The Problem With "Believe Women!"
I don't "believe women!" -- nor do I simply "believe" any person who accuses another of a crime.
What I believe is that we need to look for evidence that a crime has been committed, and if it is not there or substantial enough -- or it's been lost or mishandled -- the accused must be set free.
This sometimes means guilty people will get away with their crimes. But it is essential that we not punish the innocent -- stealing decades of a person's life from them and locking them in a cage.
In 2015, the AP reports that this is what happened to a man named Clarence Moses-EL -- all the way back in 1988:
Clarence Moses-EL was convicted in 1988 and sentenced to 48 years in prison for raping and assaulting a woman when she returned home from a night of drinking. When police initially asked who attacked her, she named the man who later confessed.
More than a day after the assault, while in the hospital, the woman identified Moses-EL as her attacker, saying his face came to her in a dream.
Moses-EL has long claimed he was innocent. But his efforts to appeal his conviction were unsuccessful, in part because Denver police threw away DNA evidence from the attack. Police destroyed body swabs and the victim's clothing despite a judge's order to preserve it for testing that could have confirmed Moses-EL's guilt or innocence.
The case inspired legislation requiring the preservation of DNA evidence in major felony cases for a defendant's lifetime. Lawmakers also took the rare step of sponsoring a bill ordering a new trial for Moses-EL, but it was scrapped after then-Gov. Bill Ritter, a former prosecutor, threatened to veto it.
His break came in December 2013 when another man, L.C. Jackson, sent him a letter in prison saying he couldn't believe Moses-EL was accused of raping the woman because he 'had sex' with her at the same time that night.
'I really don't know what to say to you, but let's start by bringing what was done in the dark into the light,' Jackson wrote, according to court documents. 'I have a lot on my heart.'
The letter led to a hearing in July, where Jackson testified that he became angry during sex with the woman and hit her in the face. The woman told police that she was lying down to sleep when a man put his hands around her neck and raped her.
Believe women?
Believe in standards of evidence.
In November, 2016, Noelle Phillips writes in the Denver Post:
As a Denver judge read the words "not guilty" Monday afternoon, Clarence Moses-EL tapped his fist to his mouth, as if suppressing the urge to shout for joy inside the somber courtroom.For 29 years, Moses-EL had insisted he did not rape and beat a neighbor in 1987. After 28 years in prison, two trials, lost DNA evidence and an accuser who identified him in a dream, he was vindicated.
"It's over!" someone yelled as Moses-EL walked out of a courtroom at Denver's Lindsey-Flanigan courthouse, where about a dozen supporters cheered and applauded.
The not guilty verdict on charges of first-degree sexual assault, second-degree assault and second-degree burglary ended a long, painful saga for Moses-EL. But it also left a 29-year-old rape unsolved and a victim who will not see justice.
It isn't just in these criminal rape cases that we're supposed to just "believe"; as media reporter Eric Wemple puts it in the WaPo:
Now comes the cryptic story of Ryan Lizza's defenestration as a staff writer at the New Yorker, where he served as Washington correspondent starting in 2007. A statement from the magazine reads like this: "The New Yorker recently learned that Ryan Lizza engaged in what we believe was improper sexual conduct. We have reviewed the matter and, as a result, have severed ties with Lizza. Due to a request for privacy, we are not commenting further."
More:
Lizza rejected his employer's conclusions: "I am dismayed that The New Yorker has decided to characterize a respectful relationship with a woman I dated as somehow inappropriate. The New Yorker was unable to cite any company policy that was violated. I am sorry to my friends, workplace colleagues, and loved ones for any embarrassment this episode may cause. I love The New Yorker, my home for the last decade, and I have the highest regard for the people who work there. But this decision, which was made hastily and without a full investigation of the relevant facts, was a terrible mistake."
I don't know Lizza and we have no idea who the woman is.
Why should we "believe" anyone?
And what's with these news outlets just expecting us to take for granted that whatever accusation is being made is for real?
Wemple feels differently:
The New Yorker is a magazine that occupies an exalted position in the public trust. It publishes stories on matters of tremendous consequence, and Lizza has been a big part of that mission. If the New Yorker botches any of those stories, it owes the public a full explanation with appropriate corrections and so on. If, on the other hand, it determines that a particular personnel action is appropriate after an internal investigation, it owes the public very little -- which is precisely what it has given us.
