(no subject)

[theweaselking]

Hey, female US Air Force personnel: If you report an attempted rape, they'll refuse you counsel, allow the defense unfettered access to you, and harass you - and as soon as you refuse to testify because you're afraid for your life and safety, they'll charge you with "committing indecent acts" based on your having confessed to such acts while reporting your rape.

Comments

[publius1.livejournal.com]

So clearly, the message is: Women, don't join the Air Force!

[graethorne.livejournal.com]

The "Special Hell" needs a new wing....

[kafziel.livejournal.com]

One theory I saw bandied about on another board was that what happened wasn't so much a "rape" as it was "consentual group sex", and that the rape claims were fabricated after the fact to try to avoid the exact charges she's facing now. That perhaps the preliminary investigation contradicted what she was saying, which is why she backed out. That we are, after all, getting statements only from her and her lawyers, and so only getting one side of the picture here.

I don't know. We have very little information, none of it unbiased, and it's kind of hard to make any sort of determination of injustice based on that. If she's making everything up, this doesn't seem at all out of line.

[torrain.livejournal.com]

To make sure I have this straight: the theory is that she cried "rape" to avoid being charged with indecent acts that no-one else knew about until she went for a medical exam and reported their occurence?

> If she's making everything up, this doesn't seem at all out of line.

If she's making everything up, why would they charge her with indecent behaviour rather than with making a false accusation? "Hey, we know you lied, so we're going to charge you with what you said you did, even though we know you didn't do it."?

That said, if sexual behaviour occurs between four people, and one of them says it was rape, and charges are dropped when she refuses to testify against the other three *after* judicial policy is violated, then it's not out of line to charge that person for committing an indecent act (and possibly having them registered as a sex offender) while granting the other three involved immunity?

Damn. Silly me. I thought that there was this weird thing going where if someone was guilty of bearing false witness, you pressed charges for *that*. And that if people got together to consensually commit indecent acts, you charged all the people who committed them.

But I guess that would be out of line.

[torrain.livejournal.com]

Not ever going south, okay?