Quote:
Originally Posted by GioforPM
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).
|
OK. Firstly, my post doesn't claim that any of this is actually the case. It is 100% speculation based on my own logic.
I never said that out of court settlements are any indication that the accusations are false. I said that they more frequently are settled this way when it involves people of fame/money because it is less of a headache for them to pay someone to go away than to go through a trial to prove their innocence REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE TRUTH IS (that's a direct quote from the post you quoted).
Because of this scenario (ie, that a wealthy person is more likely to settle than to go through a trial exposing their personal lives) that IT IS LIKELY the amount of false accusations among celebs/wealthy people is higher than those among normal people. even if it's 3 out of 1000 vs 1 out of 1000, that is still higher.
The point is that you can't take data from the entire population on real vs fake assaults and apply it to publicly exposed people of wealth. The amount of people in that community pre-disposed to rape someone is likely the same as the general population, but the likelyhood of them being falsely accused of rape is IMO likely to be higher than the general population, because the potential payoffs for the accuser are much higher.
As far as I'm concerned, an out of court settlement looks worse on the accused than the accuser. Personally, regardless of how rich or famous I was, I would be doing all I could to prove my innocence.