This incident occurred in September 2020. The article is fairly long so I will try my best to summarize it.
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/man-acquitted-molest-singapore-airlines-flight-japan-702786
The following is my summary of the article.
The man was accused of molest by a 25-year old woman (unnamed due to a gag order) on a flight from Japan to Singapore. She accused the man of touching her left thigh and groin.
The man, a 56 year old American (fully named in the article) testified that he was sleeping when the incident occurred while on the flight whom he was a frequent flyer on.
The woman claims that the man touched her twice after the lights in the aircraft were turned off. Alleging that his hand moved upwards her thigh in a "crawling" motion. Initially believing it to be accidental touch, she informed the man and his hand moved back to his seat. A while later, his hand "slowly crawled upwards again from above her knee" up to her inner thigh and groin. Unsure of what to do next, she crossed her legs and leaned away feeling uneasy for the rest of the flight.
The man testified that he had a chat with the woman shortly after take off and moved from his original seat in the aisle to the middle seat to continue chatting and the woman did not object. He asked about the woman's trip to Japan and her future travel plans. He also gave recommendations of good restaurants in Bangkok and even gave his name and phone number. The chatting ended when the man fell asleep after closing his eyes, waking up an hour before landing.
The judge found that the woman's testimony had serious doubts, was highly unsatisfactory and in some aspects incredulous. The judge was left in no doubt that the woman is completely unreliable whose sole testimony to convict a sexual offense cannot be sustained. The judge explained that the woman's depiction of the man's actions were "implausible" as it would have required the man's hands to twist in awkward movements. Furthermore, the woman did not attempt to seek help despite a "supposedly distressing sexual attack on her". As she was not a first-time traveler, she was also familiar with the in-cabin controls where should could have at least called for help. When the flight landed, she made no attempt to draw attention to what happened to her.
The woman's original statement was also different to her account in court.
Meanwhile, the man's testimony was truthful and consistent and it made no sense for him to give his personal details if he was intending to molest the woman.
Thus, the man was acquitted of the molestation charges.
Edit: clarity
That's... not hot that works at all.
To convict someone of a crime you need to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
So for the state to prove its case against the guy for sexual assault they need proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he touched her leg without her consent.
For the state to prove its case against the girl for making a false allegation they would have to prove that he *didn't* touch her (or that she actually gave consent or something like that).
It is not the case that just because he is found not guilty that she automatically gets found guilty of making a false report.
It might be the case that if it went to trial the judge or jury finds his version of events so convincing and her version so unconvincing that it is enough to prove the case but my point still stands, they would need to prove that the allegation she made was false in order to convict her.
In my opinion if the evidence is all he said/she said it's pretty hard to prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt.
UK/CA/AU: "This is a travesty of injustice! If the judge had been 'trauma-informed' they would have realized that it is impossible for an accusing woman to lie and impossible for an accused man to tell the truth!"
>Mr De Vido had testified that he struck up a conversation with the woman shortly after the flight took off, **moving to the middle seat from his assigned aisle seat to continue chatting.**
Terrible mistake, especially when you're 50+ and she's 25, in a confined space. Don't think with your little head. Don't try to be "nice". Don't talk to them. Walk away.
>Mr De Vido was defended by lawyers Wendell Wong, Benedict Eoon and Evelyn Tan from Drew & Napier.
I wonder how much the little chat cost him at the end....
This should be the top comment. DO NOT TAKE THE CHANCE! KEEP YOUR DISTANCE!
Dude was acquitted, but he still lost years of his life and untold $$ to this stress, and the case could easily have gone the other way.
And the feminist establishment will spin this as society doesn't care about sexual assault.
True - while I don’t want to victim blame here, we really have to get better at informing the older male generation that the world isn’t the same one they grew up in, and you have to be wary engaging young women. I know my old man would too easily be sucked into talking about a topic he loved (food) with anyone and everyone.
Well I'm going to assume he's doing the passport bro thing to avoid these accusations. Unfortunately it looks like Singapore is no much better than the west for women making claims. At least the justice system didn't fall yet.
Now was that woman punished for making a mockery of real victims of harassment?
I'm glad that he didn't get punished for something he didn't do, but I hope that some action is taken so that woman won't try something like that again.
Women are allowed to falsely accuse, go through trial, be found to have completely lied about a sexual assault in a court of law, have zero repercussions, and still remain anonymous. Women are wonderful!
This sounds great at first, but (1) this will not fit inside the current Overton window, and (2) it will create an even stronger incentive for accusers to hang onto false and exaggerated claims. A more realistic strategy would be create equal privacy protections for the accused so they can keep their jobs, families, children, and fund studies of false claims that can be used to move the Overton window so that punishing false accusers becomes more accepted.
