DC Tom Posted July 5, 2018 Posted July 5, 2018 Just because it was false, doesn't mean it wasn't true. 2
Doc Posted July 6, 2018 Posted July 6, 2018 Good for him. If he didn't rape her and she falsely accused him, she should have some accountability. 4 1
mead107 Posted July 6, 2018 Posted July 6, 2018 9 minutes ago, Doc said: Good for him. If he didn't rape her and she falsely accused him, she should have some accountability. Yup
Mango Posted July 6, 2018 Posted July 6, 2018 Interesting that this is a civil case, because the DA could pursue it criminally if they thought enough of it. He wasnt found innocent, just not enough for indightment. His claim that her accusation caused him to fall in the draft is separate from actual guilt. A lot of rape cases go this way. I wouldn’t pursue it if I were him. Not really worth it. It also doesn’t clear him of anything. I say this not knowing the details of the proceedings. Just what each event actually means. 1
Hapless Bills Fan Posted July 6, 2018 Posted July 6, 2018 40 minutes ago, Mango said: Interesting that this is a civil case, because the DA could pursue it criminally if they thought enough of it. He wasnt found innocent, just not enough for indightment. His claim that her accusation caused him to fall in the draft is separate from actual guilt. A lot of rape cases go this way. I wouldn’t pursue it if I were him. Not really worth it. It also doesn’t clear him of anything. I say this not knowing the details of the proceedings. Just what each event actually means. If I'm understanding correctly, she filed a civil suit against him this past April, so this is a counter-suit. Suspect there is some legal maneuvering behind the decision. 1
TigerJ Posted July 6, 2018 Posted July 6, 2018 1 hour ago, Mango said: Interesting that this is a civil case, because the DA could pursue it criminally if they thought enough of it. He wasnt found innocent, just not enough for indightment. His claim that her accusation caused him to fall in the draft is separate from actual guilt. A lot of rape cases go this way. I wouldn’t pursue it if I were him. Not really worth it. It also doesn’t clear him of anything. I say this not knowing the details of the proceedings. Just what each event actually means. In a civil case, his lawyers only have to show a preponderence of evidence for his contention, rather than having to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she made up the accusation. I wouldn't presume to tell him what to do myself without knowing what actually did or didn't happen. I know if I were totally innocent of a rape charge, it would be very difficult to just drop it. On the other hand, if he's expecting a big money settlement, he's probably gonna be disappointed. Tough to get blood out of a turnip as they say.
Mango Posted July 6, 2018 Posted July 6, 2018 22 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: If I'm understanding correctly, she filed a civil suit against him this past April, so this is a counter-suit. Suspect there is some legal maneuvering behind the decision. Because they wouldn’t indict him for criminal charges.
Augie Posted July 6, 2018 Posted July 6, 2018 Obviously I have no idea what happened here, but if I was falsely accused I would ATTACK! Even if there was no money to re-coup my losses, it would be about principle. I’d lose even MORE money on legal fees to prove my point and cause her pain. Maybe that would get some others to think twice. 2
Hapless Bills Fan Posted July 6, 2018 Posted July 6, 2018 16 minutes ago, Mango said: Because they wouldn’t indict him for criminal charges. I'm sorry, I wasn't clear. You were saying that you wouldn't pursue the civil suit if you were Conley. I was pointing out that he filed in reaction to the woman filing a civil suit, and that I suspect there is some sort of motive for this filing by Conley's legal team based upon giving him the best defense for the civil suit vs. him filing just to pursue the matter. Not sure what that motive would be, possibly the counter-suit allows them to somehow link the cases together and bring in evidence to her civil suit that they couldn't otherwise? Or possibly just leverage for a better settlement. Just my best guess. 1
Doc Posted July 6, 2018 Posted July 6, 2018 50 minutes ago, TigerJ said: In a civil case, his lawyers only have to show a preponderence of evidence for his contention, rather than having to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she made up the accusation. I wouldn't presume to tell him what to do myself without knowing what actually did or didn't happen. I know if I were totally innocent of a rape charge, it would be very difficult to just drop it. On the other hand, if he's expecting a big money settlement, he's probably gonna be disappointed. Tough to get blood out of a turnip as they say. 41 minutes ago, Augie said: Obviously I have no idea what happened here, but if I was falsely accused I would ATTACK! Even if there was no money to re-coup my losses, it would be about principle. I’d lose even MORE money on legal fees to prove my point and cause her pain. Maybe that would get some others to think twice. This.
