>>13936
>without evidence
I'm not sure how things are going in the developed west but here one can't just waltz into a police station and get someone jailed just with an accusation not even in the case of rape.
The victim always counts as a witness but the case needs other evidence for example a testimony of a forensic practitioner (I dunno how it's called in English, basically a doctor with an offical paper that his opinion is more legit then a simple doctor's) that he/she examined the victim and found proofs (or lack of it).
The bad thing however that here you are considered guilty by the police until you prove your innocence. By the book it's the other way around ofc, you are innocent until proven otherwise but in practice it's don't. The police gathers evidence which supports the victim's version and you have to spoon feed them with your evidence. Also they rather believe the vic than the accused as the accused has reason to lie.
However police have some experience with those kind of people who goes to them, vics, perps, baseless accusators and they gained the ability to tell them apart, and as I said they really need more then just one supposed witness (the vic).