At 4/4/12 09:54 PM, Elfer wrote:

At 4/4/12 09:37 PM, II2none wrote: Letting it slide is even worse.

But this isn't happening in a vacuum. When you punish people who voluntarily recant, it makes them less likely to do so, and therefore more likely that the innocent person will continue to suffer. You have to realize that the person already got away with the lie, and if they choose not to recant they still won't be punished, because nobody will know what they did.

But at the same time it gives the message that deception of the law should go unpunished. people who don't admit to their crimes get found out 9/10 anyway. If the case was handled properly and it wasn't blown off on "injury to the groin, I guess the father must've done it." The charges for the pot might be less severe then rape and if they found evidence he would've been jailed for the right reasons.

Rightfully she would be punished, but it's better to let a remorseful guilty person go free than to keep an innocent person imprisoned.

I don't know man wrongly being accused to rot in jail for 10 years family or not,\. There should be some sort of financial or moral support for this man.

At 4/4/12 10:16 PM, II2none wrote: But at the same time it gives the message that deception of the law should go unpunished. people who don't admit to their crimes get found out 9/10 anyway.

It doesn't send that message, though. Obstruction of justice and perjury are still crimes, and people are punished when the authorities find them out. The problem here is that it's an odd case where someone said "I lied, you believed me, but now I see what I did was wrong and I'm going to tell you so that this innocent person will be released." It's a pretty fucked up situation.

I don't know man wrongly being accused to rot in jail for 10 years family or not,\. There should be some sort of financial or moral support for this man.

Yeah, but that's a seperate issue. Is having his daughter imprisoned going to fix everything for him?

At 4/4/12 10:32 PM, Elfer wrote:

It doesn't send that message, though. Obstruction of justice and perjury are still crimes, and people are punished when the authorities find them out. The problem here is that it's an odd case where someone said "I lied, you believed me, but now I see what I did was wrong and I'm going to tell you so that this innocent person will be released." It's a pretty fucked up situation.

Even people who confess still go to prison for there crimes , just because she confesses a decade later doesn't make the situation special I'm damn sure he knew what she was doing was wrong as the years went by. The only reason she's being treated differently is because it was a decade ago.

Yeah, but that's a seperate issue. Is having his daughter imprisoned going to fix everything for him?

Fair is fair, but she doesn't have to necessarily go to jail. Some kind of financial obligation would be a better service in the long run.

At 4/4/12 11:22 PM, bgraybr wrote:

At 4/4/12 11:14 PM, II2none wrote: Even people who confess still go to prison for there crimes , just because she confesses a decade later doesn't make the situation special I'm damn sure he knew what she was doing was wrong as the years went by. The only reason she's being treated differently is because it was a decade ago.

THIS IS ABOUT HELPING PEOPLE LIKE THE FATHER. It's not about your weird sense of justice.

Thank you I didn't realize I couldn't go somewhat off topic and voice my opinion with another user who's debating on the same subject. Weird is a matter of perspective.

If she could be sent to prison for coming forward then few others in her situation will do the same thing. Guess what happens if people like her don't confess? Daddy rots in prison for a crime he didn't commit. Yay.

Okay thats still a "double edge sword" outlook in my opinion. Don't confess a crime long enough and hopefully no consequences will come too you.

It's more important to get him out of prison then it is to punish her for doing it in the first place.

The big picture isn't going to be 100% satisfying to everyone I'm sure you've realized that at one point. Yay for dad but shame on the deceptive daughter and the law for no looking into this issue further before accepting the rape card. I agree the father's release from prison is most important,BUT that doesn't mean I'm going to overlook the lesser issues if there's flaws in the investigation.

At 4/4/12 11:14 PM, II2none wrote: Even people who confess still go to prison for there crimes , just because she confesses a decade later doesn't make the situation special I'm damn sure he knew what she was doing was wrong as the years went by. The only reason she's being treated differently is because it was a decade ago.

No, the thing that makes the situation special is that the case also involves an innocent party that greatly benefits from her confession. If you confess to say, a murder, it doesn't bring the victim back to life. If you up and decide to confess to perjury, it does exonerate the innocent party.

The main thing I'm thinking of is that there must be more than one case like this, where false testimony led to conviction. If the person who provided that false testimony doesn't have to fear prosecution, they'll be that much more likely to come forward and improve the lot of someone who was wrongfully convicted.

At 4/5/12 12:00 AM, Elfer wrote:

At 4/4/12 11:14 PM, II2none wrote: Even people who confess still go to prison for there crimes , just because she confesses a decade later doesn't make the situation special I'm damn sure he knew what she was doing was wrong as the years went by. The only reason she's being treated differently is because it was a decade ago.

No, the thing that makes the situation special is that the case also involves an innocent party that greatly benefits from her confession. If you confess to say, a murder, it doesn't bring the victim back to life. If you up and decide to confess to perjury, it does exonerate the innocent party.

This situation ca still relate to other wrongful claim cases outside of murder.

The main thing I'm thinking of is that there must be more than one case like this, where false testimony led to conviction. If the person who provided that false testimony doesn't have to fear prosecution, they'll be that much more likely to come forward and improve the lot of someone who was wrongfully convicted.

You know what, screw it...because the investigators evidence was only word of mouth from an 11 year old, and a irrelevant injury to the groin. The whole case was one sided. I know at the time she was a child and everyone wants to jump to there rescue when it comes to rape. But if there's a certain procedure and the evidence isn't hard facts investigators and the court can't just cut corners like that. Otherwise the end result is this bull malarkey a regretful daughter a

people don't get ptsd from etc

haha dumb woman, they can have a traumatic experience in the prison or the whole thing could be seen as one, shut up kid

At 4/3/12 11:16 PM, MiloBased wrote:

At 4/3/12 11:15 PM, SKHM wrote:

At 4/3/12 11:14 PM, MiloBased wrote: If he decided to rape her now, I wouldn't even be mad at him.

that's what i was thinking

he almost deserves to now, right?

He already did the time for it, I say atleast let him have a go at it.

Indeed. Double Jeopardy guys, can't be convicted of the same crime twice.

I dunno why she lied, but that seems like a low blow to her father.

I say what she did was okay. The fucker should have bought her that nintendo 64 like she asked for.

I work in law enforcement and honestly I can understand what they have done here and it all sounds reasonable to me.

It should be noted that legal matters like this are actually very complicated and it goes far beyond feminism and double standards (contrary to what that idiot Phantox thinks) so I wouldn't assume too much here. If the dad was really angry about what happened then believe me this girl would be screwed. From the looks of it the dad must have came to some sort of PMT agreement.

Think about how horrible this is. She fucks up his life by putting him in prison for her own selfish reasons. Right? So then after 9 years after he's settled in and totally forgot about the real world and how it works she forces him out to the real world which he's already forgotten how it works, again for her own selfish reasons. Whether or not he wanted out. Because there is a point where the convicts forget how the not-prison shit works so they'll do what they can to stay in.

America land of the free and betrayed.

At 4/4/12 12:06 AM, Gambit wrote: She should definitely go in jail for 9 years. That'd be justice.

I say she gets double what he served.

She admitted of screwing over his life and she doesn't get any charges? Last time I checked that was a federal offence. She deserves to get buttfucked for the next decade.