#MeToo Ethics: Prosecuting To Stigmatize The Accused

It’s not just the impeachment..apparently prosecutors are beginning to adopt the Democratic Party’s theory that it is appropriate to force a trial when there is no chance at conviction just to stigmatize the accused. This is a clear breach of prosecutor ethics, but ethics schmethics, the ends justify the means, right?

The area in which this despicable strategy is surfacing is—and this should be no surprise—the realm of #Me Too. In Maine,  Natasha Irving , who is the top prosecutor for Knox, Lincoln, Sagadahoc and Waldo counties,  wants to reform how the legal system prosecutes sexual assault cases, believing all women so those who come forward know they’ll be “supported.” This means, according to  Irving, that prosecutors shouldn’t decline to prosecute a sexual assault case just because they “think it’s too hard to prove.”

“Individually, I think that response is very damaging to a survivor,” she says. “If they weren’t believed initially, they don’t have faith that they’re going to be believed if they come forward again. Or that they somehow will be put on trial for what happened instead of the perpetrator. There’s a lot of shame and blame that the victims often carry.”

Yes, that’s a problem. A greater problem is prosecutors bring cases to trial when the don’t have enough evidence to prove the defendant guilty. Then they are just counting on an incompetent jury, which isn’t that much of a longshot. The attitude Irving is endorsing is how black men end up in prison for murders they didn’t commit.

Oh, now, come on… she’s just advocating prosecutions based on the word of a single witness for rape, not murder. Big difference!

No, in fact there’s no difference. The prosecution ethics are exactly the same for all crimes. Applying different standard  based on the gender of an accuser is denial of equal rights and an unethical abuse of state power.

Irving says she has simplified the criteria for how her office will prosecute sexual assault allegations to a two-step process:

  • Is there a credible allegation?
  • Is the victim willing to move forward with prosecution knowing they might have to testify publicly?

Ah. The Kavanaugh approach. The method employed by universities after the Obama “Dear Colleague” letter.

The objective in all this is to smear the alleged perpetrator; this follows the strategy the Democrats followed in their impeachment plot. They knew they didn’t have a cae for impeachment; they knew they would lose the trial in the Senate. But they felt the stigma applied to the President would be worth the effort. Even with the inevitable acquittal, the impeachment would mean “a permanent asterisk” next to Trumps’ name.

An acquittal for rape or sexual assault does not erase the stigma of being tried for such a crime. This using the process as the punishment, setting out to ruin a man’s reputation without just cause. Someone tried for rape may lose his job, family and more. That’s great, Irving says. It will encourage victims to come forward. “We don’t want law enforcement or prosecutors to ever think that something is a ‘he said she said.’” she explains…even when that’s what it is. Irving wants to encourage false accusations because, after all, there aren’t that many of them. “Only” 2%-8%  of sexual assault accusations reported to law enforcement turn out to be false, according to Maine’s statistics.

Tell it to Brian Banks.

Natasha Irving is unfit to be a prosecutor. She has a toxic bias and conflict of interest, and is advocating conduct that violates the Maine Bar’s Rules of Professional Conduct, specifically Rules 1.7 b (personal conflicts of interest) and 3.8 (Duties of a Prosecutor.)

She must be removed immediately, before she ruins any more lives.


Use the Twitter link to share on Facebook: https://twitter.com/CaptCompliance/status/1224016350311583746

16 thoughts on “#MeToo Ethics: Prosecuting To Stigmatize The Accused

  1. This reminds me of Pelosi’s claim that you cannot have an acquittal without a fair trial. For someone so committed to ensuring the Constitution is followed what part of innocent until proven guilty do these people not understand.

    Justice is no longer a goal. The goal is to amass power throughthe judiciary. So, where is the Maine Bar Association on this? I want to know how one defines credible. Would this prosecuter pursue a sexual assault case against a female perpetrator based solely on the accusation by a male “victim”?

  2. “Only” 2%-8% of sexual assault accusations reported to law enforcement turn out to be false, according to Maine’s statistics.

    There is this querstion on Quora.


    Only 5% of criminal accusations are false. Why do we need the Innocence Project?

    You are depending on one article for basis to your findings. the article you did not provided is grossly under estimated for the following reasons;

    That article deals with “criminal accusations” against those who are convicted by either jury or judge.
    If you research how many actually go to trial you find that in the US 95% of cases are achieved through plea deals, and only 5% go to trial and get convicted. Please read the following articles; The truth about false assault accusations, and https://www.nsvrc.org/sites/defa…, and False accusation – Wikipedia, and ScienceDirect, and Day-care sex-abuse hysteria – Wikipedia, and Kern County child abuse cases – Wikipedia, and List of wrongful convictions in the United States – Wikipedia, and How to Handle False Child Abuse Allegations, and 2 Rising Incarceration Rates, and Man falsely accused of murder freed after 13 years behind bars, and Top 10 books about miscarriages of justice, and A man who was wrongly convicted of murder when he was 14 clears his name after 27 long years, and How Many People Are Wrongly Convicted? Researchers Do the Math., and False Arrests, Convictions and Imprisonments, and A Criminal Justice Commission to Study Wrongful Convictions 38 California Western Law Review 2001-2002, and Convicted but innocent, and National Criminal Justice Reference Service, I could go on for days, why do we incarcerate so many in relation to the world? Incarceration in the United States – Wikipedia, ?
    We have over 2.2 million adults in our prisons and jails these days according to the US Bureau of Justice, every year in the US ten to fifteen million people are arrested, USA – number of arrests for all offenses 1990-2017 | Timeline, your justice system has stolen at least 20,000 years from innocent people. https://www.washingtonpost.com/, in 2012 the conviction rate in the US was around 93% this is bolstered by the fact that all plea bargains are considered convictions, this is an unusually high percentage especially when looking at more serious crime like murder, rape, child molest, etc. see Convictions per 1,000 population, in comparison to the UK the US has much higher violent crimes.
    Now lets take just California and break down the numbers in 2015–16 we had 200,200 criminal cases, even at your low 5% estimate that equals over 1,000 false accusations, now lets look at misdemeanor cases around 841,716 that would be 4,208 false accusations, see http://www.courts.ca.gov/documen…,. Do you still feel we don’t need the Innocence Project, or the Fair Punishment Project, or the ACLU?
    Not only do we need more like them, but we need reform that will hold our corrupt judicial system accountable, and the people making false accusations accountable not with civil penalties but with criminal penalties, that means time in their own jails and prisons!

