Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by bsder 2495 days ago
One: I don't keep track of criminal convictions of every person I interact with. I'm not going to investigate criminal convictions until I'm at the point where money is likely to start changing hands. It's called due diligence, and it occurs late in the game, not early.

Two: the justice system is supposed to work such that when you are done with it your debt to society is paid. The fact that Epstein got off so lightly, repeatedly, is the fundamental problem. An individual should not have to look up the criminal convictions of every person they interact with.

2 comments

No.

The justice system must exercise extreme caution. The standard for guilt is “beyond a reasonable doubt” which is a very high standard.

It’s precisely because the justice system must be so conservative that we in our private lives MUST do our best not simply to mirror the decisions of the courts, but to make decisions for ourselves.

It is ONLY in our private circles the victims have ANY chance at being protected, because the courts explicitly (and rightly) must wait for unequivocal proof.

Especially in sex crimes that proof is almost never there. Acceding to the courts is the equivalent of saying 90% of victims should receive no protection from anyone on Earth. And that there is no corner where they might be safe from their tormentor.

> Especially in sex crimes that proof is almost never there.

Hogwash. As we have seen so far, in Polanski, Weinstein, Cosby, Epstein, etc. these people did this repeatedly and were protected and enabled. The evidence was abundant and only needed someone in the justice system to actually do their job instead of covering it up in return for favors.

Sexual abuse in the single he said-she said case is problematic, and there may simply never be a good way to fix that.

Your way, however, allows accusations to destroy careers and reputations without evidence, and, in the case of genuine malicious actors, allows such accusations to become weaponized. See: Franken.

In addition, your mob justice is, in fact, most likely to enable these rich abusers because they don't really have to worry about the mob. Only plebeians like you and me will suffer at the hands of the mob because we don't have the resources to resist.

1. The existence of people who were protected doesn’t imply that most unindicted predators are being protected.

2. Yes, accusations destroy careers (of the falsely accused). Not believing accusations that haven’t been proven in court also destroys careers (of victims). So that’s not a real argument.

3. I’m not advocating any formation of mobs. I’m advocating individual employers, friends, family members make decisions for themselves and bar the accused from their private spaces at their discretion, not based on the decisions of the courts.

I’m an American though, so maybe I’m overly committed to private autonomy. But I’m not going to defer to my government about the safety of my people.

> the justice system is supposed to work such that when you are done with it your debt to society is paid.

Yeah, no. If you are a convicted child sex trafficker I won't do business with you ever, even if the state is done with you. If you would, I'd say that's a moral failing on your part.

You are missing the point--HE SHOULDN'T BE WALKING AROUND FREE.

I shouldn't have to even think about doing business with a convicted child sex trafficker because he should be in jail.

And anyone you or I have contact with would have been in jail until doomsday if convicted of that.

So we're supposed to lock people up until everyone has forgiven them, else for life?
>until everyone has forgiven him

? The point OP was making is that the justice system is meant to have punished/rehabilitated him to a point where they are satisfied that he is no longer a danger to society.

If he hasn't served his time, then he shouldn't be walking free to do business with people.

Either it is legal for him to do business or it isn't, and it seems that it was legal for him to do business at that time.

The fact rich people seem to be able to manipulate the system to do easier/less time than others is a separate and very valid point.

Like OP said, if you or I did what he did, we'd be in jail forever.

Maybe in this case people should have known, but taking it to the extreme, citizens can't be expected to hire private investigators to learn about their business partners.