system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
In rape cases, how do we reconcile the idea that we ought to believe the victim with the idea that we ought not assume someone guilty until they are proven to be so?

 Can you point me to academic work which has discussed this question? Many cases of rape go unprosecuted and that gives us reason to give special consideration to the victims of rape, but there is also a prevailing notion of justice which states that someone shouldn't be assumed guilty of a crime. How do we responsibly go about squaring these two notions?
gpt
The idea that we ought not to assume someone guilty until they are proven to be so is a procedural protection afforded in the court of law, not a recommendation for people more generally in every context. Obviously you can assume someone's guilty without proof in all sorts of cases, like if your trustworthy friend tells you they're guilty. You just can't say that the judge and jury should use this as the basis for sending that person to jail.