Is it time for anonymity for the accused?

[JanetJ123]

I said that my gut feeling was that he was guilty - i.e. I'm explicitly stating that it's not neccesarily a feeling based on the evidence. I then went on to say 'I wasn't on the jury'.

 

I absolutely was not suggesting that I knew more than the jury.

 

Be careful of that "gut feeling" Halibut, cos you woz wrong. What else have you been wrong about?

 

---------- Post added 14-09-2013 at 06:13 ----------

 

It isn't surprising that victims have real issues with coming forward. In some cases not only do you have the perp to contend with but Special Branch, CPS, IPCC, politicians, friends, colleagues, actively protecting abusers.

 

I appreciate that but don't think there's any other alternative. If everybody was believed at face value, we'd be in trouble because making it easy to get a conviction would open the system up to all kinds of abuse.

 

There are very few false rape allegations. Most are weeded -out during the investigation. So few rape allegations actually make it to Court (Less than one in ten?) because it is 'her' word against 'his'. Then the woman is sullied and called in to disrepute by any means possible. I wonder how the alleged victim of DeVell is feeling now? Do people really think that she imagined the whole thing? The 'Not guilty' verdict is because there is some doubt in jurors minds.

 

I know cases where individuals have been accused of several rapes, only to be found 'not-guilty' each time. The jury was not privy to the previous accusations until after the verdict, when several of them burst in to tears. The prior form would have caused them to find him guilty. Surely a track record of being accused of rape should hold some sway in a prosecution? What about Soham?

 

If someone has been found not guilty several times it doesn't mean they are guilty because of the law of averages.

 

Legislation has changed. We now have the law that the person making the allegation has to be considered capable of giving concent. Like the Ched Evan's trial. So a jury has to decide, in the first instance if the victim was drunk. If they were, its rape. If not it still could be.

[Halibut]

Be careful of that "gut feeling" Halibut, cos you woz wrong. What else have you been wrong about?

 

I may or may not be wrong. We can't say. He's been found not guilty but it doesn't necessarily mean he didn't do it.

[JanetJ123]

I may or may not be wrong. We can't say. He's been found not guilty but it doesn't necessarily mean he didn't do it.

 

No and again no. By that standard anyone who is found guilty can be assumed, in some circumstances, to be not guilty.

 

You have contradicted yourself because what you say highlights the need for anonymity. Mud sticks, and you a hurling a muddy bundle in the direction of an innocent man.

[Halibut]

No and again no. By that standard anyone who is found guilty can be assumed, in some circumstances, to be not guilty.

 

You have contradicted yourself because what you say highlights the need for anonymity. Mud sticks, and you a hurling a muddy bundle in the direction of an innocent man.

 

Rather the very occasional innocent man have a hard time than many more victims be denied the chance of justice.

 

The number of false accusations is tiny compared to the number of rapists who are never charged or convicted.

[JanetJ123]

Rather the very occasional innocent man have a hard time than many more victims be denied the chance of justice.

 

The number of false accusations is tiny compared to the number of rapists who are never charged or convicted.

 

They're not rapists until found guilty. Do you not believe in justice?

[Halibut]

They're not rapists until found guilty. Do you not believe in justice?

 

A man is a rapist if he rapes someone, whether he's convicted or not.

[JanetJ123]

A man is a rapist if he rapes someone, whether he's convicted or not.

 

No he's not, legally, there's no proof. I'm surprised you support the lynch mob mentality.

 

Its not very civilised.

 

So if I called you a rapist, told everyone you were, would you be such?

[Halibut]

No he's not, legally, there's no proof. I'm surprised you support the lynch mob mentality.

 

I don't and I can't see how you've possibly been able to infer that from anything I've said.

 

So if I called you a rapist, told everyone you were, would you be such?

 

No, as I haven't raped anybody.

 

Many women are raped and never report it; many women are raped and charges aren't brought, many women see their attackers walk free from court.

 

Who is doing all this raping? Non-rapists?

 

Does a paedophile only become a paedophile if he's convicted?

Is a murderer any less a murder if he's never charged?

 

A rapist becomes a rapist when he rapes someone, not when he's convicted of an offence of rape.

 

If I punch a man in the face, is it only assault if I'm convicted of that offence?

[JanetJ123]

I don't and I can't see how you've possibly been able to infer that from anything I've said.

 

 

 

No, as I haven't raped anybody.

 

Many women are raped and never report it; many women are raped and charges aren't brought, many women see their attackers walk free from court.

 

Who is doing all this raping? Non-rapists?

 

Does a paedophile only become a paedophile if he's convicted?

Is a murderer any less a murder if he's never charged?

 

A rapist becomes a rapist when he rapes someone, not when he's convicted of an offence of rape.

 

If I punch a man in the face, is it only assault if I'm convicted of that offence?

 

The point is that if you are willing to accept an allegation that is unproven then that opens up, as I said, the lynch mob mentality.

 

I appreciate, like lots of men on the extreme left, you like to patronise feminist groups and their, I have to say, questionable ideologies, but that's not how it works.

 

I'm sure you are on very dodgy legal grounds calling someone a rapist, without a guilty verdict first. You can probably say "alleged" rapist though.

 

If someone is found not guilty, they are not guilty, its not difficult. If you called Michael Le Velle a rapist now, you'd probably be charged.

 

Unfortunately, there are women, as well as men, who make false allegations up. We have to protect the innocent from these by having a process that gives both sides a fair opportunity to prove their case. Its called justice.

 

If there are women not coming forward, then unfortunately there is little that can be done. Unless you want to round up any number of random men and bang them up for a long time. Being a man doesn't mean you should be persecuted because there are some men who commit crimes.

[Halibut]

The point is that if you are willing to accept an allegation that is unproven then that opens up, as I said, the lynch mob mentality.

 

I appreciate, like lots of men on the extreme left, you like to patronise feminist groups and their, I have to say, questionable ideologies, but that's not how it works.

 

I'm sure you are on very dodgy legal grounds calling someone a rapist, without a guilty verdict first. You can probably say "alleged" rapist though.

 

If someone is found not guilty, they are not guilty, its not difficult. If you called Michael Le Velle a rapist now, you'd probably be charged.

 

Unfortunately, there are women, as well as men, who make false allegations up. We have to protect the innocent from these by having a process that gives both sides a fair opportunity to prove their case. Its called justice.

 

If there are women not coming forward, then unfortunately there is little that can be done. Unless you want to round up any number of random men and bang them up for a long time. Being a man doesn't mean you should be persecuted because there are some men who commit crimes.

 

I haven't called anyone a rapist.