(This is my ongoing series presenting pieces that I am formulating into my own constitution for any future country (including LL). The wording is not set and is open to changes/additions/subtractions. Posting about it is just to stimulate debate, as should any good creator of a constitution.)
“False Allegations
A person (accuser), who makes allegations against another person (accused) that are proven false, shall face penalties for attempted false imprisonment for the period of time the accused would have likely spent in prison. It is mandatory for law enforcement to pursue charges against false accusers if there is sufficient evidence. Law enforcers who refuse to pursue charges against false accusers shall be fired from their positions, and if any criminal charges are applicable against them, they shall be charged.”
There are many stories that put false allegations on my radar as a problem that needed fixing within the laws and justice system, but the following video has a very deep lasting emotional impact on anyone who watches it:
In the above video, at least there was some sort of penalty for the liar, but 2-3 years in prison is not comparable to the 10-20 years (or longer) that the falsely accused man would have faced. She should have faced a comparable sentence to what he would have gotten.
There has been a disturbing trend happening in society where men increasingly cannot fathom that a woman can do anything evil. It was not surprising to me that all the male cops infinitely sided with the lying woman, and it took a female cop investigator to enter the case and diagnose that the woman was lying. I’m not sure if it is just English speaking cultures where this is happening, but we need to figure out the cause of it and correct it; male cops should be capable of suspecting that any woman might be lying.
Unfortunately up to 99% of false allegations liars get away with no penalties (according to link at bottom). I personally know a man who had 2 step daughters. The older daughter asked him if she could go to a party, he said no, and the next day she and her little sister (older one had convinced her) went to the police and said he raped them. He only got off the charge because the younger sister admitted to her mom and then the police that they had made the whole thing up to remove the step-dad from the picture. The older sister was in “deny-til-you-die” mode, and if it had only been her falsely accusing him, he would have been in prison at least 10-15 years. Because of the age of the younger sister and the state this happened in, he would have been facing life in prison if convicted. Neither daughter faced any legal repercussions from almost taking a man’s life.
Not only falsely accused but entrapment, planting of incriminating evidence, false imprisonment, etc must also be considered into this equation as well. The me too movement created a bunch of women cry rape when they consented at the time of the act. I hate using this case in this way but look at the P Diddy trial that recently occurred and the women crying rape when the evidence clearly showed that the acts were consensual and they kept coming back. I am not in any way supporting the man’s behavior but one must always look at the evidence that is presented and the Mann Act is I would argue totally unconstitutional as we have at various times already discussed but not necessarily directly. And of course it came into being during the wretched Progressive Era of the USA….
Outstanding additions Martin! I’ve written up a version of what you’ve added, I’m just wondering if they should all be in the same section or separate.
I did see in the diddy case there were women that voluntarily kept coming back to his parties, but now try to say that they were “abused”. Obviously, since they were adults and therefore responsible for their own actions, if they were actually abused, they would not return voluntarily.
There’s also the Yale rape allegations from 2015 where a woman claimed a guy raped her but then it came out she was just shamed by her friends the next day for being with him. Videos surfaced of her at a bar and on the walk back to her apt where she was touching him and making out with him.
And the Pitcher Trevor Bauer where a woman tried to extort him with false allegations.
This stuff needs to be clarified in the laws. I’m now thinking up a rape section that better sets the boundaries of how such events should be considered by the law but also for average men and women citizens to better understand these situations.
It already seems precedent that at the point when a man and woman go into a private room together, not much evidence will emerge from that, just verbal claims. I am considering the legal right to record audio in any situation a person is personally in, even in a bedroom, but I haven’t run thru all the mental simulations yet. I can see how a young woman might want to audio record all her intimate encounters with men and then publish them online just as some form of clout-chasing. Not sure about this.
But the periods before and after entering the private room have taken on much more significance. Women definitely need better procedural instructions on what to do if they have been raped, and if they do not follow these procedures in a certain amount of time, then the window closes. Claiming rape 30 years later will be unheard of in the future, though I can understand that, like the Cosby case, in times past it was more like the wild West and it was not necessarily safe to make rape claims against a wealthy powerful person. But I believe we are definitely out of that period now. And of course this only applies to adult women, children cannot be expected to know of such things.
Same law but new sections I would point out that for ease of legal reference and for juries it becomes necessary to separate such illegal acts because each action would be separate criminal charge.