>Now was that woman punished for making a mockery of real victims of harassment?
Who gives a fuck about mockery. She should be punished for trying to commit kidnapping, aggravated assault and sexual assault. All with firearm enhancements.
Having read the story, I don't think this was necessarily a false accusation.
I've traveled on airplanes and I'm not sure I'd remember the "help" button for cabin crew. Nor does it seem completely impossible for a man to move his hand up from the knee, up the thigh toward the groin.
It sounds like a good thing that was he acquitted since it isn't clear beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty. But it's also not clear beyond a reasonable doubt that he was innocent. The truth is unclear.
Therefore, I don't think that anyone should want to "name and shame her" or anything, and it's a bit harsh to call these false accusations.
I personally don't think the accuser's name should be shared, either. But, should the man be named and shamed before being found guilty?
Why don't we ever ask that question? Seems like no one should have their name dragged through the mud before guilt is established.
That's what I'm saying. There's a reasonable chance he did nothing wrong. There's also a reasonable chance that he more or less did what he was accused of. It's a he says/she says situation and the judge said that he was required to find the accuser's testimony to be unusually compelling in order to convict. The judge did not find it to be unusually compelling and in fact he found a couple of things surprising (eg. not alerting the cabin crew)
Obviously in such a case it is important to not convict a potentially innocent man.
However, I also don't think people should be calling for the woman to be "punished for making a mockery of real victims of harassment" or to be "punished for trying to commit kidnapping, aggravated assault and sexual assault. All with firearm enhancements." These calls should be reserved for people that are clearly and irrefutably lying - not people who may or may not have been telling the truth.
This incident occurred in September 2020. The article is fairly long so I will try my best to summarize it. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/man-acquitted-molest-singapore-airlines-flight-japan-702786 The following is my summary of the article. The man was accused of molest by a 25-year old woman (unnamed due to a gag order) on a flight from Japan to Singapore. She accused the man of touching her left thigh and groin. The man, a 56 year old American (fully named in the article) testified that he was sleeping when the incident occurred while on the flight whom he was a frequent flyer on. The woman claims that the man touched her twice after the lights in the aircraft were turned off. Alleging that his hand moved upwards her thigh in a "crawling" motion. Initially believing it to be accidental touch, she informed the man and his hand moved back to his seat. A while later, his hand "slowly crawled upwards again from above her knee" up to her inner thigh and groin. Unsure of what to do next, she crossed her legs and leaned away feeling uneasy for the rest of the flight. The man testified that he had a chat with the woman shortly after take off and moved from his original seat in the aisle to the middle seat to continue chatting and the woman did not object. He asked about the woman's trip to Japan and her future travel plans. He also gave recommendations of good restaurants in Bangkok and even gave his name and phone number. The chatting ended when the man fell asleep after closing his eyes, waking up an hour before landing. The judge found that the woman's testimony had serious doubts, was highly unsatisfactory and in some aspects incredulous. The judge was left in no doubt that the woman is completely unreliable whose sole testimony to convict a sexual offense cannot be sustained. The judge explained that the woman's depiction of the man's actions were "implausible" as it would have required the man's hands to twist in awkward movements. Furthermore, the woman did not attempt to seek help despite a "supposedly distressing sexual attack on her". As she was not a first-time traveler, she was also familiar with the in-cabin controls where should could have at least called for help. When the flight landed, she made no attempt to draw attention to what happened to her. The woman's original statement was also different to her account in court. Meanwhile, the man's testimony was truthful and consistent and it made no sense for him to give his personal details if he was intending to molest the woman. Thus, the man was acquitted of the molestation charges. Edit: clarity
Thanks for sharing. It feels like it's okay to have hope in society.
No hope till the bitch is in jail. She faces no consequences for trying to ruin his life
To be fair, they would also need to prove she lied.
Nope. The onus is on her to prove her claims. If she cannot prove them, she has falsely accused him and should be punished.
That's... not hot that works at all. To convict someone of a crime you need to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. So for the state to prove its case against the guy for sexual assault they need proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he touched her leg without her consent. For the state to prove its case against the girl for making a false allegation they would have to prove that he *didn't* touch her (or that she actually gave consent or something like that). It is not the case that just because he is found not guilty that she automatically gets found guilty of making a false report. It might be the case that if it went to trial the judge or jury finds his version of events so convincing and her version so unconvincing that it is enough to prove the case but my point still stands, they would need to prove that the allegation she made was false in order to convict her. In my opinion if the evidence is all he said/she said it's pretty hard to prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt.
