Raped woman on trial for being raped

[unhappycamper]

CBS: Female airman claims rape, ends up on trial herself
David Edwards and Muriel Kane
Published: Wednesday August 29, 2007


CBS News reported Tuesday on a current case that calls into doubt the Air Force's promise, after a scandal four years ago, of better treatment for alleged rape victims. The case is that of Airman Cassandra Hernandez, who has stated that she was raped by three fellow airmen.

Hernandez gave an exclusive interview to CBS in which she admitted having drunk "a lot" at a party before accompanying three male colleagues to a dorm room. She acknowledged that her memory of events is fuzzy, but said she definitely remembers saying "No" and trying to push the men away. The three men allege that Hernandez started taking off her clothes and that the sex which followed was consensual.

A hearing was originally set on the rape charges, but after harsh pre-trial questioning, Hernandez decided not to testify. At that point the Air Force brought lesser charges against all four airmen, citing Hernandez for underage drinking and "indecent acts." The three men accepted minor punishments, while Hernandez refused. She is now facing a court-martial and could be jailed or expelled from the Air Force. At the same time, the three men have been granted immunity in their testimony against her.

It is that outcome that has so alarmed advocates for rape victims and raised a concern that -- regardless of whether Hernandez is correct in her accusations -- the case will have a chilling effect in the future. According to the Los Angeles Times, Hernandez' attorneys have released a statement saying that "'important, relevant evidence' was denied them during discovery and that Hernandez decided not to plead to the same indecent-act charge as the three airmen because 'she was told that she was considered guilty unless she proved herself innocent.'"

"The system failed Hernandez," one of her attorneys told CBS.


video at end of article


War is Peace.
We have always been at war with Oceania.

[TwilightGardener]

1. Can't say she was raped until she's willing to go under oath and say it--

the men involved ARE willing to go under oath to defend themselves. I'm not sure what outcome she expects--no punishment at all for violating rules?

[ThomCat]

2. She was willing to go under oath

until they rigged the system and turned it against her to make her the accused. She refused to participate in her own lynching.

This is a particularly blatant example, but it's not limited to the military. Our civilian criminal justice system often does the same thing, as much as they can get away with. The woman is immediately attacked and accused.

Nobody represents her best interests. The guys have defense attorneys. The prosecutor represents the system, not her. So she's the only one with no defense in this whole official process.

Those guys were drunk too, and provided the alcohol, but their carreers aren't ruined. It's very likely that the gang rape really did take place, and yet she's the only one whose live is ruined over this. She's the only one facing jail time.

They did everything they could to turn this whole processes into a way of attacking her, and they succeeded. What does this say about how the Air Force views rape?
x(

[TwilightGardener]

3. No testimony, no case. It's that simple. "Harsh pre-trial questioning"?

Come on. If she's confident that she's telling the truth, that wouldn't dissuade her. In a case like this, it's her word against theirs, and if she's not willing to go through with it, then there's no choice but to assume no rape was committed. You can't make allegations and then not back them up, and yet hope people will believe you anyway, and hope that the Air Force will just ignore the fact that you admitted you broke their rules. She had some very stupid lawyers, perhaps, but that's the way it goes.

[ThomCat]

4. Bull shit. Truth doesn't matter worth a damn when the system

is set up to punish you.

This is why rape is one of the least reported crimes, because it's the least prosecuted. Women know that they're going to be victimized all over again, and again, and again.

Naive B.S. about standing up for the truth doesn't make the system better than it really is. It's a bunch of guys protecting other guys, and allowing them to get away with raping and abusing women.

Even if she had been willing to go through with this and press charges, she was guaranteed to get punished more than them. She's the only witness against the three of them, and they are three witnesses against her. The guys running the system will grant her no credibilty, but are clearly granting the guys credibility. It's blatant sexism.

When you find yourself in a totally rigged game your only option is to cut your losses and leave. That's what she's trying to do.

[TwilightGardener]

6. You're really extrapolating. She's not willing to go under oath, because

she's not willing to face "harsh questioning". Presumably that would involve possible past history of promiscuity being admitted into evidence, a possibly embarrassing examination of her behavior on the night in question, perhaps being forced to admit that she doesn't really remember what happened. These men are allowed to defend themselves against a VERY SERIOUS ALLEGATION by hiring defense attorneys to pick apart her case--that's how the criminal justice system works. You attack the accuser's credibility. That's entirely fair. If she's not willing to subject herself to cross-examination, then her case must not be very credible.

[TahitiNut]

5. "citing Hernandez for underage drinking"

It seems to me that this, in itself, establishes the basis for a rape charge. If the FACTS are that she was drunk AND they had intercourse with her ... then she was clearly not in a condition to consent. Period. That's rape.

No matter what they cite her for, it's still rape.

[TwilightGardener]

7. There are no established facts until she testifies under oath, so

they can't pursue that angle. Right now, it's all allegation.