Agree? Disagree?
via ifeminists
A few left-wing scalps like this, and people will start calling for due process in sexual harassment cases.
Snoopy at December 12, 2017 4:24 AM
"The New Yorker is a magazine that occupies an exalted position in the public trust. It publishes stories on matters of tremendous consequence"
On this I disagree. The New Yorker is a regional magazine that no one else cares about. While it may publish stories on matters of tremendous consequence so do many others who do a much better job of it.
Other than that I don't really care. It has been this way for a long time. As you point out Moses-EL as convicted back in '88. When did that SNL sexual harassment skit come out? I honestly can't remember. But as for the workplace what happened to Lizza has been normal for roughly two decades. Some point out it isn't as simple as woman makes an accusation and man gets fired. And they are right. Instead it is random and chaotic. Management makes a decision based on future expected value of the employee vs. cost to the company of the current allegations. Perhaps they make that evaluation wrong. It is all a guess in the end. What is different recently is this is happening to people who are somewhat famous instead of people no one has ever heard about.
Ben at December 12, 2017 6:30 AM
"It publishes stories on matters of tremendous consequence..."
City-folk writing for city-folk, that they take themselves SOOOO SERIOUSLY makes it all the funnier. Out here in the rectanguloid fly over states, there are very few who actually give a shit about their little rag.
bkmale at December 12, 2017 6:45 AM
"It has been this way for a long time."
You are correct. I was accused of sexual harassment in 1995. Myself and a male co-worker were having a frank discussion of some problems within the company. It was at the end of the day, and we were in a conference room by ourselves, behind a locked door. We did not know that a female co-worker was eavesdropping at the door. In passing, we discussed a woman of our acquaintance, someone who was not an employee or customer or supplier of the company -- just someone we knew in the industry. She had a reputation as a bit of a party girl, and she had done something mildly inappropriate and bothersome at a business dinner a few weeks earlier. The female co-worker who was listening in on us was not mentioned.
She filed a harassment complaint on behalf of the woman we had discussed. It was a career-ender with that company for me. I was told that there was no defense; anything that a female perceived as offensive was so by definition, and the fact that we were having a private conversation did not matter. I was suspended without pay for week, and after that, I was passed over for promotions and opportunities to get involved in new projects. I eventually took the hint and left the company.
Cousin Dave at December 12, 2017 6:57 AM
Lizza rejected his employer's conclusions
So, you're going to file a wrongful termination suit? I'm pretty sure New York is not an "at will" state, so the publisher doesn't have that leg to stand on. It will depend on the contract between the parties and what escape clauses (if any) exist.
I R A Darth Aggie at December 12, 2017 6:57 AM
Yeah, it’s a problem to automatically not believe women or assume they are to blame for what befell them. But the solution is NOT unquestioning belief. The solution is to gather evidence on both sides, whether it’s in a court of law or in you social circle.
My friend’s now-ex girlfriend accused him of abuse. My husband and I listened to her story then contacted our friend and got his side. He forearded us the sexy texts/photos she’d been sending him every day since she’d moved out of his place (he says he threw her out, perhaps prompting her retaliation) — including on days she’d messaged me with her tales of how terrified she was of him. The background of one of those photos was our guest bedroom, which has a very distinctive painting on the wall. She’d taken it the night we had invited her to a house party (a week after the alleged abuse). So not only was she still sending nudes to a “dangerous” man, she was sending him evidence that she was at our house.
We’ve since blocked her on social media and her number.
Always get both sides.
sofar at December 12, 2017 8:55 AM
Society just might be doomed.
Conan the Grammarian at December 12, 2017 12:04 PM
Feminists are over-playing women's hand. The backlash will be severe. The losses will be real, and significant.
As the professor said to the snowflake, "You can't make me respect you."
Jay R at December 12, 2017 12:04 PM
Total props to Amy for this blog post
Crid at December 12, 2017 6:39 PM
My prediction is that Amy will once again incur the wrath of BitchLasagna/anonymousie, whose efforts to be taken seriously will once again fail.
mpetrie98 at December 12, 2017 10:20 PM
We’ve since blocked her on social media and her number.
