Question...(on crime, etc.)

[Superfly]

my wife and I were having this discussion.

Say, for instance, a person is raped (assaulted, robbed, etc), but due to fear, acceptance, or whatever, refuses to come forward and press charges against an assailant.

A detective has a hunch that she's been raped, but would like her to come forward and talk about it, which she will not.

These may be very dumb questions, but:

1) If she accepts the rape and decides to move on, has there been a crime even committed? (ie, does acceptance of the incedent, in the case of rape, connote consensus?)
2) Without the victim coming forward, can the detective launch an investigation and prosecute the assailant without the cooperation of the victim? Can the prosecutor then subpoena the victim to testify against the assailant?

I think I know the answer to these questions, but I would still like to be sure.

Brian

[Superfly]

1. BTW...this has not happened to

anyone I know of, we were just watching CSI when we started having the discussion.

[Superfly]

2. Anybody?

This thread dropped to the bottom of GD in a heartbeat.

[DrWeird]

3. Don't know about rape.

But I think in the case of most crime, if the victim doesn't press charges, there is no trial.

Rape could be different. I think in a number of states, there are laws that prosecute spousal abuse, even if the victim doesn't press charges.

[JasonBerry]

5. Prosecute - HOW?

This is a problem in many a DA office across the country. Many people refuse to even report the rape knowing how difficult it can be to get a conviction. A prosecution cannot - in all reality - continue without the assistance of the victim. Even with victim testimony, unless there is SOMETHING that can place the suspect at the scene of the crime, give doubt to pleas of innocence, forensics, etc.... it's difficult. Many women know this and fear reprisal from the rapist if they are not convicted. Without a witness to an abduction and/or the rape - not having the cooperation of the victim really aborts a prosecution.

[dflprincess]

4. Okay I'll bite

1)Rape is a crime. Actually, I think the victim files a complaint, and the state decides whether or not to press charges (this may vary from state to state). Not filing a complaint does imply consent, it only indicates that this victim chose to deal with the crime committed against her this way. If a woman has her purse snatched by the neighborhood thug and refuses to file a complaint because she is frightened does that mean she consented to the theft?

2) Yes, the detective can continue to investigate. Rape is rarely a one time crime. Investigating this case might lead to clues in other open cases where the victim(s) would testify. I assume the the prosector could subpoena the victim but I believe most of them feel it's better when the victim cooperates willing and probably would not.

[Superfly]

6. That's what I thought

and as for #2, I used the example of murder to convince my wife. The detective would be compelled to initiate an investigation because the witness/victim is dead.

[Yupster]

7. I think you got it right princess

Certainly whether it's prosecuted or not it's a crime. I think it's more clear with murder. If a body's found tied to a cement block at the bottom of the rver shot twice in the head, a crime was committed, regardless of whether they found out who did it or not.

The rape example is more tricky.

If a person was raped that is a crime.

If a person said she was raped, that is not automatically a crime.

[ConsAreLiars]

8. crime & punishment

Sure, rape is a crime whether reported or not. If a victim choses to "move on" without getting entangled in the legal system this in no way implies consent. If the prosecutor has a basis for filing charges, anyone with relevant evidence can be called to testify, although pragmatism makes this unlikely in the case you hypothesize.

[AP]

9. Answers:

(1) Obviously yes. What do you think happens when rape victims are murdered? Do you think the perpetrator gets off just because there's nobody to give evidence.

If the victim is alive and refuses to testify, it'll obviously be hard (if not impossible) to get a conviction. But not, say, if the perpetrator confesses, or if there's some other clear evidence that precludes the necessity of the victims oral evidence.

(2) Yes. But I'm going to guess that only the police in Mayberry might waste their time pursuing a case in which they have an uncooperative victim-witness. Most cops have more productive ways to spend their time. But, say, if they're dealing with a serial rapist who's homicidal, and an uncooperative victim-witness is their best witness, they might persue it.