I don't think that it is fair to speculate one way or another. To be fair to both parties, the friends and workers need to address the case like this: "a sister worker has reported to the authorities that she was raped by Leslie White. Out of caution, Leslie has been removed from the work while an investigation is taking place."
Everything else is speculation, or worse, spinning, which does nothing but cause triangulation among the friends and workers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2012 9:16:24 GMT -5
Back to the topic- is it fair for some of the friends to be spinning the case as a "memory" that was fabricated under the influence of a psychiatrist? I don't think that it is fair to speculate one way or another. To be fair to both parties, the friends and workers need to address the case like this: "a sister worker has reported to the authorities that she was raped by Leslie White. Out of caution, Leslie has been removed from the work while an investigation is taking place." Everything else is speculation, or worse, spinning, which does nothing but cause triangulation among the friends and workers. It's never fair to "spin" anything. On the other hand, it is always fair to discuss situations which affect us either directly or indirectly, trying to make sense out of known or inferred information, and assessing the ramifications of possible outcomes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2012 11:33:08 GMT -5
One of the problems that 2x2 leadership has in cases like this is, that regardless what they have as policy for dealing with sexual issues of workers today --- Everyone knows that in the past the clear policy has been to hide and ignore. It has also taught friends out of loyalty to leadership, fabricate alternative explanations -- and to actively condemn any form of serious investigation from 'outside'.
In all honesty we have to remember that all accusation in matters like this isn't neccesarily true either-- and the nature of the crime is so that often hard evidence is scarce.
|
|
|
Post by ts on Jul 24, 2012 12:24:46 GMT -5
I'm not saying it is a false accusation. I'm saying that I feel there has to be a stronger case than she said he said. Remember as part of the investigation, the accused has to talk to the investigator as well. Great. if it is weak, then LW would have no fear of going back to the state where he is accused and facing all his "weak" accusers. If he is as innocent as he says he is, then there should actually be no problem. If the overseers are not protecting him, they could require him to face the accusations in person before he continues going to meeting(let alone taking part in meeting).
|
|
|
Post by ts on Jul 24, 2012 12:51:59 GMT -5
I think we can also commend the incredible bravery of any woman or sister worker for bringing forward any true accusations that potentially validate many other potentially alleged victims who may have had similar experiences with the accused. It especially takes a lot of bravery if the case is "weak" but true knowing the potential for the accused to deny the accusations and especially given the power and place of the accused. Yes, a lot of bravery.
Like we sing:
"You will find those souls of greatness where the walls are weak and low. Where the burden is the greatest and the tears most often flow. Although worn and tried and tested heavens beacons always glow in the patient loyal bearers of the cross."
I suppose this could apply to LW if he actually were falsely accused. I would hope, for his soul's sake, that he is not trying to claim unjust persecution for righteousness' sake if he is actually guilty. I am not talking about the legal implications. I am talking about the spiritual implications. The salvation of his soul.
We don't have to judge. The judgment against liars is already set. We just have to warn people about the judgment. It is better to confess now than to face eternity with lies. Whether it is lies from the accused or the accuser, the judgment is the same. I would think that God's true servants could spiritually discern what is a lie and what isn't even without the help of the best lawyers the friends can afford for the workers.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 24, 2012 13:02:56 GMT -5
One of the aspects of Post Traumatic Stress is the inability to remember parts of the event. You need to now do some researching on how many false memories are there compared to true memories and how many false claims compared to true ones. These two statistics would be intertwined. Unsubstantiated rape reporting is thought to be about 8%. This figure has been quite constant even between countries. The under reporting problem has been estimated to be from 70%+ to as high as over 90%. As far as false memories, it happen much more than people realize. Estimates are most often in the 30% range. There have been many studies done on this. For example: cogprints.org/599/1/199802009.htmlAnd when it does happen it is difficult to convince people that their memories are incorrect. For example: Columnist A young woman in psychotherapy recovered the memory that at age 13 she was raped by her teacher, became pregnant and underwent an abortion. No corroborating evidence for this event existed. In fact, the woman had not reached menarche until 15, so the pregnancy was medically impossible.
