Wednesday, March 11, 2009

Why Aren't "Victims' Rights Advocates" Liable?

Readers Note: As first published this post's title was: Why Aren't "Victims Rights Advocates" Libel?

That drew this email from one of JinC's many outstanding "editors:" Shouldn't your Title be:

Why Aren't "Victims' Rights Advocates" Liable

Of course. I apologize for my error and thank the "editor" for the correction.



At MSNBC today - - -

For 11 years, a North Carolina woman slept comfortably, secure in the knowledge that she had put the man who raped her in prison for life. And for 11 years, that man endured the endless days of confinement praying that someday, somehow, his innocence would be proved.

On Tuesday, Jennifer Thompson-Cannino and the man she mistakenly put in prison, Ronald Cotton, shared a couch on the TODAY show as they told co-host Meredith Vieira a tale about pain and redemption — and the tricks that memory can play on people with the best intentions. …

The rest of the story’s here.

What a tragedy for Ronald Cotton!

And what a reminder of the false and dangerous claims “victims’ rights advocates” often make.

When was the last time you heard one them say “rape victims” often lie as Crystal Mangum did in the Duke/Durham case when she claimed 20, 5, 3, 4 Duke lacrosse players raped her?

When was the last time one of those "advocates" admitted in the midst of a page one rape investigation that women who are raped often ID the wrong man and send him to prison?

When was the last time you heard a newspaper or politician say “victims’ rights advocates” should be licensed and subject to malpractice suits just as physicians, nurses, mental health professions, attorneys and others are?