Nagel Posted January 25, 2016 Author Share Posted January 25, 2016 I just knew there would be an article from Spiked! magazine about this. It's a good one too. A man has been deprived of rights the rest of us enjoy even though he has not been convicted of a crime. He’s effectively been categorised as a pre-rapist. ......... A society in which a non-guilty man must provide the police with information about his every sexual conquest is not a free society. It’s the opposite; it’s a society in which no zone of life exists independently of officialdom, and in which more and more of us are viewed as precriminals, and sex is viewed as pre-rape. Full article here - http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/in-dystopian-britain-the-police-now-hunt-down-8216pre-rapists8217/17954#.VqXwAlOLTeQ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 The man's name has not be revealed . The Court's 'sexual risk order ' suggests the authorities believe he is guilty . My guess the person in question is not going to sue anyone and more than likely thinks he's lucky to be still walking the streets . A Jury found him not guilty. The state thus believes that he is not guilty. That's how our justice system works. There shouldn't be any system by which he can have his liberty restrained due to someones "belief" that wasn't proven in court. Hopefully in this case other evidence was presented and that's what lead the magistrate to decide on this order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamston Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 A Jury found him not guilty. The state thus believes that he is not guilty. That's how our justice system works. There shouldn't be any system by which he can have his liberty restrained due to someones "belief" that wasn't proven in court. Hopefully in this case other evidence was presented and that's what lead the magistrate to decide on this order. I am in agreement with what you say . There has to be some other evidence which led the court to issue the order . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 It's not right that it's done in secret though, justice has to be open to scrutiny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfox Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 It's not right that it's done in secret though, justice has to be open to scrutiny. Where was it done in secret ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagel Posted January 25, 2016 Author Share Posted January 25, 2016 Where was it done in secret ? At Northallerton Magistrates Court. That part isn't secret. What went on at the court is very secret. You are not allowed to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Where was it done in secret ? Where are the details of what happened? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 At Northallerton Magistrates Court. That part isn't secret. What went on at the court is very secret. You are not allowed to know. Was the case held in camera? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfox Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Where are the details of what happened? You mean you the all knowing one doesn't know ? Are the details of all cases heard within the criminal justice system in the media ? No of course not and there are many reasons for that - If the man was legally represented - and i can only assume he was - then any application will have been served on them and the underlying supporting evidence. If the details are not to be reported there will be an order in existence in relation to that too. If he feels the order was inappropriate or disproportionate or not evidentially supported then he can appeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamston Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 You mean you the all knowing one doesn't know ? Are the details of all cases heard within the criminal justice system in the media ? No of course not and there are many reasons for that - If the man was legally represented - and i can only assume he was - then any application will have been served on them and the underlying supporting evidence. If the details are not to be reported there will be an order in existence in relation to that too. If he feels the order was inappropriate or disproportionate or not evidentially supported then he can appeal. We are all speculating because we all have a lack of knowledge of the facts . It seems to be a rare or unique ruling by a court . To answer the OP's original question - 'Is this Fair ?' None of us know , we have to trust the judgement of the court who I believe will have acted in good faith under whatever the circumstances are . 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