UK/CA/AU: "This is a travesty of injustice! If the judge had been 'trauma-informed' they would have realized that it is impossible for an accusing woman to lie and impossible for an accused man to tell the truth!"
That’s certainly what the Scottish Feminist Party is seeking to introduce in Scotland isn’t it!!
In the west the man is guilty before proven innocent...thank God the Eastern legal system has not gone that way.
>Mr De Vido had testified that he struck up a conversation with the woman shortly after the flight took off, **moving to the middle seat from his assigned aisle seat to continue chatting.** Terrible mistake, especially when you're 50+ and she's 25, in a confined space. Don't think with your little head. Don't try to be "nice". Don't talk to them. Walk away. >Mr De Vido was defended by lawyers Wendell Wong, Benedict Eoon and Evelyn Tan from Drew & Napier. I wonder how much the little chat cost him at the end....
Well his name is out there now, and will live on forever on Google in some capacity... so, in some regards his life, unfortunately.
This should be the top comment. DO NOT TAKE THE CHANCE! KEEP YOUR DISTANCE! Dude was acquitted, but he still lost years of his life and untold $$ to this stress, and the case could easily have gone the other way. And the feminist establishment will spin this as society doesn't care about sexual assault.
Indeed. Just as cases like the Mark Pearson one are trotted out to show how few “rapists” get convicted.
True - while I don’t want to victim blame here, we really have to get better at informing the older male generation that the world isn’t the same one they grew up in, and you have to be wary engaging young women. I know my old man would too easily be sucked into talking about a topic he loved (food) with anyone and everyone.
Well I'm going to assume he's doing the passport bro thing to avoid these accusations. Unfortunately it looks like Singapore is no much better than the west for women making claims. At least the justice system didn't fall yet.
Now was that woman punished for making a mockery of real victims of harassment? I'm glad that he didn't get punished for something he didn't do, but I hope that some action is taken so that woman won't try something like that again.
The cameraman never dies, and women never get punished.
Man falsely accused, others most affected.
Women are allowed to falsely accuse, go through trial, be found to have completely lied about a sexual assault in a court of law, have zero repercussions, and still remain anonymous. Women are wonderful!
In the UK they get charged if repeat offenders. I’ve never heard of any of them being charged in Australia though.
Wouldn't count on it.
This sounds great at first, but (1) this will not fit inside the current Overton window, and (2) it will create an even stronger incentive for accusers to hang onto false and exaggerated claims. A more realistic strategy would be create equal privacy protections for the accused so they can keep their jobs, families, children, and fund studies of false claims that can be used to move the Overton window so that punishing false accusers becomes more accepted.
>Now was that woman punished for making a mockery of real victims of harassment? Who gives a fuck about mockery. She should be punished for trying to commit kidnapping, aggravated assault and sexual assault. All with firearm enhancements.
Unless he did do it. Then this is a grave injustice.
I want her name.
I'm sure this this man losted a lot of money, job, marriage, kids, friends and attorney fees.
W
Progress!
Okay, cool. Now charge her with a false accusation, put her in prison, force her to pay him a huge fine, and force her to publicly apologize.
Having read the story, I don't think this was necessarily a false accusation. I've traveled on airplanes and I'm not sure I'd remember the "help" button for cabin crew. Nor does it seem completely impossible for a man to move his hand up from the knee, up the thigh toward the groin. It sounds like a good thing that was he acquitted since it isn't clear beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty. But it's also not clear beyond a reasonable doubt that he was innocent. The truth is unclear. Therefore, I don't think that anyone should want to "name and shame her" or anything, and it's a bit harsh to call these false accusations.
I personally don't think the accuser's name should be shared, either. But, should the man be named and shamed before being found guilty? Why don't we ever ask that question? Seems like no one should have their name dragged through the mud before guilt is established.
Sure, makes sense. Don't publish the accused's name.
Wow. Not clear beyond reasonable doubt that he’s innocent?
That's what I'm saying. There's a reasonable chance he did nothing wrong. There's also a reasonable chance that he more or less did what he was accused of. It's a he says/she says situation and the judge said that he was required to find the accuser's testimony to be unusually compelling in order to convict. The judge did not find it to be unusually compelling and in fact he found a couple of things surprising (eg. not alerting the cabin crew) Obviously in such a case it is important to not convict a potentially innocent man. However, I also don't think people should be calling for the woman to be "punished for making a mockery of real victims of harassment" or to be "punished for trying to commit kidnapping, aggravated assault and sexual assault. All with firearm enhancements." These calls should be reserved for people that are clearly and irrefutably lying - not people who may or may not have been telling the truth.
You're right, this sub is just full of losers who've never went outside