"[F]reshman electrical engineering major Steph Winter said letting someone guilty of a serious crime go unpunished would be more harmful than finding an innocent person guilty. It’s obviously one of the big side effects, if it could result in an innocent person being found guilty,” she said. “But I think sexual assault is such a big issue that it’s worth the risk.”While their passion is laudable, collegiate rape jihadis are tossing over a millennia of Western jurisprudence if they think for a moment that innocents found guilty of the worst crime possible are mere collateral damage, to be disregarded as unfortunate casualties in some notional 'war on rape'. Worse, by overplaying their hand, they may actually be harming actual victims of legitimate rape:
Actual rape victims have no interest in punishing the innocent and are often among the most vocal critics of false rape accusers because they know that every rape lie diminishes the integrity of every legitimate rape claim. Punishing the innocent undermines public confidence about the way rape claims are handled. Judges, juries, and the people who decide college disciplinary hearings, would be all the more wary of punishing men for rape charges, even those who deserve to be punished, if they believed that the system allows the innocent to be punished, too.That the lives of innocent men could be treated so casually by rape activists demonstrates that it is not justice--the process--that they seek, rather it is "justice"--retribution--they're after. When revenge for a perceived violation of their holiest of holies is on their mind, all manner of collateral damage is "worth the risk".
A wrongful acquittal is a terrible thing, of course. But a wrongful acquittal is never, ever the equivalent of a wrongful conviction -- morally, legally, or any other way -- and to suggest otherwise is nothing short of morally grotesque.