339
Not long enough. That's not what he would have gotten.
This kind of stuff boils my blood. Some asshole drags innocent people through some horrible shit for NO REASON.
It would take years to shake that out of you after it was over and done with. Also imagine what family, friends, employers, would say and think or do because of accusations like this.
This is so fucked up.
So slander is as bad as rape?
Slander that implicates an innocent of a crime should carry the sentence of that crime. His life is forever changed, and is forever linked with that accusation, regardless of his innocence.
Slander that implicates an innocent of a crime should carry the sentence of that crime
Why should someone be sentenced to death for falsely accusing someone of murder?
Whatever the sentence would be for the false accusation, yes.
These situations where people are being convicted for these false accusations don't come from simple misunderstandings or poor testimony, they come from people purposefully making false accusations and even fabricating evidence. It's effectively conspiracy to defraud the government and waste resources as well.
If anything I'd say the sentences for these should even be higher than the accusation punishment, since these people are purposefully trying to ruin the life of the accused and abusing the justice system to try and do it for them.
That doesn’t answer my question
Why should the penalty for falsely accusing someone of murder be death?
You seem to be under the mistaken assumption, that a simple accusation by itself means something, it doesn't. They don't prosecute a mistaken eyewitness for false testimony. A simple false claim doesn't bring the wrath of the system down on someone to the point where they are charged for those false claims, you've got to show a complete disregard for reality and the system for things to reach that level.
People lie about shit all the time, especially to police, very few reach the point where they are prosecuted for those lies. The ones that rise to the level where they bother to actually do something about those false claims should receive the same full punishment of those false accusations.
If you knowingly falsely accuse someone of murder with the intention of having them be prosecuted and sentenced for a crime you know they did not commit, then you should receive that same punishment, not a slap on the wrist like a year of prison and some fines.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Because if the sentence for the innocent person would have been carried out as the death penalty, then an innocent person would have died. Thankfully, in this case, the justice system worked, but if it hadn't, the outcome would have been the figurative end of that person's life. The weight of the accusation, especially a malicious one (which this was), should be born by the accuser, should it be proven false.
The justice system executes innocent people even without false accusations. Why do false accusers deserve this more than, say, judges or prosecutors who oversaw the case of an innocent person sentenced to death?
Because the judges an the prosecutors are (we hope) acting in the best interest of the general public, and want to see justice served. They are not the instigators. That's like saying that your team lost a game because the referee called the rules as they were written. The judge and the prosecutor are (again, we hope) bystanders and only there to help move justice along.
load more comments
(8 replies)
It shouldn't be, unless the falsely accused was sentenced to death based purely on the accuser's lies.
That would be murder, which can carry capital punishment.
So murdering someone by falsely getting him the death penalty is somehow better than murder by poisoning?
If someone tries to get a death sentence for an innocent person, that is attempted murder. If the punishment for attempted murder in your country is the death penalty, the false accuser should be charged with the death penalty.
Note that this is all assuming that it's proven the accuser did a false claim. The accused being found not guilty is not enough to say that it was a false accusation. Due to the different standards of proof.
I shall answer, because I am a firm believer in capital punishment.
Death should be given because death should be the punishment for all crime. The white blood cells inside your body agree with me - they are eager to give the death penalty to any criminals infesting your body. There's no pardons or rehabilitation or anything like that; your white blood cells know that there can be no tolerance for crime.
More blood for the blood god is an acceptable answer, thank you for your honesty 👍
Such a bad faith line that tries to down play the damage this did. Do better.
Could not agree more. Not only that, but the kind of damage this does to people with legitimate claims is hard to calculate...
I think she should have gotten what he would have gotten for punishment.
You mean rape and falsely reporting a crime are two different crimes?
In this house, we believe in false equivalences and appeals to pathos!
You mean false equivalencies and reality are two different things?
The court press release said she was sentenced to "45 days to 23 months" and the linked news article garbled that to "23 months and 45 days" which they somehow added up to "nearly 2 years". No idea why the sentence itself has such a wide range.
Usually ours to account for things like good behavior/parole I think? I always assumed they used that upper range as the stick part of the incentive to not fuck up again once you’re out of prison since getting sent back would make you serve the longest possible sentence.
could be, or more likely in my mind it's just an ai fuckup.
Nearly two years in prison for falsely accusing someone but if that innocent man got a sentence it would have been 20 plus years...
Yes. It should have been at least a few more years in prison and a felony rap too.
And if a non-innocent rape the man would get community service.
I'm glad she got charged at all, but what a weak sentence.
No mention of motivation. I don't understand why anyone would choose a random person to just utterly destroy like that. Like even though he's been found innocent can you imagine the horror of being told you were accused of that?
Anyone read more elsewhere?
Those are some dead/crazy eyes...yikes
How the hell do you get from "I saw his truck" to "he tried to kidnap and rape me"
Ugh, not nearly enough of a sentence.
The motivation is what I really want to know. Given that it was just some random person, I can only hope she figured they'd never find him? So many crimes go unsolved, it's surprising they found this random man with a truck— unless she actually remembered his license plate or something, but that would indicate it was a lot less random. Maybe this wasn't as random as she's saying, maybe she got in a road rage incident with him...
I guess it's because I'm not the kind of person who'd do this, but I just don't understand why someone would. If you want the social media "clout," presumably for a gofundme or something, you don't need to go to the police about it. Even if you thought you had to, a super vague report would probably lead to a cold case that would waste everyone's time, but at least no one would go to jail. If you were truly mentally ill and delusional, you probably wouldn't admit even to yourself that it didn't happen.
People like this should get the sentence of what they wrongly accused somebody for.
Good news. Terrible emotional comment section.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2025
339 points (100.0% liked)
News
28700 readers
3774 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
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. 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS