Topic:
The Model Penal Code requires that the allegation of the victim in sexual assault cases be corroborated in some manner - be it by physical evidence, or by statements, or by some other manner. Some states, as we learned, do not require corroboration. Taking into consideration that victims of sexual assault may not immediately report the crime, and may immediately shower repeatedly, may destroy the clothing they were wearing, or may traumatically block the location from their minds, do you think that this is a good practice or not? It protects victims of crimes, however, it does allow for a baseless allegation, doesn't it? Or does it?
Do you support or not support the idea of non-corroborated charges going forward? If you were the investigator, what steps would you be taking to make sure that you were bringing forward a good case? What would convince you that a case was "real"?
My classmate's response: I do not support the idea of non-corroborated charges because our system of law depends on the accused being innocent until proven guilty. This country has a history of not giving fair trial to people accused of crimes when the only evidence was a victim saying "he did it."
It's understandable that a victim of sexual assault will face mental trauma and their actions may cause the destruction of crucial evidence. But the risk of sending an innocent person to jail because of a baseless allegation seems too high unless some type of physical evidence can be presented.
What would convince me the case is real is providing physical evidence that the crime actually took place. People need to be educated on the steps that should be taken after a sexual assault. Going home to wash yourself, destroying clothing, and forgetting where the crime took place is not how you get justice for the crimes that were committed. If you came home and found one of your loved ones murdered, you wouldn't wipe up blood, pour bleach around, or move the body and forget where you moved it from. The proper steps are to call 911 for police and paramedics. After a sexual assault, the victim should notify the police and paramedics.
If I were the investigator, I would need physical evidence, pictures, messages, or a 3rd party witness to make sure I was bringing forth a good case.
What are your thoughts on this? (Personally, I think the response is based more on personal opinions than actual facts of how these procedures are typically handled.)
Classmate's response: I hands down support non-corroborated charges. You have to, as stated already victims for all sorts of reasons do not always come forward right away. This said though, does pave the way for baseless charges being filed, and turns defendants, into the victim. However, any good attorney, judge or advocate possess intuition, and should use it to its fullest extent.
First and foremost I would trust my intuition, and search for any sign of corroborative evidence. If I believed the victim I would proceed with nothing but their testimony if I had to, or if I didn't believe I would seek guidance, on how to address this.
What are your thoughts on this response? (I feel most of my classmates are basing their responses on personal opinions rather than proper procedure.)