Quote:
Originally Posted by MattyC
The point I was trying to make is that someone is far more likely to go through all this if it is against someone of significant fame/wealth because the payoff may actually be worth it. More often than not, these types of cases are settled out of court for undisclosed amounts, and the public never finds out the truth and so we come to our own conclusions based on the released evidence.
I never said that the amount of actual assaults is outweighed by false accusations, far from it. I said that, in the case of people of fame/wealth, they are far more likely to be falsely accused than the average person (note* this again, does not mean that there are more false accusations than real ones, just that there are likely more false accusations against celebs than regular people). So you can't use the amount of false accusations vs real assaults from the general public as a framework for how often false accusations vs real assaults would happen for celebrities. Those numbers will not be the same.
That doesnt at all imply that the amount of actual assault is less than false ones, just that the amount of false accusations against celebrities will outweigh false accusations of normal joe blow, exactly because of what you mentioned. The payoff isn't worth it to falsely accuse someone if they have nothing to offer in settlement, and an average person would likely be more concerned with going through a trial to prove their innocence rather then just pay some money to make it go away, regardless of what the truth is.
|
There is actually no evidence or studies to support what you are suggesting. The cases that are settled are no more indicative of false accusations that of true ones in which the victim decides not to put herself through the process (look at what happened with Tyson's accuser).