On Aug 24, 2011, at 10:10 AM, Dissenting Wren wrote:
> I agree that you can't run a decent criminal justice system on presumption. OTOH, the pragmatic decision not to prosecute in cases where dragging the complainant's name through the mud is likely to succeed makes it possible to rape with impunity if:
> --you rape a woman who survives as an immigrant by hook or by crook
She worked at a major hotel for the last 3 years. That's not "hook or crook."
> --you rape a woman who "improved" the truth to make her asylum application more likely to be approved (so very like police "testilying")
She didn't write the story on her asylum application.
> --you rape a prostitute
Only the Post says that.
> --you rape a woman who has had a lot of sexual partners
> --you rape a woman who is kinky
> --you rape a woman who dresses provocatively
> --you rape a woman who likes to flirt
These have no bearing on her case.
She was the only witness who could testify, and no jury would have believed her testimony. So the only applicable characteristic on a list of this sort is one that you didn't include:
--you rape a woman who invented a story about a previous rape thereby rendering her testimony completely worthless
Doug