Why don't people say "innocent until proven guilty" for rape/sexual abuse?

[Devout Centrist]

It has been guilty until proven innocent for a long time now, don't act surprised.

What happens if a girl accuses a guy at work of sexual assault in front of everyone? What is the standard then?

Leave it to HR

[MasterJedi]

It has been guilty until proven innocent for a long time now, don't act surprised.

What happens if a girl accuses a guy at work of sexual assault in front of everyone? What is the standard then?

Leave it to HR

That, or probably what would happen if someone came up to you and accused your say dad of killing someone. You probably wouldn't believe it right away. What I talk about is once it's in the media/public opinion it's always guilty until proven innocent.

[Fuzzy Bear]

It has been guilty until proven innocent for a long time now, don't act surprised.

What happens if a girl accuses a guy at work of sexual assault in front of everyone? What is the standard then?

Leave it to HR

That, or probably what would happen if someone came up to you and accused your say dad of killing someone being complicit in the Kennedy Assasination. You probably wouldn't believe it right away. What I talk about is once it's in the media/public opinion it's always guilty until proven innocent.

I was thinking of Ted Cruz and I couldn't resist!

Not to derail the thread, but I would never give a guy an inch of breathing room if I were Ted Cruz and Trump said what he said about my Dad.  Cruz's relative silence, his "forgive and forget" posturing on this is more than a little curious, particularly from a politician that I have come to view as one of the more vindictive folks in DC.

[emailking]

I guess he didn't want to affect his chances of winning by offending Trump's supporters. I could be wrong, but the only time I remember him getting really angry about something Trump said was when he posted that horrible meme about his wife.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

People always say it's worse to convict an innocent person than letting a guilty man go free. I hear a lot of people running to the defense when certain people are accused of murder. Why is it that we never tend to bestow the same sympathy on people who are accused of sexual assault or harassment or rape? Once the accusations come out, your reputation is ruined before any legal charges.

Because such charges, once they breach the surface of the media/community/legal system, almost always turn out to be true? In turn, that's probably because we as a society, prefer to ignore such abuse and typically the abuser must either assault a very large number of victims, or do something incredibly heinous before anyone will take notice - much less action - at all. (If civilization survives, history is not going to look back favorably on us for our societal tolerance of sexual abuse.)

Just in my lifetime, we've had one adulterous President (I don't know whether he's been credibly accused of sexual assault or not, thanks to all the BS charges the GOP has also flung at the Clintons), one very popular VP who can charitably be described as a creep, and elected a President who openly advocated for sexual assault.

[pbrower2a]

People are not convicted for being scum. People are convicted for crimes, that is, violations of statutory law.

[BlueSwan]

No one opposes the innocent until proven guilty legal standard.

That being said - plenty of Republicans thought Hillary Clinton was guilty of a crime, even though she wasn't proven guilty in a court of law. Not only was she not proven guilty, she was never even charged. And not only was she not even charged, the investigating official (FBI director) didn't even recommend charges (which prosecutors can usually accept or pass). And not only did the investigation official not recommend charges, he went so far as to say that no reasonable prosecutor would bring them. Yet "Lock Her Up" was a regular chant at Republican rallies.

Spot on.

[RINO Tom]

People always say it's worse to convict an innocent person than letting a guilty man go free. I hear a lot of people running to the defense when certain people are accused of murder. Why is it that we never tend to bestow the same sympathy on people who are accused of sexual assault or harassment or rape? Once the accusations come out, your reputation is ruined before any legal charges.

Also strange, why is it that those who do insist that the accused is innocent are always Republicans, while it's the Democrats always pushing for conviction?

It's clearly not.

[BlueSwan]

People always say it's worse to convict an innocent person than letting a guilty man go free. I hear a lot of people running to the defense when certain people are accused of murder. Why is it that we never tend to bestow the same sympathy on people who are accused of sexual assault or harassment or rape? Once the accusations come out, your reputation is ruined before any legal charges.

Also strange, why is it that those who do insist that the accused is innocent are always Republicans, while it's the Democrats always pushing for conviction?

If we ignore the partisan bit, I do think you have a point. There is a certain sense of lawlessness regarding this issue and it is even worse when it comes to charges of paedophilia, which are impossible to defend yourself against. It is no wonder why few men even dare seek out jobs in kindergartens anymore. Some people are so scared of paedophiles that they will mistake acts of kindness for acts of paedophilia. I remember when as a school psychologist a few years back, I gave a crying girl a hug. My colleagues were horrified. Not because they thought I was a paedophile, thank goodness, but because they feared that I might face accusations. The last 12 years I have been a high school teacher and boy do you have to be careful. I have kept my path clean, but you "hear stories" of other teachers and those stories spread like wildfire. And we're certainly not talking rape or even any kind of sexual relations here. We might just be talking about male teachers looking a bit too much at girls cleavages or whatever.

[Figueira]

I mean, there are some cases where it's obvious that the person is guilty, e.g. Bill Cosby. But there are other cases (e.g. Neil DeGrasse Tyson) where it's unclear.

In those cases, what we need to do is presume that both parties are innocent--i.e. take the accuser and accusation seriously while also not assassinating the accused person's character by presuming their guilt. This is hard to do, but it's the only solution that's really fair.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

It has been guilty until proven innocent for a long time now, don't act surprised.

What happens if a girl accuses a guy at work of sexual assault in front of everyone? What is the standard then?

Leave it to HR

That, or probably what would happen if someone came up to you and accused your say dad of killing someone. You probably wouldn't believe it right away. What I talk about is once it's in the media/public opinion it's always guilty until proven innocent.

So, it's like how Repulicans treat muslims?

[elcorazon]

People always say it's worse to convict an innocent person than letting a guilty man go free. I hear a lot of people running to the defense when certain people are accused of murder. Why is it that we never tend to bestow the same sympathy on people who are accused of sexual assault or harassment or rape? Once the accusations come out, your reputation is ruined before any legal charges.

Also strange, why is it that those who do insist that the accused is innocent are always Republicans, while it's the Democrats always pushing for conviction?

Agreed. OJ was exonerated. Let him be.

[emailking]

People always say it's worse to convict an innocent person than letting a guilty man go free. I hear a lot of people running to the defense when certain people are accused of murder. Why is it that we never tend to bestow the same sympathy on people who are accused of sexual assault or harassment or rape? Once the accusations come out, your reputation is ruined before any legal charges.

Also strange, why is it that those who do insist that the accused is innocent are always Republicans, while it's the Democrats always pushing for conviction?

Agreed. OJ was exonerated. Let him be.

I don't know if that's a serious comment or not, but OJ was not exonerated, which would mean the police or the DA's office said he didn't do it.

Being found not guilty means there wasn't enough evidence to justify taking away your freedoms. It doesn't mean you are innocent or that anyone (including the jurors who found you not guilty) think you didn't commit the crime.