My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 01/2004

« French, Germans and Chicagoans | Main | The left never changes »

July 23, 2007


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


I am not comfortable with any law that says a crime is determined not by what the accused did or said, but only by how the victim feels about it. How can any accused defend themselves, then? How could you possibly prove the accuser is lying about how they felt? Why even bother with a trial, then?

For a another common example, consider how sexual harassment rules at work are based entirely on how the accuser claims they felt (regardless of what was actually said or done). A shy guy can ask a girl out and it might make her feel uncomfortable; but if a guy she likes makes an obvious sexual inuendo, she might just laugh and feel flattered. It becomes a crime simply because it came from a person the "victim" isn't attracted to (and how many men really know how women think?). This is exasperated by the tendancy of women to pretend they are interested even when they are not (so as never to hurt a man's feelings). She keeps smiling and telling el Wierdo she'd really love to do lunch, but can't today, so he takes her at her word and keeps asking. Next thing he knows, he is in a scary one on one with a supervisor, hearing that he can't be told what he is accused of nor who has accused him, but if he doesn't stop he will be "let go". A system begging for abuse (intentional and otherwise).

I think a 13 year old boy should know better than to slap girls on the butt, but it sounds like the punishment in this case is way out of proportion.

This isn't the same DA that handled the McMartin case is it? Why are there so many of them? Scary!

The comments to this entry are closed.