Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Uber driver charged with raping woman in D.C.

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 73 posts

Re: Uber driver charged with raping woman in D.C.

#61

Post by simcop2387 »

rhdoenges wrote: post #47
tomp wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the word of one person against the word of another. If it were two men and you had to choose whom to believe, you would probably find it more likely that the lier is the one that otherwise causes more problems, and e.g. gets kicked out of bars.

So when an otherwise upstanding man brutally rapes a vulnerable woman, it's his word against hers? Rape is almost always perpetrated from a position of power. That's why most rapes are committed by men against women. That aside, they caught the incident on camera, so it is not one person's word against another's: http://dcist.com/2012/12/uber_customer_accuses_driver_of_rap...

What's interesting about that is also something left out of the other article, that the girl is a teenager. That makes me wonder how she was out drinking? It also makes me wonder then if these are the same cases. The descriptions of the crime is incredibly similar so I'd believe they are but it sounds like there very well might be more here than the press knows about yet.

Re: Uber driver charged with raping woman in D.C.

#62

Post by rtkwe »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #33
xanadohnt wrote: post #8

Why is Über even mentioned? How about some details on the manufacturer of the seat the driver was sitting on, maybe what barber he usues too? Regardless, this is tragic if true, and my heart goes out.

It's relevant. Uber are creating a network of unregulated cabs, and people have been voicing concerns over the consequences of that. It can happen with a regulated cab too, but it's probably a little more sensitive given that there are no regulations at all. These concerns are not mine, and I'm not taking a position for or against Uber, I'm just pointing this out.

They still employ specially licensed driver just like cab companies. The regulations they don't have to deal with are things like availability and rate laws iirc.

Re: Uber driver charged with raping woman in D.C.

#63

Post by [deleted] »

rhdoenges wrote: post #47
tomp wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the word of one person against the word of another. If it were two men and you had to choose whom to believe, you would probably find it more likely that the lier is the one that otherwise causes more problems, and e.g. gets kicked out of bars.

So when an otherwise upstanding man brutally rapes a vulnerable woman, it's his word against hers? Rape is almost always perpetrated from a position of power. That's why most rapes are committed by men against women. That aside, they caught the incident on camera, so it is not one person's word against another's: http://dcist.com/2012/12/uber_customer_accuses_driver_of_rap...

[deleted]

Re: Uber driver charged with raping woman in D.C.

#64

Post by mpyne »

rhizome wrote: post #49
ry0ohki wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I started to agree with you in terms of "fair is fair", but on the other hand rape is severely undereported partly because of the embarrassment, if you know you'll be publicly named I can't imagine that will increase the number of reports.

Not to draw any conclusions, but hiding the name has the effect of reinforcing that there's something to be embarrassed about .

It's not just about cause and effect though. If I were a woman I don't think I'd want every potential future jilted boyfriend to be able to Google my name in the future and discover I'd been raped. Not because of embarrassment, but because they could re-victimize just by bringing it back up. But of course, there is the element of embarrassment for many, which just adds to the problem of having it completely public.

Re: Uber driver charged with raping woman in D.C.

#65

Post by aetherson »

Retric wrote: post #37
ataggart wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not clear to me how government licensing would prevent an already illegal rape.

Tracking, people are far less likely to commit crimes if they need to be identified beforehand. Background checking, while far from foolproof it's both a deterrent and a preventative measure. Higher barriers to entry, if it takes significant amounts of effort and money to be able to drive a cab then people are both less likely to risk it and going to try something else to have their 'fun'.

Uber isn't a ride-sharing service. Their drivers are just as tracked and identified as normal taxi drivers are. Probably more tracked than a typical limo service is.

(I also do not believe that the ride sharing services are particularly risky.)

Re: Uber driver charged with raping woman in D.C.

#66

Post by aetherson »

ry0ohki wrote: post #35
snprbob86 wrote: post #5

I don't really appreciate the fact that the suspect is named publicly, but the victim is not. It should be either neither, or both, preferably the former. Every time I see an article about rape, there are hints of bias to full on convictions in the court of public opinion. Innocent until proven guilty! Uber probably has GPS data for the Driver's phone. Did he linger at the destination long enough for a rape to occur?…

I started to agree with you in terms of "fair is fair", but on the other hand rape is severely undereported partly because of the embarrassment, if you know you'll be publicly named I can't imagine that will increase the number of reports.

I don't support naming victims of any crimes, certainly including rape (unless the victims consent or their identity is unavoidably public).

That said, I'd like to see some numbers about reporting of stranger-rape. I know that acquaintance-rape is heavily underreported, and as a very large amount of rape is acquaintance-rape, that means that rape is underreported. I'm ignorant about the reporting rate of stranger-rape.

Re: Uber driver charged with raping woman in D.C.

#67

Post by tomp »

rhdoenges wrote: post #47
tomp wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the word of one person against the word of another. If it were two men and you had to choose whom to believe, you would probably find it more likely that the lier is the one that otherwise causes more problems, and e.g. gets kicked out of bars.

So when an otherwise upstanding man brutally rapes a vulnerable woman, it's his word against hers? Rape is almost always perpetrated from a position of power. That's why most rapes are committed by men against women. That aside, they caught the incident on camera, so it is not one person's word against another's: http://dcist.com/2012/12/uber_customer_accuses_driver_of_rap...

> So when an otherwise upstanding man brutally rapes a vulnerable woman, it's his word against hers?

Unless there are witnesses or evidence (e.g. camera, sperm, bruises, ...), then, yes, obviously. What else have you got?

But, my intention was simply to demonstrate gender bias by considering two men in a similar situation, the word of a reputable man against the word of a less reputable man. I guess I've demonstrated it...

Re: Uber driver charged with raping woman in D.C.

#68

Post by greenyoda »

Despite what the headline on HN says, the article states in the very first sentence that he was not charged with anything, and released:

"District prosecutors on Thursday said they will not charge a limo driver who city police had arrested and accused of raping a 20-year-old customer outside her home in December."

Edit: Looks like the news article used to have that same headline; it's still what the page title says. Apparently, the police got it wrong in their press conference:

"Bill Miller, a spokesman for the U.S. attorney’s office, told The Washington Post that the office was not charging Anouar Habib Trabelsi, even as a top D.C. police commander was holding a news conference outside police headquarters announcing the criminal charge."

Re: Uber driver charged with raping woman in D.C.

#70

Post by warfangle »

rhdoenges wrote: post #47
tomp wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the word of one person against the word of another. If it were two men and you had to choose whom to believe, you would probably find it more likely that the lier is the one that otherwise causes more problems, and e.g. gets kicked out of bars.

So when an otherwise upstanding man brutally rapes a vulnerable woman, it's his word against hers? Rape is almost always perpetrated from a position of power. That's why most rapes are committed by men against women. That aside, they caught the incident on camera, so it is not one person's word against another's: http://dcist.com/2012/12/uber_customer_accuses_driver_of_rap...

>That's why most reported rapes are committed by men against women.

FTFY.

Post reply on HN