Innocent until proven guilty protects all of us bostonherald.com/opinion/op_ed/…
There are reasons our legal system requires proof of allegations. Conviction by accusation has a horrific pedigree. The terms “witch hunt” and “lynching” are not hyperbole: In Salem, in 1692-93, 20 people were hanged — most of them women.
Nearly 4,000 blacks were lynched in the U.S. between 1877 and 1950 — many for false accusations of sexual assault against white women.
People whipped into a fervor of righteous indignation, unconstrained by process and the rule of law, do unspeakably evil things.
People whipped into a fervor of righteous indignation, unconstrained by process and the rule of law, do unspeakably evil things.
False accusations can destroy someone’s career, livelihood and reputation. (This is why we have defamation laws.)
We cannot punish one man for the sins of others. We cannot countenance the abolition of the presumption of innocence.
We cannot punish one man for the sins of others. We cannot countenance the abolition of the presumption of innocence.
Nor can we — even out of commiseration with the victim of an alleged assault — say her accusation is enough to convict someone, whether in a court of law or in the court of public opinion.
This isn’t cruel. It isn’t heartless. And it certainly isn’t patriarchy. It’s self-preservation. Women have been hanged. Women have been lynched. Women have been falsely accused and have been the false accusers.
Women can be destroyed, too.
Women can be destroyed, too.
