We have gone back to the 1980s where many good people had their reputations ruined and freedom threatened by false accusations. Most of these came about simply because someone was angry with them, and unless the accuser recanted, the charges stuck. Many of these innocent people are forced into plea bargains by zealous prosecutors by the threat of 20-year to life sentences if they lose at trial. A person accused of rape, especially if it involves a child, is GUILTY in the eyes of society until proven innocent, which is difficult to do under today's court systems. Even with only circumstantial evidence such as the accusers say-so or no evidence at all, the not guilty still has a great chance of losing. I would like to see only real evidence, such as DNA or an injured victim, not just unsubstantiated accusation allowed to be considered at rape trials. Many "rapists" get minimal time because of lack of evidence to support their convictions of guilt but the prosecutor in trying to make a name for himself/herself is not going to give in and drop the case. If the prosecutor can force a plea, he/she is still a winner. he poor innocent accused is the loser. As a former reporter, I saw too much of this, and I am seeing it happening again. Please don't get me wrong, I am for throwing the book at a rapist in a case where there is strong evidence of guilt.