Dude you are really making me think hard about pushing back on the whole bedroom issue but I think women should have the right to record in their bedroom. In fact this has been done for years as blackmail against people but I think for “bedroom” evidence to be legally allowed you MUST have consent by all parties otherwise it’s blackmail and cannot be used. Guys if they wanted the woman bad enough would consent because by the woman making the recording and her letting him know beforehand means I would argue that the act is consensual and cannot be rape but the phrase “stop means stop” also still applies and I think educating people that are of age about how the law protects them needs to be addressed in this area.
I agree a statute of limitations must be in place but to what length and on what charge remains to be seen. I would say that for planting of evidence and false imprisonment specifically and for other charges where the accused is actually imprisoned the “clock” does not start until their release. In this way if they were falsely imprisoned they have a full “clock” to be able to prove their innocence or at a minimum reasonable doubt that they were truly the ones that committed the crime they served time for.
I will also say that if it the accuser is found and legally sentenced as such they must personally compensate the person they imprisoned in addition to their sentence and the formula the compensation would work would be based on an average of the last 10 years the imprisoned worked before their were imprisoned plus a flat per year stipend for each year of their sentence. So the person imprisoned would be compensated not by the government but by the person that but them in prison and if there were multiple people conspired together they each have to pay the imprisoned person the same amount so the imprisoned person would get a multiplier for each additional accuser. Now here is where I would say it gets real spicy the accusers stat turning on each other and I would also add a “preponderance of the evidence” wherein if one accuser laid it on really thick and there testimony is what “sealed the deal” versus the other accusers they would face an even heavier burden but this only kicks in if they start turning on each other and I don’t see why not since the jig is up and I need to cover myself before the other party has a chance to plaster me as the worse of two evils.
I don’t know, if it comes to women making men come to verbal agreements before sex, I don’t believe sex will ever happen. At least not in any society even close to our present one. Women (and men) simply refuse to bring up logical topics in romantic scenarios as it “kills the vibe” and then sex doesn’t happen anyways.
Now in a society 20 years from now, the 2 people are dating each other in their late teens or early 20’s, and their prospective parents should haggle out a child-rearing-agreement at least (per our convo on marriage/child custody, etc). Families have to become involved in relationships again for there to be any responsibility inserted into the process.
A bit off topic, but, I do believe that birthing and raising children is a somewhat mandatory part of a woman’s maturation cycle because the rest of the world is not too great at disciplining them and forcing them to make responsible decisions, whereas men are not coddled in any way by society. Every woman I knew in college easily got a long term job straight out of college because, obviously, there were people in those workplaces who wanted them around. All the men I knew had to fight and hussle for even the crappiest of opportunities.
I suppose I am leaning towards not having unrestricted audio recording in bedrooms, etc. Theoretically, if I was a woman, I would probably just break the law and record all my intimate interactions because then I would have the necessary evidence to charge a rapist and then in that case, I would be protected against charges because my audio recording revealed a larger crime. But having this type of recording still be a crime would prohibit women who like to post things to the internet for clout/fame purposes.
You make other good point that I want to respond to, but I don’t want to make this too long. We must start a rape crime thread, but I have not thought out what the constitution part will say.
Well rape is rape I wouldn’t put it directly into the constitution as there over arching “only actual crimes committed against a person” aka no “victimless crimes” are allowed theme that a constitution should have
My plan is to try to make my constitution a bit more than previous constitutions. I want it to be somewhat of a “guide” to society. We will see how it works out.
I def want to have punishment ranges for crimes so that punishments don’t get ridiculous, such as rapists in the UK getting shorter sentences than the sentences for people making illegal social media posts complaining about the rapists. A constitution seems like a great place to have punishment ranges because it can be all in one all-inclusive document. Where else in govt is there an all-inclusive document?
An all inclusive document for crimes is indeed real it’s called the Napoleonic Code, the only difference is that it’s not necessarily a constitution for limiting government but for being all inclusive for any and all punishable crimes. We don’t use it here in the US except for Louisiana but I am not necessarily one that wants to place the criminal code inside the constitution itself but I will also say (as I have pointed out before) that all laws must be reviewed during the convention process too.
I’ve never looked into the Napoleonic code, but I will now, sounds interesting.
Right now, it just seems to make sense to work on this stuff all together. The criminal stuff would be in its own section anyways, so it won’t be a big deal to “technically” make it a separate document. At the moment tho, since what I’m doing is planning a society, it just feels right to work on laws and crime together to get the balance right.
I totally get it now that makes sense to do it that way. We really do need a new approach to how society functions and interacts but not the “reset” the “powerful” want
