722
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2024
722 points (98.9% liked)
News
22470 readers
4693 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
And the woman who accused him is now going to jail for 44 years, right? Right?
Bruh. Quoted from the article:
"They said that the prosecution’s main piece of evidence was the victim’s identification of Long weeks after the attack and that it was "the product of a suggestive identification procedure arranged by the police to target Long."
There were also numerous pieces of evidence from the scene, including suspect hair and 43 fingerprints, that could have helped exonerate him, according to his attorneys. The material, which they said did not belong to Long, was tested by investigators but not disclosed. The attorneys also accused Concord police officers of giving false testimony about the evidence at Long's trial."
It sounds like she was led by the police, and all evidence pointing to the contrary was tossed out.
Seriously. If you're raped you don't think "finding my real rapist would be great, but what I would rather do is get some random guy sent to prison because I don't like black people"
Bruh, it sounds like she was coerced and lead. She likely believed she that she had selected the correct person.
Plus, how is this not on the courts and jurors? They had actual evidence matching someone else that would have exonerated him, they purposefully ensured that he was judged by an all white jury, and they coerced/lead the victim.
Come on now guys, we all fucking know that police play head games with people to get BS confessions. This isn't hard. They wanted a conviction, and they did whatever they could to get one, no matter whether it was the correct perpetrator or not.
I'm saying a victim would not have chosen the wrong suspect maliciously in general.
Ah, my bad. I completely misread your comment! Sorry about that!
That really should depend.
It's fucked, but there needs to be malicious intent behind it. If she was actually raped, and really did believe thus guy did it, then no, we shouldn't be sending actual rape victims to prison.
There's a difference between a false ID you believe to be true and a false ID given maliciously.
It's not so simple. There's known cases where rape survivors are gaslit by cops into identifying the wrong person as the rapist.
In that case the cops should go to jail.
"Although Concord police had a photo of Long to show Bost, they decided on another route. They asked her to accompany them to the courthouse on May 10, telling Bost that the man who raped her might or might not be present. Bost sat in the second row, disguised with a red wig and sunglasses.
When Long’s case came up an hour or so later, he walked around to the defense table, wearing a flowered leisure shirt and a medium-length brown leather jacket. Even before Long spoke, Bost notified the officers that Long was her attacker. Later, at the police station, Bost picked Long’s photo out of an array. He was the only person in the array wearing a leather jacket."
[Source]
You, and anyone that agrees, should probably read the article.
Blindly reacting to shit and demanding retribution without thinking is exactly how injustices like this happen in the first place.
Honestly it was a very racist trial. You really can't blame one person.