In most sexual harassment cases, the facts are based on "she said, he said" statements. There are no witnesses ("in a car...lonely route"). Even in a crowd someone can grope someone else without being observed. (In Japan, "women only" subway cars have been inaugurated because of "rush hour groping").
When the alleged victim points the finger of accusation at the perpetrator, a "prima facie" (on its face) cause has been established. While there is the principal of "innocent until proven guilty", in these cases it is beneficial to use the "preponderance of evidence" standard.
While the accused has the right to remain silent, such a position, especially in these cases, can be (and usually is) taken as a sign of guilt.
At the time of the complaint, the accuser should be informed that any false statements will result in immediate discharge. The accuser will then have the opportunity to write a statement of events that occurred. S/he should then initial each page. After several hours, but before the day is over, s/he will be given the opportunity to review the statement for errors or omissions before s/he formally signs.
A similar procedure will be utilized with the alleged perpetrator.
One way to get to the truth is to inform the victim, at the time of the complaint, that sometime in the future, as part of the investigation and/or subsequent proceedings, s/he will have to face the one who is accused.
Physical evidence is inconclusive since the victim could self-inflict bruises, tear clothes, and/or arrange matters to fit their story. Similarly, any evidence as to the car, the level of sobriety, mental state and intent are just as unreliable.
I have found that the best method is to interrogate both parties as if the victim was the perpetrator and vice versa. I usually have two other people observing the demeanor of each under questioning, after which we all compare notes and come to a consensus. It is not as easy as it sounds, some victims, as well as perpetrators are good actors, and present compelling performances.
Based on the "preponderance of evidence" and the general demeanor of the parties, a finding will be made. If it is found that the victim was harassed, the penalty is usually immediate termination, unless there are unusual circumstances, such as long work history without any prior discipline.
Hope this sheds some light on the topic.
PALADIN
When the alleged victim points the finger of accusation at the perpetrator, a "prima facie" (on its face) cause has been established. While there is the principal of "innocent until proven guilty", in these cases it is beneficial to use the "preponderance of evidence" standard.
While the accused has the right to remain silent, such a position, especially in these cases, can be (and usually is) taken as a sign of guilt.
At the time of the complaint, the accuser should be informed that any false statements will result in immediate discharge. The accuser will then have the opportunity to write a statement of events that occurred. S/he should then initial each page. After several hours, but before the day is over, s/he will be given the opportunity to review the statement for errors or omissions before s/he formally signs.
A similar procedure will be utilized with the alleged perpetrator.
One way to get to the truth is to inform the victim, at the time of the complaint, that sometime in the future, as part of the investigation and/or subsequent proceedings, s/he will have to face the one who is accused.
Physical evidence is inconclusive since the victim could self-inflict bruises, tear clothes, and/or arrange matters to fit their story. Similarly, any evidence as to the car, the level of sobriety, mental state and intent are just as unreliable.
I have found that the best method is to interrogate both parties as if the victim was the perpetrator and vice versa. I usually have two other people observing the demeanor of each under questioning, after which we all compare notes and come to a consensus. It is not as easy as it sounds, some victims, as well as perpetrators are good actors, and present compelling performances.
Based on the "preponderance of evidence" and the general demeanor of the parties, a finding will be made. If it is found that the victim was harassed, the penalty is usually immediate termination, unless there are unusual circumstances, such as long work history without any prior discipline.
Hope this sheds some light on the topic.
PALADIN