Still, she filed criminal charges against the teacher, who had to spend his life savings to defend himself against the false accusation. Eventually, the court ruled that recovery of a repressed memory lacked sufficient scientific foundation to be admissible evidence. If one in ten reports is unsubstantiated and 30% of memories are distorted I think the accused is due some consideration.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 24, 2012 13:09:49 GMT -5
I'm not saying it is a false accusation. I'm saying that I feel there has to be a stronger case than she said he said. Remember as part of the investigation, the accused has to talk to the investigator as well. That might be in violation of a person's 5th amendment rights. I can't think of any instance when this would be true. He may elect to. But what would be the point?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 24, 2012 14:06:18 GMT -5
It seems to me that this case for the prosecution will practically require other unrelated complainants to establish a pattern of coercive behaviour if there is no physical evidence. Conviction based on a pattern of behavior is not going to fly. If a person kills 3 people and is then charged with the murder of a fourth, there still needs to be evidence proving who committed the fourth murder. You can't convict someone of auto theft because they stole cars in the past.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 24, 2012 14:12:38 GMT -5
I wonder where all of those that were reported to be coming forward are? The case must be weak if it can't stand on it's own. Does a weak case mean it is a false accusation? Was it the word "weak" that you didn't understand? Usually it means a case where there is little evidence to substantiate the charges made. It is a case of the rape of "A" by "B". The fact that "C" is accusing someone of rape is not really the issue. Nope. Not unless they also file charges. Or were you thinking of something like a class-action suit!?! Then they should bring charges.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 24, 2012 14:27:10 GMT -5
Is it possible that because the investigation has taken an unusual amount of time, that it IS because there is NO physical evidence from any of the complainants.....and is it possible this is why the accused's lawyer has been holding him back from going to that state. You are stating that LW's lawyer has been holding him back from going to that state and offering this as a possible reason? Do you know that the lawyer has been holding him back? As far as I know no charges have been filed so what would/could happen if he went back? Are there outstanding warrants for his arrest? How much does it cost to extradite a person? Yeah. That's the way I think the legal system works too.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Jul 24, 2012 14:41:11 GMT -5
Who knows the reason the SW went to a counsellor in the first place may have been to deal with the effects of the rape. It didnt' take one to dig up some false memory.
It is fourth not forth, Rat even in the states
Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 24, 2012 15:02:02 GMT -5
Who knows the reason the SW went to a counsellor in the first place may have been to deal with the effects of the rape. It didnt' take one to dig up some false memory. Wasn't there some explanation as to why the SW was seeking professional help? And no, it doesn't take a counsellor [sic] to dig up false memories. Our minds seem to do that very well on their own. My error, thanks for the correction. I was going to try to spin it saying it had something to do with the Firth of Forth but is seemed like a long way to go! It was the 5th Amendment to the United States Constitution that I was concerned about. Hadn't thought about unreasonable searches and seizures.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2012 16:04:37 GMT -5
It seems to me that this case for the prosecution will practically require other unrelated complainants to establish a pattern of coercive behaviour if there is no physical evidence. Conviction based on a pattern of behavior is not going to fly. If a person kills 3 people and is then charged with the murder of a fourth, there still needs to be evidence proving who committed the fourth murder. You can't convict someone of auto theft because they stole cars in the past. The discussion was about a weak case, not about convicting on the basis of other accusations alone. Multiple unrelated accusations will make the case stronger but of course would not result in conviction on that basis alone.....that wasn't the point. Do you think that additional accusations will make no difference to how a jury would arrive at a decision?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 24, 2012 16:10:04 GMT -5
The discussion was about a weak case, not about convicting on the basis of other accusations alone. Multiple unrelated accusations will make the case stronger but of course would not result in conviction on that basis alone.....that wasn't the point. Do you think that additional accusations will make no difference to how a jury would arrive at a decision? If the defense lawyer is doing their job the jury will never hear the details. But who knows. Perhaps victims from all over will be asked to testify.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2012 16:20:43 GMT -5
The discussion was about a weak case, not about convicting on the basis of other accusations alone. Multiple unrelated accusations will make the case stronger but of course would not result in conviction on that basis alone.....that wasn't the point. Do you think that additional accusations will make no difference to how a jury would arrive at a decision? If the defense lawyer is doing their job the jury will never hear the details. But who knows. Perhaps victims from all over will be asked to testify. What is the most likely event to occur with multiple accusations before charges is that is when the investigator hauls in the accused and scares him with a long list of possible charges and possible jail into perpetuity so that he will start confessing. If no confession, he gets the long list of charges which he has to plea bargain with a guilty plea on a small number of them, hence no trial at all. Regardless, if he is hit with many charges from different alleged victims, it becomes a mountain for him and his lawyers to deal with long before a trial. There is little wonder why an investigator makes him/herself available to multiple accusers.
