Dark Night Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 To difficult to answer? Not at all, in that case the rapist has admitted guilt, my point is that they name the alleged rapist on being charged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flanker7 Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 If found guilty then name them, if found not guilty then name the claimant. Not so easy DN. Cases found not guilty many years ago have since been proven by new science. DNA samples found at a crime today may be 'No Trace' until the offender gets caught in the future and has to give a sample which provides a link to earlier crime(s). I prefer the the Scottish verdict of 'Not Proven'. It is said that it is better for 100 guilty people to go free than 1 innocent person to be found guilty. There are plenty walking around free today that prove this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solomon1 Posted February 8, 2015 Author Share Posted February 8, 2015 (edited) Interesting that people should turn on the abuse victims, rather than the perpetrators This is exactly what I'm talking about Mr M I find it very difficult to deal with, in the face of obvious suffering Trying to break down the reasons for it...and draw people's awareness to the fact that they are being hideously unfair to people who have been brutalised - just to preserve their peace of mind ---------- Post added 08-02-2015 at 19:24 ---------- The problem that I have with these rape(and lesser crimes) is that they were committed a long time ago I agree it becomes very difficult to prove But Cosby is guilty in my mind Without a shadow of a doubt ---------- Post added 08-02-2015 at 19:25 ---------- if the alleged perpetrater can be named so shouldso should the alleged victim. ..................... Why? ---------- Post added 08-02-2015 at 19:26 ---------- To be fair, whilst it's an allegation, it's not proven is it. So it would be a little premature to form any opinion on the basis of it For a soul-less robot, perhaps ---------- Post added 08-02-2015 at 19:30 ---------- The problem is there have been many false alegations, very public ones that have been to court and found to be baseless And how many millions of people are raped and molested without anyone ever knowing Out of every 100 rapes, 2 make it to court I think I would be more on the side of victims, statistically ---------- Post added 08-02-2015 at 19:32 ---------- If a named rapist for what ever reason decides to turn him/herself into the police for a crime he/she committed 30 yrs ago, should the alleged victim be named? I don't think so, there's no need ---------- Post added 08-02-2015 at 19:34 ---------- Not at all, in that case the rapist has admitted guilt, my point is that they name the alleged rapist on being charged. Rather than before it's all gone to court you mean? Most rapists get off scott free, so I'm probably in favour of naming them Mud sticks an all... ---------- Post added 08-02-2015 at 19:37 ---------- It is said that it is better for 100 guilty people to go free than 1 innocent person to be found guilty Who says? And this appears to be our current system. The percentage of rapists walking free, instead of being banged up is about 90% Edited February 8, 2015 by Solomon1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 Most rapists get off scott free, so I'm probably in favour of naming them Mud sticks an all... But why would you name someone that has not commited an offence, and being found unproven in court? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solomon1 Posted February 8, 2015 Author Share Posted February 8, 2015 But why would you name someone that has not commited an offence, and being found unproven in court? Because this number is miniscule El Cid Do you have any idea of rape stats? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 Do you have any idea of rape stats? That would suggest that the CPS are bringing too many case to court, when there is a low chance of a conviction; not that the unproven cases are guilty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solomon1 Posted February 8, 2015 Author Share Posted February 8, 2015 That would suggest that the CPS are bringing too many case to court, when there is a low chance of a conviction; not that the unproven cases are guilty El Cid, with all due respect, do you have any idea about rape stats? Because if you did, you wouldn't be asking me such idiotic questions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly4danny Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 This is exactly what I'm talking about Mr M I find it very difficult to deal with, in the face of obvious suffering Trying to break down the reasons for it...and draw people's awareness to the fact that they are being hideously unfair to people who have been brutalised - just to preserve their peace of mind ---------- Post added 08-02-2015 at 19:24 ---------- I agree it becomes very difficult to prove But Cosby is guilty in my mind Without a shadow of a doubt ---------- Post added 08-02-2015 at 19:25 ---------- ..................... Why? ---------- Post added 08-02-2015 at 19:26 ---------- For a soul-less robot, perhaps ---------- Post added 08-02-2015 at 19:30 ---------- And how many millions of people are raped and molested without anyone ever knowing Out of every 100 rapes, 2 make it to court I think I would be more on the side of victims, statistically ---------- Post added 08-02-2015 at 19:32 ---------- I don't think so, there's no need ---------- Post added 08-02-2015 at 19:34 ---------- Rather than before it's all gone to court you mean? Most rapists get off scott free, so I'm probably in favour of naming them Mud sticks an all... ---------- Post added 08-02-2015 at 19:37 ---------- Who says? And this appears to be our current system. The percentage of rapists walking free, instead of being banged up is about 90% Where is the link to this??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Talker Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 The problem is there have been many false alegations, very public ones that have been to court and found to be baseless. Many false allegations? You really think so? Since when? The truth of the matter is, that a man is 300 times more likely to be the victim of a rape, himself, than to be the victim of a false allegation of rape. The incidence of false allegation in the crime of rape, is analogous to the false reporting of any other crime, ( be it burglary, robbery etc) at approximately 3% or so. ---------- Post added 08-02-2015 at 21:53 ---------- Where is the link to this??? Try the cps, or rape crisis, or victim support. They usually have accurate figures. Or see my comment above about the incidence of false allegations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly4danny Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 Many false allegations? You really think so? Since when? The truth of the matter is, that a man is 300 times more likely to be the victim of a rape, himself, than to be the victim of a false allegation of rape. The incidence of false allegation in the crime of rape, is analogous to the false reporting of any other crime, ( be it burglary, robbery etc) at approximately 3% or so. ---------- Post added 08-02-2015 at 21:53 ---------- Try the cps, or rape crisis, or victim support. They usually have accurate figures. Or see my comment above about the incidence of false allegations. I was talking about the link to where it has been proven that 90% of rapists are walking free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now