Always get both sides.
sofar at December 12, 2017 8:55 AM
And the corollary to that, is don't assume the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
I have heard men make up devious stories to keep themselves out of trouble.
But, By and large, lying to get someone else *in* trouble is overwhelmingly a woman thing.
They want you on their side, and they dont care what kind of lies they have to tell to get you there,
Isab at December 13, 2017 6:44 AM
"Believe Women" worked in Alabama. However, I predict that with the mid-term elections next year, in almost every race in which the Republican candidate is polling higher, women will start coming out and accusing him of sexual misconduct. But it's not going to have the same impact this time.
Fayd at December 13, 2017 7:16 AM
"I'm pretty sure New York is not an "at will" state..."
-- I R A Darth Aggie at December 12, 2017 6:57 AM
You are incorrect. New York is an at-will state. https://ag.ny.gov/labor/can-you-be-fired
Gail at December 13, 2017 7:37 AM
"'Believe Women' worked in Alabama."
Only up to a point. There's a lot here that you aren't getting from the national media:
* Moore has long been a controversial figure in Alabama politics. There are a lot of people who love him, and a lot of people who think he's a pompous idiot who puts his personal views above the law.
* This is karma coming back to bite the GOP establishment in the rear end. Mitch McConnell hand-picked Luther Strange as the nominee, and his PAC spent a crap-load of money to knock the best candidate, Mo Brooks, out of the runoff. He spent no money against Moore because he figured that Strange would beat Moore easily in the runoff.
* Luther Strange has suspicious-looking ties to disgraced former Gov. Robert Bentley. Strange declined to prosecute Bentley for misuse of state funds (he was using the state aircraft to visit mistresses), and Bentley appointed Strange to Jeff Sessions' seat just prior to resigning.
* It quickly became known during the runoff that Strange was being backed by McConnell. That overrode the value of Trump's endorsement of McConnell. Everyone underestimates how much the GOP Washington leadership is despised out here in the hinterlands. To compound the problem, Brooks, for tactical reasons, endorsed Moore in the runoff. So in the runoff, Moore got a lot of votes that he otherwise probably would not have gotten.
* Sessions won this seat in 2014 unopposed. The Democrats didn't bother to nominate a candidate. The state has changed some since then, but not that much.
* Brooks would have won easily against Jones. I'm guessing that a significant number of the 22,000 write-in votes went to Brooks. Note that Jones' margin of victory was 21,000 votes.
So a lot of the national media is reporting this today as a triumph for the Democrats, a vindication of the GOP establishment, and a defeat of the ogres Steve Bannon and Donald Trump. That doesn't describe the situation at all. It's the wrong template.
Cousin Dave at December 13, 2017 12:15 PM
And now the denouement: Mo Brooks announced today that he is being treated for prostate cancer.
Cousin Dave at December 13, 2017 1:47 PM
"Yes, God does work in mysterious ways,” Brooks said."
These people and their God-and-buttholes-and-abortion obsessions are weird.
Here's hoping for a speedy, science-based recovery for Msgr. Brooks.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at December 13, 2017 2:27 PM
If you took all the women and girls who, during the past five decades, had said that a man of raped, molested or sexually harassed them, you'd find some women and some girls making false accusations. Absolutely no doubt about it.
What I wonder is what percentage of all accusations the false ones would be?
JD at December 13, 2017 7:17 PM
I believe you mean Mr. Brooks. Unless he's a Monsignor in the Catholic Church.
"The creator of the universe works in mysterious ways. But he uses a base ten counting system and likes round numbers." ~ Scott Adams
Conan the Grammarian at December 14, 2017 7:14 AM
" Unless he's a Monsignor "
Arrgh. I meant 'M' Brooks, as in 'Monsieur', not 'Monsignor'. Pied, rencontrez bouche ...
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at December 14, 2017 7:47 AM
Even with the Msgr., your French, it seems, is still better than mine. I got it wrong with Mr.
Conan the Gramamarian at December 14, 2017 8:13 AM
Luther Strange has suspicious-looking ties to disgraced former Gov. Robert Bentley.
And a great name. Like the South's version of Lamont Cranston.
JD at December 14, 2017 7:32 PM
Leave a comment