|
|
|
Post by ts on Jul 24, 2012 18:51:34 GMT -5
If the defense lawyer is doing their job the jury will never hear the details. But who knows. Perhaps victims from all over will be asked to testify. What is the most likely event to occur with multiple accusations before charges is that is when the investigator hauls in the accused and scares him with a long list of possible charges and possible jail into perpetuity so that he will start confessing. If no confession, he gets the long list of charges which he has to plea bargain with a guilty plea on a small number of them, hence no trial at all. Regardless, if he is hit with many charges from different alleged victims, it becomes a mountain for him and his lawyers to deal with long before a trial. There is little wonder why an investigator makes him/herself available to multiple accusers. That is the way that the court system works and that is the way that the overseers have chosen to promote their brand of righteousness knowing that they have a bottomless pit full of money(pun intended) with which to hire the best lawyers to get them off the hook. Perfectly legal and nothing legally wrong with that. However, if there is guilt and there is no confession, there can be no repentance or forgiveness even if the accused is found innocent in a court. Jesus said that unless your righteousness exceeds that of the pharisees, you cannot enter the kingdom of heaven. I would say that letting your righteousness be the righteousness of the law of the land is the same as the righteousness of the pharisees.
|
|
|
Post by Linford Bledsoe on Jul 24, 2012 19:31:44 GMT -5
What is the most likely event to occur with multiple accusations before charges is that is when the investigator hauls in the accused and scares him with a long list of possible charges and possible jail into perpetuity so that he will start confessing. If no confession, he gets the long list of charges which he has to plea bargain with a guilty plea on a small number of them, hence no trial at all. Regardless, if he is hit with many charges from different alleged victims, it becomes a mountain for him and his lawyers to deal with long before a trial. There is little wonder why an investigator makes him/herself available to multiple accusers. That is the way that the court system works and that is the way that the overseers have chosen to promote their brand of righteousness knowing that they have a bottomless pit full of money(pun intended) with which to hire the best lawyers to get them off the hook. Perfectly legal and nothing legally wrong with that. However, if there is guilt and there is no confession, there can be no repentance or forgiveness even if the accused is found innocent in a court. Jesus said that unless your righteousness exceeds that of the pharisees, you cannot enter the kingdom of heaven. I would say that letting your righteousness be the righteousness of the law of the land is the same as the righteousness of the pharisees. What did you really say?
|
|
|
Post by ts on Jul 24, 2012 19:57:33 GMT -5
That is the way that the court system works and that is the way that the overseers have chosen to promote their brand of righteousness knowing that they have a bottomless pit full of money(pun intended) with which to hire the best lawyers to get them off the hook. Perfectly legal and nothing legally wrong with that. However, if there is guilt and there is no confession, there can be no repentance or forgiveness even if the accused is found innocent in a court. Jesus said that unless your righteousness exceeds that of the pharisees, you cannot enter the kingdom of heaven. I would say that letting your righteousness be the righteousness of the law of the land is the same as the righteousness of the pharisees. What di you really say? The workers are letting their righteousness be the legal system of the land....Just like the pharisees. That is their right. But it is not the righteousness that Jesus taught. If an accused worker is found innocent in the legal system because he has an expensive lawyer, that does not necessarily make him innocent before God. If, for example, LW is found innocent in court or found that he does not have to face charges in court, should he not be allowed in the work? His message would be the same as it was when he was scheduled for convention rounds this summer. If nothing is wrong with LW's message and he claims innocence and is not proven guilty by law, why would he not be allowed in the work?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 25, 2012 6:54:33 GMT -5
If, for example, LW is found innocent in court or found that he does not have to face charges in court, should he not be allowed in the work? His message would be the same as it was when he was scheduled for convention rounds this summer. If nothing is wrong with LW's message and he claims innocence and is not proven guilty by law, why would he not be allowed in the work? Indeed, why not? Should people be able to make accusations and not have them questioned? I don't know if LW is guilty as charged or not. Do you? You seem to be implying he needs to confess to gain whatever it is you think he needs to gain. But if he is not guilty?
|
|
|
Post by Linford Bledsoe on Jul 25, 2012 7:11:01 GMT -5
If, for example, LW is found innocent in court or found that he does not have to face charges in court, should he not be allowed in the work? His message would be the same as it was when he was scheduled for convention rounds this summer. If nothing is wrong with LW's message and he claims innocence and is not proven guilty by law, why would he not be allowed in the work? Indeed, why not? Should people be able to make accusations and not have them questioned? I don't know if LW is guilty as charged or not. Do you? You seem to be implying he needs to confess to gain whatever it is you think he needs to gain. But if he is not guilty? The point being in, ts talk ,all workers are guilty.
|
|
|
Post by kencoolidge on Jul 25, 2012 13:13:04 GMT -5
Indeed, why not? Should people be able to make accusations and not have them questioned? I don't know if LW is guilty as charged or not. Do you? You seem to be implying he needs to confess to gain whatever it is you think he needs to gain. But if he is not guilty? The point being in, ts talk ,all workers are guilty. Lin Give it a break. In no way does TS call all workers guilty. Why does his post bother you so much. I know there are many workers who have his utmost respect. Perhaps you feel called to poison the well so those that perhaps seek an accurate assesment will be shielded from what is real. Just my thoughts which are weak at best. Ken
|
|