55
This image captures the moment a former high school football star breaks down in court when his rape charge is dismissed. The dismissal occurred after the 16-year-old accuser admitted that the alleged incident never happened, concluding six years he spent in prison.
I think we would all agree she deserves some form of punishment but I think we would also agree we don't want to scare off other false accusers from rescinding their lies. That makes figuring out what to do a lot less black and white.
Genuine question: why would we prioritize avoiding deterrence of rescinding false accusations over deterrence of the false accusation itself?
Genuine Answer: While it may deter new instances, it comes at the cost of potentially harming the currently falsely accused by never letting them get justice because the fake accuser decides the cost is too high to come clean. The most precious thing we have is our time and freedom. What decision would you prefer if you were in the shoes of the falsely accused?
Its not ideal, but it is something that requires a little more consideration.
tbh I would want to see numbers on % of false accusations resolved through admission vs litigation to make this call. If the actual rate of admission is incredibly low already then the value would be negligible. And you have to weigh that against the deterrence value, and the value punishment provides in emotional restitution to the victims.
Fair point. Perhaps a grandfather clause of sorts then to cover both instances?
I think it's also worth adding, the justice system failed this man as well.