Uber driver charged with raping woman in D.C.
washingtonpost.com
washingtonpost.com
"Laws don’t exist merely to frustrate the business ambitions of coastal hipsters: They also exist to protect the more vulnerable members of society. Back home in London (where such statistics are available), 11 women a month are attacked in unlicensed cabs, and unlicensed drivers are responsible for a horrifying 80 percent of all stranger rapes. If Uber doesn't have to follow licensing laws, then neither does any Tom, Dick, or Harry who chooses to paint the word 'TAXI' on the side of his car, and start offering rides via the Internet. A disruptive CEO will shrug (and there's a foreshadowing word) and insist that it’s not his fault that such criminals exist."[1]
It appears this critic was right.
--
[1] http://pandodaily.com/2012/10/24/travis-shrugged/
--
Edit: added "It appears," which more accurately conveys my position.
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'.
(I also do not believe that the ride sharing services are particularly risky.)
[edit] Also its worth noting that the reason people would risk unlicensed cabs in London was that taxi licenses were so strictly controlled that prices were quite ridiculous for many.[edit2] And that the solution to the issue in London was to license the minicabs where trying to shut them down demonstrably failed.
"Taxi Satelital" is a taxi company valued for its safety and overall ease of use, that subcontracts each ride to a pool of licensed drivers (like uber).
A young woman accused one of its drivers of drugging and abusing her. Everyone assumed she was right and went all "duke-lacrosse" on the firm, which we assumed will have to go bust soon. The next day, the CEO appeared on TV with a CC video, the phone call audio, GPS records, and even one witness, showing that she was indeed making it up.
After seeing this happen one too many times, I think its prudent if we withhold judgement and let the police do their job. That said, I do believe unlicensed drivers are a huge issue in thefts, kidnappings, and rapes in many parts of the world (London as you quoted, but this is also common knowledge in most of Latin America)
Uber probably has GPS data for the Driver's phone. Did he linger at the destination long enough for a rape to occur? Or did he immediately begin traveling towards his next fare?
There's a character witness for the driver, but what about for the woman? After all, she was just kicked out of a bar...
What is the status of her injury?
There's just not enough information here for this to justify as news quite yet.
What difference does this make?
It is only ever sexual assault cases where this many calls for skepticism -as to whether a crime even happened- are made.
Second:
Murder yields a body.
Theft creates a void.
Vandalism leaves a mark.
The body left by rape cannot distinguish between regret and terror. The void cannot be measured by the outside. The mark may be an act of theater.
However, the public demands justice and often we lose sight of our principles. The court of public opinion cares not about a shadow of a doubt.
Just think how you would feel if this was your mother, sister, or daughter. You would not have the same attitude. Women never deserve this, ever. It scars them for life.
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...
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...
FTFY.
If you get high enough you get symptoms of paranoia. Maybe the fact that he talked to her a little bit in the cab scared her, and when she got raped she didn't have a good enough look at the perpetrator and assumed that it was the cab driver.
Innocent until proven guilty. It's unfortunate that his name is being plastered over the news like this.
Entirely agree. Doesn't it contradict the notion of innocent until proved guilty to subject the suspect to a media circus? It's like getting doxxed just because a bunch of bloggers see a chance to get hits.
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.
These concerns are not mine, and I'm not taking a position for or against Uber, I'm just pointing this out.
The driver was an Uber driver, the company supported him as a driver. Any event that occurs while he is doing his work as an Uber driver deserves to have Uber mentioned.
The craiglist comparison is much more app than the the American Airlines one - a connection was made via this service with little oversight or regulation - that comes with benefits like higher availability and easier transactions, but it also can be risky.
(http://www.npr.org/2012/01/31/146123433/upstart-car-service-...)
"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."
You need to take the proper precautions. Uber's screening of their drivers is laughable. Regulations don't exist solely to make your life miserable, and hopefully this incident, true or not, gives them the shock they need to understand their problem. While I appreciate what Uber's service is trying to accomplish, sacrificing safety is not the kind of "disruption" this industry needs.
Also, being a driver is kinda dangerous regarding that, I have some driver friends, and they all have the same rule: They don't pick up lone women, period, it might be raining, hurricane, dust storm, middle of the night, day, whatever, if she is a woman, and alone, they don't pick up them, ever.
It is because here in Brazil at least, is a very common scam to a women accuse a driver (be him professional, like a cabbie or Uber-like driver, or a volunteer that wants to help a hitchhiker) of rape, or make threats to accuse him unless he pays her something.
On this case in particular, I think the best is wait for what a judge and evidence has to say.
> Messages related to the incident on neighborhood email groups state that the incident was caught on security cameras mounted to the victim's home.
source: http://dcist.com/2013/03/uber_driver_charged_with_sexual_ass...
Unfortunately, there is little evidence to go on at this point aside from her testimony, so much of this discussion is mere speculation.