Why the laws need changing...

[NYvice]

Not bad at all, Storyteller...

Ik70 posed a question about money equating with justice. In Civil Law, money is absolutely part of the justice because THAT IS THE PENALTY the law allows. Civil and criminal cases can be filed separately or simultaneously. Sometimes the verdict in one type of case influences the verdict in the other OR influences whether the other type of case will be filed at all. Sometimes, criminal charges cannot be filed but a suit can be brought in civil court. If that's the only justice the law allows and you're a victim, you go with what you can. Like anything else, there are those who abuse the system for personal gain, and there are those who are legitimately seeking justice in the venues available to them.

...you did just fine on your own...in fact, that was pretty damn good. I'm only adding this in to further clarify the two types of law for anyone who's still confused:

Criminal law addresses the need to investigate crimes, prosecute defendants, and hold offenders accountable, usually through penitentiary, jail or probationary sentences. Common criminal law issues would be DWI/DUI, robbery, homicide, and rape to name just a few. A District Attorney prosecutes criminal cases in court, and must prove the guilt of accused defendants (represented by private attorneys) beyond a reasonable doubt.

Civil law addresses situations in which people have been harmed, and either criminal charges cant be brought due to prosecutors not being able to meet the burden of proof for their case, or an economic award might help remedy the situation. Examples of civil law cases include divorce, disputes involving property ownership, and contractual disputes. Private attorneys generally handle both sides of a dispute involving civil law, and the issues in civil court need to be proven only by a preponderance of the evidence (totality of the circumstances involved).

Sometimes, criminal and civil charges may be brought at the same time (a thief steals your car (criminal issue--warrants punishment by fines/incarceration, etc.) and damages it while doing so (civil issue--warrants monetary or material reparation).

Hope it helps.

 

[storyteller]

Thanks, NYvice!

For confirming the difference I drew AND providing good examples and further clarification between civil and criminal cases.

 

[Redmage]

I'm no psychologist, Lindy, and I won't deny the existence of the False Memory Syndrome or the fallibility of memory.

However, I don't think that you can compare a public catastrophe like 9/11 with a very private catastrophe like sexual abuse during childhood. Repressing memories about the latter is quite often the only way for a kid to survive and remain halfway sane. Then, maybe in their 20s, they meet a loving partner, but their sexual life won't work at all. They consult a therapist who finds out about sexual abuse during childhood. Should this victim be denied justice, only because he/she found this out too late?

Hal, there are numerous documented cases of "recovered memories" of abuse that are either documentably false, patently impossible, or completely uncorroborated. If we've learned nothing else over the past 20 years of studying these cases, it is that mind and memory are incredibly malleable.

The case of Paul Ingram is hellishly frightening, and shows just how flexible the memory can be. Ingram was a true pillar of the community in Olympia, Washington: Conservative Christian, civilian volunteer at the Sherrif's department, married father of two, etc.

In 1988, Ingram's teen daughter Ericka broke down in tears at a retreat sponsored by Ingram's church. After talking with another attendee at the retreat, Ericka announced that she had recovered suppressed memories of satanic ritual abuse by her father.

Over the next several weeks both Ericka and Ingram's other daughter, Julie, began recovering hundreds of memories spanning decades of sadistic and violent sexual abuse at the hands of Paul Ingram and two of his friends. Eventually, the two girls recalled more than 800 separate incidents. They talked about satanic rituals in which over a dozen people participated, with sadistic gang rapes of both young girls, animal sacrifices, and books that shed blood and spontaneously burst into flames.

Paul Ingram could not explain this. He had no memories of any of these events, he claimed. Nevertheless, he was unwilling to call his daughters liars, especially since they were clearly traumatized. Ingram's minister suggested to him that he might have been influenced by demonic forces. Under questioning (without an attorney present), Ingram stated that the only explanation he could think of was that he must have suppressed his own memories of the events.

A pathological pattern soon developed. Ericka or Julie would recover a memory of some incident of rape or abuse. The police, Ingram's minister, and a "therapist" would present the allegations to Ingram, and he would then return to his jail cell to pray. When he came out, he would report that he had recovered the memory and confess to whatever the girls had claimed.

Eventually the court brought in an outside expert named Richard Ofshe. Ofshe had studied recovered memories and ritual abuse allegations for many years, and he noticed some odd patterns in the girls' recollections. For example, Ericka could recall the exact date of an event, the names of everyone there, and exactly what each person had done to her. But she couldn't remember whether those present had been sitting or standing.

Ofshe decided to try an experiment. He made up a story that had supposedly been "recovered" by the girls and presented it to Paul Ingram. After a period of prayer in his cell, Ingram dutifully "recalled" the events that Ofshe had made up! These completely fabricated memories were as clear to Ingram as any of the other things he had confessed to.

Ofshe immediately filed a report with the court stating that he believed the memories reported by Ingram and his daughters to be false. Unfortunately the police, Ingram's minister, and the "therapist" continued just as they had, and Ingram confessed to more and more false stories. Soon, Ingram entered a formal plea of "Guilty" to several counts of rape and other crimes. He was convicted, and sentenced to 20 years in prison.

Once he actually got to prison and away from the constant pressure of the interrogations, Ingram recanted his false memories. Unfortunately Washington law does not allow a new trial after a plea of Guilty, so Ingram remains in prison to this day.

 

[new2sceenbob]

I have no qualms

I have no qualms about the law being changed in such a way that more abusers of children can be prosecuted for their crimes! In fact they can execute bastards like that and I wouldn't shed a tear!

Sincerely,
Bob

 

[LindyHopper]

I have no qualms about the law being changed in such a way that more abusers of children can be prosecuted for their crimes! In fact they can execute bastards like that and I wouldn't shed a tear!

Well, that's all fine and dandy, except for the part about identifying who the child abusers actually are. Allowing "recovered memories" as evidence just opens the door to a lot of innocent people being persecuted for things they never did.

 

[new2sceenbob]

Omg!

Well, that's all fine and dandy, except for the part about identifying who the child abusers actually are. Allowing "recovered memories" as evidence just opens the door to a lot of innocent people being persecuted for things they never did.

OMG! I was only referring to child molesters where there was sufficient evidence to prove them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt! Just like there is no statute of limitations for murder, I don't believe that a child molester should be able to get away with his crime because of a statute of limitations! I never meant to imply that I wanted to open the door for innocent people to be wrongly convicted of crimes...

Sincerely,
Bob