Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Actual left/right wing discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (4686)	11/13/2006 3:55:26 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 10087

Well a lot of times it just can't be sufficiently proven. If it can be, you could sue, probably for slander, and maybe for ""malicious prosecution" like Lindsey's suit. And there can be punishment for "making a false statement" or "filing a false report", and possibly for perjury. If someone went to jail because of perjured testimony and it can be proven that the testimony was perjury then I think (depending on the exact circumstances) bring a perjury charge makes a lot of sense. Rape, esp. a rape or sexual abuse charge made about long ago events that you have no "recovered the memory of" can be particularly hard to prove false, unless the false accuser tells other people about the plan. There may be insufficient evidence so the defendant might be found not guilty, but that doesn't mean the false charge gets punished. It shouldn't be easy to punish a false charge, because the charge might be true. Just as other criminals should have to be proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt, perjury, or some other charge of filing a false crime faces that same high burden of proof.