mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net wrote:

> Eric Takabayashi <etakajp@yahoo.co.jp> wrote:
> > mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net wrote:
>
> >> >> What is a "statistically uncommon trial"?
> >>
> >> > Do trials occur in 100% of incidents, or even reports (true or false), of sexual
> >> > assault?
> >>
> >> Nope.
> >>
> >> Why do you think they should?
>
> > It would be an excellent indication of the effectiveness of law enforcement, and people's
>
> Sorry, it doesn't follow at all.
>
> There can be plea bargains,

You mean deciding beforehand on a possibly lesser charge, instead of the trial process to
"prove" what actually happened, and whether or not it constitutes a crime?

> dismissed charges due to innocence,

Deciding before trial that they are innocent? Are you saying that trial is not always
necessary?

> cases where the accused is charged with other unrelated crimes easier to
> prove, etc.

It is YOU who want trials for us to "know", as if "decisions" make something fact.

> >> > Yes, because a woman who was raped probably knew it since it happened.
> >>
> >> And someone who simply makes an accusation to get back as someone knows
> >> it didn't.
>
> > That is correct. But you, as years ago, are focusing on a statistical improbability, from
> > 2% to 8% of claims.
>
> No, I'm focussing on rights of the accused.

And I'm focussing on the rights of those who have already been victimized and their own need
to have justice served, too late.

> >> But you see no problem with the latter, oddly.
>
> > No, because a false accusation would be a lie, putting an "innocent" person in
>
> Then you must protect the rights of the accused, yes?

Not in the way that you seem to argue, and not as seen in actual practice. In many cases, for
example, it is the criminal themself who must step forward to reveal a crime has been
committed, as in say, an unsolved murder. If they simply remain silent, or take the Fifth when
confronted if suspected, what can law enforcement do to properly investigate or prosecute the
unsolved crime?

> > I do not believe that every conviction represents an actual crime took place, but I am
> > even less inclined to believe that 5 out of 6 reports are lies.
>
> Are you aware of the various definitions of rape?

Why does it matter? Are some rapes not punishable offenses?

> > Then there is the issue of up to nine out of ten, or ten out of eleven sexual assaults
> > going completely unreported.
>
> Since sexual assault can be a  slap on the butt, that's not surprising.
>
> That's one of the problems with broad definitions...

What are you implying about a slap on the butt vs. for example, violent penetration by a gang
of strangers, in the eye of any applicable laws?

> >> I can't come up with an example in recent memory where there wasn't at
> >> least an investigation.
>
> > The investigation that takes place before presentation during a trial (which might take
> > years and cost hundreds of thousands of dollars or even more),
>
> Very seldom, in fact.

Is cursory questioning by a single patrol officer who may make the decision not to file the
report or pursue the matter any further, as I have experienced, the same as what may take
place before an actual trial according to the Constitution for us to properly "know"?