ayrmad Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 15 hours ago, anotherchance said: It absolutely should be innocent until proven guilty. Sometimes some of those who lead the crusade against sexism, misogyny, racism and bigotry feel that the alleged crime is so severe that it should be a matter of castigating people first then asking questions later. It's dangerous stuff, but there's no middle ground in the eyes of vast amounts of people these days. If you question the widely held view even slightly, you might as well be the enemy. It could also be that some of those at the forefront of crusades are doing it to deflect away from their own unsavoury past, I do know a guy locally who led a crusade against smack while being a dealer himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 6 hours ago, ICTChris said: The sooner we move away from the antiquated, bourgeois jury system to one where innocence and guilt is decided by retweets and likes the better. This. If it’s good enough for U.S. foreign policy it’s good enough for the legal system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 To be fair this is a very difficult and complex issue.There's a fine line between discouraging rape victims to come forward and protecting the reputation of someone who may be falsely accused. I suspect on balance there are far more sexually abused women who have not come forward out of fear than falsely accused who have seen their lives ruined as a result of the public nature of the process.That being said, we do have a culture of 'no smoke without fire', particularly among people in the public eye and it's very dangerous to brand people just for being accused of something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 The theory is being charged and tried publicly allows you to clear your name. What other crimes should have anonymity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Widow rattling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTChris Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Bex Bailey on PM today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 59 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said: The theory is being charged and tried publicly allows you to clear your name. What other crimes should have anonymity? There’s an argument that people charged with any offence, however big or small, should have anonymity until found guilty. The downside is that only by publicising the accusations against Weinstein have other women come forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Just now, Granny Danger said: There’s an argument that people charged with any offence, however big or small, should have anonymity until found guilty. The downside is that only by publicising the accusations against Weinstein have other women come forward. I was playing Devil's Advocate, I'm not sure anonymity could be maintained these days anyway, before even considering the practicality within the law. My point was an accountant accused of embezzlement would have his life ruined as well. Or are the people promoting it limiting this protection to people accused of sexual offences? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 11 minutes ago, Granny Danger said: There’s an argument that people charged with any offence, however big or small, should have anonymity until found guilty. The downside is that only by publicising the accusations against Weinstein have other women come forward. That's my belief(I could live with anonymity until charges are brought), could there not be a government funded organisation like childline for these kind of allegations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 1 minute ago, ayrmad said: That's my belief, could there not be a government funded organisation like childline for these kind of allegations. Rather than the police? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 2 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said: I was playing Devil's Advocate, I'm not sure anonymity could be maintained these days anyway, before even considering the practicality within the law. My point was an accountant accused of embezzlement would have his life ruined as well. Or are the people promoting it limiting this protection to people accused of sexual offences? For clarity I’m talking about ALL offences. If you’re accused of something and it goes to court and you’re found not guilty*, or worse yet dropped before it goes to court, you have been publicly named for no good reason. * Or the b*****d verdict in Scotland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 33 minutes ago, ICTChris said: Bex Bailey on PM today Are all the erm's included to make her look stupid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 3 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said: Rather than the police? Obviously, if it's a good enough option for kids it's should be good enough for adults. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 2 minutes ago, Granny Danger said: For clarity I’m talking about ALL offences. If you’re accused of something and it goes to court and you’re found not guilty*, or worse yet dropped before it goes to court, you have been publicly named for no good reason. * Or the b*****d verdict in Scotland. But you can say I have been investigated and tried, I am therefore proven to be not guilty. (Unless you get not proven, of course) My point remains, complete anonymity is unworkable for a variety of reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 2 minutes ago, ayrmad said: Obviously, if it's a good enough option for kids it's should be good enough for adults. Childline isn't set up to facilitate prosecution. It is a support line for kids. The thread is about anonymity of alleged offenders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 6 hours ago, The OP said: It's impossible to say the number of false allegations for any given crime but the percentage of false allegations of rape is probably less than 10%. On the other hand I'd imagine rape more than most other crimes would have a higher attrition rate due to insufficient evidence, victims being unwilling to pursue the matter and not being believed. There seems to be a common myth that false reporting of rape is more common than it is. Probably part of the reason something wasn't done about Harvey Weinstein sooner. It's lower than 10%. Here is an article about a study that suggests it's potentially as low as 3%. https://www.rapecrisisscotland.org.uk/false-allegations/ This tallies with the fact that, between January 2011 and May 2012, there were 5651 prosecutions for rape and only 35 for falsely alleging it. A woman is far more likely to be raped in her lifetime than to make a false allegation of rape. That's the reality and those claiming there's no evidence to support this have ignored, well, the evidence. Edit to add: indeed, if anyone were simply to Google "false allegations of rape" and to click on the first Wikipedia article that comes up, they would see a list of studies across countries where even the most inclusive definitions of "false allegation" puts the figure no higher than 10% and the narrowest definitions and cohorts put it at under 1%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 44 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said: Childline isn't set up to facilitate prosecution. It is a support line for kids. The thread is about anonymity of alleged offenders. It gives them someone to confide in and will also help them in the event of them taking it further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 24 minutes ago, Bishoptonbankie said: Yes but you are talking about prosecutions for rape, what about the number of wasting time cases reported that don't make it to court? Presumably you'll have some *evidence* that this is widespread? No? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 1 minute ago, Bishoptonbankie said: You've yet to provide any independent evidence for your claims. Your claim is based on convictions for false allegations despite the fact that prosecutors very rarely take these matters to court. Independent of whom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 7 minutes ago, Bishoptonbankie said: The link posted by Ad Lib is from an organisation which actively opposes people being prosecuted for false allegations. Personally think that Rape is a crime which is second only to murder in terms of how horrific it is. We will place your views on the motives of Rape Crisis Scotland to one side. It's an article summarising a piece of academic peer reviewed research supplemented by other pieces of research. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.