Jump to content

Guilty until proven innocent.


Recommended Posts

It’s weird how all this criminal law discussion is taking place when the original question was essentially “should people be protected from false accusations on Twitter” and the answer was “they already are because they can sue for defamation.”

I think that, when it comes to sexual offences, a lot of internet dwellers conflate the presumption of innocence with the presumption that a complainer is lying, but tbf I don’t think Markoraj is doing that. He just seems to be pedantically following the “the only thing we know is that we know nothing” line and might appear to be inadvertently backing up the woman-haters in so doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 117
  • Created
  • Last Reply
14 minutes ago, Bishoptonbankie said:


No one here with one exception is anything like a woman hater, personally I think Rape is pretty much the worst crime imaginable that one person can commit on another. The dark days where women were told 'you were asking for it' etc should never be allowed to re-emerge, but we are moving rapidly towards a society where people are presumed guilty sometimes even after being found not guilty or indeed with no case to answer, I know of several cases and the lasting impact on that person is just as horrific as the crime they are accused of in that it absolutely ruins their life.

Social media is a great thing, but the hysterical reaction to just about every 'scandal' and witch hunt for whichever type of incident is flavour of the month is something that has to stop.

Im not even sure anonymity is the right answer either, as has been argued many abusers have been caught when their crimes were reported on, but also many lives have been ruined by these witch hunts.

Do you know personally of several cases? I don’t think I have ever known anyone, even remote acquaintances, who have been criminally tried for rape, whereas I personally know of a number of people who have been tried for murder or culpable homicide. And I’m fairly middle class. Odd then that we have all zeroed in on rape as being potentially rife with false accusations, imo.

Given the difficulty in gaining sufficiency of evidence to bring rape to trial I would not be entirely surprised there was a “no smoke without fire” logic at work when someone is. That is not my personal experience however, as people are far more likely to give a rape accused (in the media) the benefit of the doubt, particularly when it doesn’t follow the stereotypical and atypical “violent stranger” model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know personally no one who’s been tried for rape or sexual assault or anyone who has complained to the police or been the alleged victim in a rape or sexual offences trial. I know several survivors of rape and sexual assault.

The reality is that genuine survivors do keep quiet for many reasons. Some because they (wrongly but understandably) feel shame, some out of fear, some because they don’t feel they’ll be believed. And some because the whole idea of a criminal trial process, in which they are required to recount this horrible attack on them and (typically) have their character and honesty called into question as a defence counsel leans on the prejudices of a jury, will be just as traumatic as the original attack, and unlike with other serious crimes, the evidence is harder to corroborate absent a victim testimony.

If false allegations really were a serious problem we would expect the level of attempted prosecutions to be far higher than it is. As it stands, it’s barely a footnote and completely consistent with false allegation rates for other criminal offences.

To treat people differently because they have been indicted for a crime is not to “presume that they are guilty”. It is to recognise that just because someone hasn’t yet been declared guilty by a court of law doesn’t mean society should give them a presumption of being safe to be around and not a bad person either.

The thing about the presumption of innocence is also that, just like any other presumption, it is rebuttable. Unless a judge dismisses a trial on the grounds that the evidence should not allow any jury to convict an accused, then that means prosecutors have at least presented a “case to answer”: the presumption has been, at least partly, rebutted, even in a court of law.

Sometimes there is smoke without fire but in a functioning society you still conduct a precautionary evacuation of a building even if it’s a toaster setting off the alarms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A boy at my work was telling me a story about his pal who went with another guy and a burd for a 3some in the church graveyard. They had to give her a punty to get over the wall. Afterwards they just buggered off and left her to get her own way out.

She went to the polis the next day to accuse them of rape, and they got questioned, but cctv showed them helping her over the wall, so it never lead to anything. They asked his pal if he wanted to press charges against her, but he declined cos this all happened while his girlfriend was away, so he didn't want her to know.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Bishoptonbankie said:


Yes it is. Im also really enjoying the fact that you seem to be getting very angry over words on computers x

Not enough to go on a dotting spree though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Tamdunk said:

A boy at my work was telling me a story about his pal who went with another guy and a burd for a 3some in the church graveyard. They had to give her a punty to get over the wall. Afterwards they just buggered off and left her to get her own way out.

She went to the polis the next day to accuse them of rape, and they got questioned, but cctv showed them helping her over the wall, so it never lead to anything. They asked his pal if he wanted to press charges against her, but he declined cos this all happened while his girlfriend was away, so he didn't want her to know.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There yer dinner ad Lib lawyer boy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

I was thinking EdgarusQPFC had been quiet, but he's been banned. 

Probably asked to be. He was daft in that newfangled American teenage way but he wasn't a total c**t.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Probably asked to be. He was daft in that newfangled American teenage way but he wasn't a total c**t.

I think he is easily led. nothing wrong with him that couldnt be solved by a good nights sleep instead of up til all hour having his head filled with shite about US colleges

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think Louis CK whoever he is hasn't quite got rid of his penis/power complex and tediness.

Quote

These stories are true. At the time, I said to myself that what I did was okay because I never showed a woman my dick without asking first, which is also true. But what I learned later in life, too late, is that when you have power over another person, asking them to look at your dick isn’t a question. It’s a predicament for them. The power I had over these women is that they admired me. And I wielded that power irresponsibly.

http://www.tmz.com/2017/11/10/louis-c-k-confession-masturbation-women-accusers-true/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...