    First, the “5%” figure you cited is nonsense. The fact is, nobody knows how many criminal accusations are false. Any number is a guess, and impossible to back up.

    But, if we pretend for a moment that your 5% is accurate, and that 5% of all of those who are found to be guilty are in fact truly innocent — that is outrageous, and we as a society need to try to do something to fix it.

    When it comes to an innocent human being, 4% is too many.

    When it comes to an innocent human being, 3% is too many.

    When it comes to an innocent human being, 2% is too many.

    When it comes to an innocent human being, 1% is too many.

    If you are the person who has been falsely accused, and you find yourself falsely convicted, and incarcerated in a prison, I suspect you will not be quibbling over numbers, or percentages. You will just know that a terrible injustice has occurred, and that you have now lost your freedom.

    The “Innocence Project” exists because we know that there are some people sitting in prison that are 100% innocent. The “Innocence Project” exists because we know that there are people sitting on death row that are 100% innocent. The “Innocence Project” exists because we know that there are people who have been executed who were 100% innocent.

    In my own state, 13 people have now been released from death row after DNA evidence showed they could not possibly have been guilty. They were waiting to die. Some of them were released because of the “Innocence Project.”

    Four of those 13 people who were on death row had been awaiting their execution for more than fifteen years, before judges were made aware of their innocence. Two were within weeks of their scheduled death sentence, by lethal injection.

    Those of colour and the poor are overrepresented in that 5% or whatever the true number may be. They are more likely to be initially targeted as suspects and charged. Less likely to know their rights. Less likely to afford a thorough defence, and less likely to afford appeals etc. So there are people languishing in jail just for being poor or black or both.

    That’s why the innocence project is needed

    These answers are so fucking obvious.

    How can anyone claim that “Only” 2%-8% of sexual assault accusations reported to law enforcement turn out to be false” is an argument?

    • Especially when, as you look at the stats which spawned that statistic, that’s 2-8% of accusations which are provably, obviously false. There’s whole other group of unlikely to be true, a group of impossible to knows, a group of probably trues, and another 2-8% on the other end of the bell curve of absolutely, provably trues.

      So when they say 2-8% are false, they’re implying that 92-98% are true. When in reality, the number is likely in the 30-50% range, which also puts it right in line with false accusations of about every other crime on the books. It also puts it at number 3 of my favorite fake stats, right there with 77% of every dollar and 50% of all marriages end in divorce.

  3. Irrational social justice warriors, and people like Natasha Irving, have infiltrated all aspects of our society and are perforating everything right down to public education with absurd ideas most of which are driven by emotional hysteria. The hippies of the 50’s thru 70’s and their indoctrinated children have infected all aspects of our society with a cancer that is dumbing down a huge chunk of our society into a non-logical, non-critical thinking, emotion-driven, tunnel-vision, hive-minded, emotional troglodyte drones and their efforts have driven divisive wedges deep into the social structure of the United States. The ridiculousness from these people is just one of the side effects of apathy. We as a society are reaping the “benefits” of apathy.

    “Apathy in political activism has left a serious intellectual sucking black hole in our social fabric creating a fertile well-fed breeding ground for irrational emotionally driven behavior to flourish. A sincere lack of critical thinking skills and common sense is now obvious in 21st century public activism and it’s especially evident since mid 2016.”

    “We are seeing the building blocks of a civil society crumble before our eyes and cult-like hordes of stupid people are the unilateral crushing force and it’s all enabled by blind apathy.Apathy Fertilizes A Breeding Ground For Stupidity

  4. I wonder if the Maine AG, or whoever oversees prosecutors in the state, has a Professional Standards section. If so, that section needs to start looking into this. They won’t though, because Maine is in the hands of the Democratic Party now, who are all about pandering to anyone who claims to be a victim.

      • And who still, as a percentage of population, gets accused of these crimes the most.

        Hint — it isn’t white males. Whites are arrested at approximately twice the rate of African Americans, despite making up more than 5 times more of the population.

        If Republicans were advocating this same idea, do you suppose the Left would point out this disparity?

        I’m thinking yes…

  5. When I bring these sorts of incidents up to my wife, you know examples of political, judicial, or ethical malfeasance perpetrated by the progressive left, and how wide spread it is becoming through all levels of our society-I inevitably get ‘hand waved’ away and told either:

    A. “It’s just a small but loud vocal minority that don’t have any real political or societal power-and it’s just one incident that is being blown out of proportion.”


    B. “That’s just a right-wing conspiracy theory, because the New York Times/WaPo/Rachel Maddow said so.”

    Breaks my heart, because I know she’s smarter than that-but how does one go about breaking one’s spouse out of an echo chamber?

  6. The Johnny Depp-Amber Heard fiasco is a celebrity bonanza of why women shouldn’t automatically be believed. Yet, I still read justifications of Heard because, you know, patriarchy….

    The animosity towards men has become a bias that has prosecuted and persecuted individuals across the US. Duke isn’t an isolated incident. The Rolling Stone article isn’t an isolated incident. Kavanaugh isn’t an isolated incident.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.