White Linen Posted July 6, 2018 Posted July 6, 2018 Not speaking specifically about this case because I know next to nothing about the details. In general, I find the situation where someone is falsely accused one of the more difficult things in our society. You almost can't have laws punishing false accusers because then you'd stop actual crimes from being reported in fear of getting punished if something can't be proven. I don't know what the answer is but I do know from personal experience with my brother - it's one of the most painful things in life to be falsely accused of something and the person doing it has absolutely no recourse against them. 2
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 6, 2018 Posted July 6, 2018 2 hours ago, White Linen said: Not speaking specifically about this case because I know next to nothing about the details. In general, I find the situation where someone is falsely accused one of the more difficult things in our society. You almost can't have laws punishing false accusers because then you'd stop actual crimes from being reported in fear of getting punished if something can't be proven. I don't know what the answer is but I do know from personal experience with my brother - it's one of the most painful things in life to be falsely accused of something and the person doing it has absolutely no recourse against them. The penalty for falsely accusing someone should be identical to the penalty for commiting the act. 2
GunnerBill Posted July 6, 2018 Posted July 6, 2018 6 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: I'm sorry, I wasn't clear. You were saying that you wouldn't pursue the civil suit if you were Conley. I was pointing out that he filed in reaction to the woman filing a civil suit, and that I suspect there is some sort of motive for this filing by Conley's legal team based upon giving him the best defense for the civil suit vs. him filing just to pursue the matter. Not sure what that motive would be, possibly the counter-suit allows them to somehow link the cases together and bring in evidence to her civil suit that they couldn't otherwise? Or possibly just leverage for a better settlement. Just my best guess. Yep. Pretty common civil justice tactic.
ExiledInIllinois Posted July 6, 2018 Posted July 6, 2018 1 hour ago, TakeYouToTasker said: The penalty for falsely accusing someone should be identical to the penalty for commiting the act. You live in a dream world. Do you even understand what White Linen is saying? One can accuse somebody of something, then lose the argument... The case then may be viewed that somebody falsely accused another... This would have profound ramifications when dealing with crime. Criminal behavior would skyrocket. Most people are honest. Fraud is a small % of everything. Around 5%, if even that high. There's always collateral damage, it's better to error on the side of allowing the victims to come forward instead of the fear of losing shutting them down. 1
GunnerBill Posted July 6, 2018 Posted July 6, 2018 (edited) 5 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said: The penalty for falsely accusing someone should be identical to the penalty for commiting the act. I think in rape cases there is a lot of grey. Of course there are some absolute falsehoods and those should be dealt with under the full weight of the law. But a court finding that they cannot beyond reasonable doubt prove rape occured does not make the accuser a liar. It is ground where the law has to tread extremely carefully. 3 hours ago, ExiledInIllinois said: You live in a dream world. Do you even understand what White Linen is saying? One can accuse somebody of something, then lose the argument... The case then may be viewed that somebody falsely accused another... This would have profound ramifications when dealing with crime. Criminal behavior would skyrocket. Most people are honest. Fraud is a small % of everything. Around 5%, if even that high. There's always collateral damage, it's better to error on the side of allowing the victims to come forward instead of the fear of losing shutting them down. Agree with your post. Though fraud (including cyber) as a crime type is now the most common crime in the UK. Of course a tiny percentage of that will be people being prosecuted for perverting the course of justice by making fraudulent accusations, but fraud in all its forms is no longer a tiny percentage of overall crime figures. Edited July 6, 2018 by GunnerBill 1
Coach Tuesday Posted July 6, 2018 Posted July 6, 2018 5 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said: The penalty for falsely accusing someone should be identical to the penalty for commiting the act. Yes, that ought to fully deter people who lack faith in the justice system from coming forward to report crimes against them. Well done. There are some raging psychotics around here. 1
BuffaloBillsMagic1 Posted July 6, 2018 Posted July 6, 2018 Good for him, maybe this stops or slows down any phony ones
Recommended Posts