Absolutely, however the case should be taken seriously and investigated and then dismissed for lack of evidence. That's the key differencial between now and the past, where a policeman would oft automatically assume the burden of guilt upon the woman and dismiss the case out of hand. Ironically, it's gone a bit the other way now, because of the machismo of men if a man is raped by a woman he will find himself being asked what the problem was, especially if the woman was attractive in the eyes of the officer. Men are automatically assumed to be willing participants in sexual intercourse. :dead:
Still, evidence should be key alongside witness and victim/perpetrator testimony, no doubt about that at all. Rape kits should be something that are made more available so a victim of rape can get evidence gathered in the immediate aftermath of the assault.

Of course, sexual harrassment is a lot harder to prove and gather evidence for, that's a much trickier subject, and in that case I think education and defence might be a better thing to help, but also in the future if things like Google Glass ever catch on then evidence will be a bit easier to gather.

I must admit though, I do find it ironic though about the complaints that people feel that all men are being found guilty until proven innocent because they are the same gender group as the most common perpetrators of rape. Can anyone think of other instances where a wide group of people have been blamed universally and acted against because of the actions of a smaller sub-group within that group? :hmmm:

Your analysis sums up the newly enacted legislation in Germany concisely. Your background in law enforcement gives this issue a better perspective.

If there is physical evidence which ties an individual to the crime we are discussing here, then it's likely that individual will be prosecuted. DNA analysis in various forms is no longer in it's infancy and is widely accepted in prosecutorial court proceedings due to it's near certainty. There are also eyewitness accounts which although useful, can be discredited in court. DNA evidence is almost iron clad.

DNA evidence has also been used to exonerate people wrongly tried and convicted for various crimes.

For this reason, I don't think people have much to worry about with regards to being in the general area where a crime took place if they weren't involved in the crime itself.

I think most people would intervene on the side of the victim if a woman was being attacked in that manner or physically assaulted to help them.
I'm sure this newly enacted law will be tweaked as the need arises if there are problems or issues.


Something else to consider is any law, rule or regulation is only as good as the enforcement behind it.

Leaked document says 2,000 men allegedly assaulted 1,200 German women on New Year’s Eve

" Quote "

Lawmakers were facing intense pressure to pass the new legislation, particularly in the wake of the Cologne assaults. Most of the perpetrators in that city stand accused of groping and facilitating sex assaults as part of a group — accusations that were difficult to prosecute.
The stricter law is also supposed to make it easier for refugees to be deported if they are convicted in sex-assault cases — an aspect of the new law that activists and advocates for refugees have harshly criticized.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...new-years-eve/

"To make it easier to deport people?" Criminal police already now is just bitterly laughing about that. And some days ago I read about new legislation in Germany that allow that asylum seekers whose case already got rejected, nevertheless stay in Germany for years and years - legally. And after some years, no court in Germany will ever dare to throw them out again.

Doing so would be considered to be "anti-social".

Criminal police inspectors also recommend to let the Cologne cases rest by now. It leads just into nirvana-by-court. The guys who got convicted some days ago, already are on free foot again, left the court as free men, because they shed some tears at court. Guilty, but free and unpunished.

Both from a perspective of morals, and psychological conditioning, I just can shake my head in resignation. Many things go terribly wrong with out law enforcement and the way perpetrators can escape at court. But I think nothing else does so much damage to justice,like suspending penalties, and deals made. Both must be banned, completely and always. But most löawyers do not even understand why.
So what hope could there be?

Right - probably none.

BTW "criminal police" and "criminal police investigators" are not corrupt LEOs but are actually members of the "criminal investigation department". Just in case someone was confused....:know:

One of the reason could be the emergence of usage of incapacitating drugs by sailors onto their intended victims.

There is a good article about Sexual Assault & Response Weapons by Commander Timothy P. McGeehan, U.S. NAVY in the JULY 2016 publication of "PROCEEDINGS" from the U.S. Naval Institute.

But preventing your victim from saying ''no'' already makes it rape :hmmm:

Yep and in the UK if a victim is incapable of giving consent (for any reason) then there is no defence.