How do you feel about this ? - sensitive subject - not a debate

Bee_Kay wrote: http://talkleft.com/new_archives/005541.html

I came across this story quite awhile ago, and a story I read on the news got me thinking about this.

Should there be compensation for those falsely accused?
Should those girls have paid a stiffer penalty for falsely accusing an innocent person?
Should the man get some form of compensation?
Should a more thourough investigation have been done? If so, like what?

Not a debate, this just struck me as very very sad. It could very easily ruin a persons/family's life.

Kirstenmumof3 replied:
I definately think that the girls should have beeen given a much harsher punishment. It's sad to think that those girls centred out a homeless person in such a horrible way. I feel badly for the man and beleive that he should recieve some compensation for spending all that time behind bars as an innocent man.

Hillbilly Housewife replied: While I agree that the justice system in this case, sucks for not having thouroughly investigated the complaint, yadda yadda yadda.... but at least he got 3 square meals a day and a warm/dry place to sleep for eight whole months.

As for compensation - well - for what - time spent fed and warm/dry as opposed toh ungry and cold/wet? it's not like he lost a salary, or a home, he didn't have them anyways. Maybe for slander, libel, emotional trauma.. and the "what ifs" if he "might" have gotten a job/home etc if he was on the street as opposed to locked up are woth something... heck - he hasd no money - if he can sue for emotional trauma and win, bravo, and I hope his house will be nice.

Yeah - that was probably bad to say... but it's true.

jcc64 replied:

Are you serious, Rocky??!!!!!

He lost his FREEDOM, the only thing he had left at this point. Just b/c he's homeless doesn't mean he's better off in jail. So, what, if you don't have much to lose, your rights aren't as important as someone who does? I'm not delusional enough to believe that everyone is capable of receiving justice regardless of their economic health, but your blatant contempt for our weaker brothers and sisters is pretty shocking. What kind of setup are you suggesting- why not just round up all the homeless and mentally ill and just throw them in jail since their lives suck anyway??

As for the girls, well, I think the best punishment for them would be to work in a homeless shelter for the rest of their lives.

mckayleesmom replied:
Totally agreeing with Jeanie here.... And not only that, but what probably happened to this poor guy when he was in jail? Does he deserve that too? Other people in jail don't treat people that attack or hurt kids to nicely.

Bee_Kay replied: Sorry..... Maybe I should have clarified....

My intent wasn't really to focus on that particular man (being homeless and all)..... Just any person in general that has been falsely accused of a crime against children (teens or preteens in particular who are clever enough to "come up with a story", no matter what the reason is they made the accusation).

How about an average person that shells out TONS of money for an attorney? Should the families of the accusers be held financially liable if the end result is that the accusation is false?

jcc64 replied:

yes.

punkeemunkee'smom replied: Yes, in cases where one party FALSELY accuses another-I believe there should be compensation to the accused as well as criminal prosecution of the accuser. In cases where the case was just unproven-NO- I don't think we should make it any scarier for someone to come forward with,say, abuse allegations because of fear that they may be fined if their case is unproven. In criminal cases where the police have done there job and come to the WRONG conclusion I believe those people should receive compensation BUT I do not think that anyone who investigated should be punished.

Side-bar I have watched many Datelines and 20/20s where I think to myself-HOW did they just find this person guilty??? I think there needs to be a greater respect for the reasonable doubt clause in our justice system......I have the same thoughts on a lot of people they find innocent too-so I was just making a generalized statement about this topic.

Hillbilly Housewife replied:

Maybe I'm explainig myself wrong.

I don't mean that because he was homeless he should feel happy he was fed etc... I just mean he shouldn't get special treatmeant just because he was homeless. I mean that one good thing about the whole ordeal was that he WASN'T hungry and cold... even thoguh he was in jail, which sucked.

that probably sounds awful and wrong too - it's really not how I intend to have it sound. Believe me - the last thing I have is disregard for the weaker...

I mean it as in: The rich lose their job, their wealth, their home potentially - but this guy didn't have that stuff to lose. Yes, he lost his freedom... and yes it sucks... but they won't make that big a deal bout it. How long was the alst guy wrongly imprisoned in jail for, and how long was he on the news? How much did he get, money wise? And he wasn't homeless - it accounted for everything else he'd lost. For this guy - sad truth may be that he will not be compensated as much as if he were rich to begin with, which is crock, and unfair... who knows if he would have struck it rich by being out there - he could have spend 1$ on a lottery ticket and been an instant millionaire - but that chance was taken away because he was incarcerated. Do you think that they will award compensation on chances and possibilities of what "could" have happened? I don't want to sound mean - but he lost his freedom...that's about all the "law" will see, not all the "what ifs" in life that he "could have" lost... know what I mean?

Freedom may be priceless.... but life isn't free.

If I could say it in french and be understood, this would go soooo much smoother.

jcc64 replied:

I don't see where he got any "special" treatment, simply b/c he was homeless. Quite the contrary, had he had $$$, he would have theoretically been able to defend himself in court with a competent lawyer and not spent a day in jail.
People with money receive special treatment in court all the time (cough**OJ**cough)- people without are routinely screwed. Case in point.

I think I understand what you're trying to say, Rocky. There is no meaningful way to determine and/or compensate what he lost as a result of his incarceration b/c he had no material possessions to begin with. Still, there are damages for emotional pain and suffering, which certainly sounds relevant here, but not being a lawyer, not sure how it all works.

btw- didn't know english wasn't your first language!

Hillbilly Housewife replied: I should have written "He shouldnt get diferent treatmeant... he should have had as much of a chance as the next guy to try to get outta there."

I've got my foot in my mouth today... dunno what's wrong.

Hillbilly Housewife replied: OMG check out my spelling. Geez! That's what you get for t1h and not re-reading... lol

jcc64 replied: If I was trying to communicate these nuanced ideas in a second language, there's no telling what kind of trouble I would get myself in. I think you do a good job, Rocky! Glad we cleared that up!

Hillbilly Housewife replied:
Thanks Jeanne!

I think this comes into play why a lot of members may think my posts are sometimes controversial... I really don't mean to come off the way I sometimes seem to...



I'm glad we got this cleared up to - thanks for your understanding what my "intent" was!!!

TLCDad replied: I did not see this in the article... but just curious does anyone know if the homeless man had a criminal record? I am not asking like I assume he must or anything, just curious and wondering if that what caused the police to make a quick judgement.

Also it was not mentioned in the article as well (at least I do not think) but did the girls have any marks or signs of an attack.

I guess we also need to look at as if; what if the girls were telling the truth? Then we would want someone like that off the streets.

You would expect that the police would be able to tell if they were lieing.

MommyToAshley replied:
Rod has a point, and I am not saying that because he is my husband. We are usually on the opposite side of a debate.

But, had this man been let go on the presumption of innocence, and then later it was discovered that he was guilty then I am sure we would be posting here how wrong it is that they put this person back on the streets with innocent children around. I think in cases where children are at risk, it is better to error on the side of caution. (Although I don't understand how they held him that long without evidence... the girls must have been convincing).

With that being said, I think the girls should be severely punished. They need to understand the seriousness of what they did and others need to be discouraged from making false accusations. Not only does it hurt the reputation of this person and deprived him of his freedom, but it also hurts the credibiltiy of legitimate claims by children.