Rolf Harris arrested on sexual charges

Glaucus said:
No, how did you come to that.
Click to expand...

Did I come to that ? No. I asked a question. I did not assert an opinion on your point of view regarding this case.


Glaucus said:
I don't care if he is or isn't but it seems that the burden off prove has been lowered for this and other cases, which is not something we should want as a society. There seems to be nothing other than 20-30 year old witness. Which again witness is the least reliable source if evidence and it only gets worse with time. this is well known about and researched. It is also harder for both sides, other potential witness etc, aren't going to remembered or easily traced etc
Click to expand...
You weren't at the trial. You never heard all of the evidence presented. I can't see how you opinion matters. Sorry. I trust the Jury's opinion as they are best placed to decide.
 
Sliver said:
You weren't at the trial. You never heard all of the evidence presented. I can't see how you opinion matters. Sorry. I trust the Jury's opinion as they are best placed to decide.
Click to expand...

that's fine, and no I wasn't. But nothing that has been released shows any substantial evidence and everything released so far is all based on witness evidence. It is a worrying case. And either they should release more info and/or should have a review of this and other cases, to insure burden off prove which is vital to our legal system is maintained.
 
XeNoN89 said:
The issue is how hard it is to defend yourself against an accusation that long ago, not how far back you can remember if you're a victim.
Click to expand...

But if your "innocent before being proven guilty" then it down to the prosecution to prove your guilt, I just don't see in these cases (not just Rolf's) how this can be done.

I'm not defending his actions I just don't understand how you prove guilt on something that happened 30 years ago, what proof do you have other than the other persons word. The nature of the crime would tend to mean that these acts were in private, if they weren't in private then their would be witnesses (so no problems there).

Glaucus said:
that's fine, and no I wasn't. But nothing that has been released shows any substantial evidence and everything released so far is all based on witness evidence. It is a worrying case. And either they should release more info and/or should have a review of this and other cases, to insure burden off prove which is vital to our legal system is maintained.
Click to expand...

Exactly, I wish the media would do a better job of telling us how it was proved "beyond reasonable doubt", I have no doubt that justice was done but I'd just like to know how these conclusions were arrived at.
 
Last edited:
HEADRAT said:
I'm not convinced that's true, I had an open fracture on my thigh when I was about 12 which was pretty traumatic, can't say I can really remember any detail now.
Click to expand...

Well that's unfortunate. Want to hear my anecdote ? In 1977 when I was five and living in South Africa, I broke my left arm while playing near a building site. I still remember it well today. So where does that leave us ?

Sexual abuse is worse than physical trauma because it stays with you with an intensity that physical pain does not.
 
Sliver said:
So where does that leave us ?
Click to expand...

So you're saying that somebody that suffered a sexual assault has a perfect recollection of that event! That the trauma they perceived as an assault may not have clouded their memory over the years?
 
Last edited:
HEADRAT said:
So you're saying that somebody that suffered a sexual assault has a perfect recollection of that event! That the trauma they perceived as an assault may not have clouded their memory over the years?
Click to expand...

No I'm not going that far. I will say that the mental anguish caused by sexual trauma is something that never leaves the victim, even after decades it's still there.
 
Is there any actual proof of that or is it just an assumption on your part?

It might well be true I just don't know, human memory if very fallible, I didn't realize sexual assault made it less so?
 
Last edited:
HEADRAT said:
Is there any actual proof of that or is it just an assumption on your part?
Click to expand...

My late cousin suffered sexual abuse growing up from her father, who left the family and got away with it. She was a few years older than me but we were quite close. She grew up to have real issues with men. She was married and divorced, had numerous boy friends and two kids. She was seen as the black sheep of the family cause she was quite outspoken and emotional. She confided in me what had happened to her when we were younger. My mums side of the family knew but her mother refused to accept it and said she was making it up. I believed her. Three years ago, her latest alcoholic boyfriend murdered her in a domestic dispute. I know for certain, if her father had been a good man and not a dirty pervert, she would never have ended up that way.

Her murder made the local news:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-12744951
 
Last edited:
Sliver said:
My late cousin suffered sexual abuse growing up from her father, who left the family and got away with it. She was a few years older than me but we were quite close. She grew up to have real issues with men. She was married and divorced, had numerous boy friends and two kids. She was seen as the black sheep of the family cause she was quite outspoken and emotional. She confided in me what had happened to her when we were younger. My mums side of the family knew but her mother refused to accept it and said she was making it up. I believed her. Three years ago, her latest alcoholic boyfriend murdered her in a domestic dispute. I know for certain, if her father had been a good man and not a dirty pervert, she would never have ended up that way.

Her murder made the local paper:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-12744951
Click to expand...

That's really very sad/personal account but it doesn't really prove anything about falibity of a persons memory (no disrespect intended)

Zethor said:
http://www.aaets.org/article190.htm
Click to expand...

I'll take a read, thanks ;)
 
Last edited:
HEADRAT said:
That's really very sad/personal account but it doesn't really prove anything about falibity of a persons memory (no disrespect intended)
Click to expand...

I know, I was trying to convey the point that sexual abuse has consequences that last a lifetime. These things are very real in peoples minds decades later and as such, trying to say that their memory is no longer reliable is a weak argument.
 
Sure, I appreciate that.

I just wish the media would do a better job of explaining the process of proving guild in such situations, it's quite frustrating, as I said before I'm sure justice has been done but I'd just like to be better educated on the process.
 
Sliver said:
Your opinion is duly noted. ;)
Click to expand...

Please, if you have a convincing argument showing that the emotional responses and prejudice that any given individual has on such an emotive subject as child molestation has absolutely no detrimental effect on their ability to make unbiased objective decisions, I am happy to listen :)

Then when you are done with that, you can explain the reasoning behind 'peer pressure' having absolutely no effect on anyone, even in a jury, or why it is simply not plausible that the prevailing acceptable responses to certain emotive subjects could colour the decisions of individuals and therefore sway the overall objectivity of a jury.
 
BuffetSlayer said:
Please, if you have a convincing argument showing that the emotional responses and prejudice that any given individual has on such an emotive subject as child molestation has absolutely no detrimental effect on their ability to make unbiased objective decisions, I am happy to listen :)

Then when you are done with that, you can explain the reasoning behind 'peer pressure' having absolutely no effect on anyone, even in a jury, or why it is simply not plausible that the prevailing acceptable responses to certain emotive subjects could colour the decisions of individuals and therefore sway the overall objectivity of a jury.
Click to expand...

What exactly are you saying? Do you think he is innocent?
 
Sliver said:
Your entire post is supposition. You can't prove anything you said, all you have done is present a hypothetical which you think supports your line of thought.

Again. You also were not in court and listened to the evidence presented. I'll take the jury's word over yours every single time.
Click to expand...

The press would have printed any real evidence that was presented. We might not have cameras in the courts, but we sure as heck have reporters ;)

The most damning thing they printed was his letter, and that does not contain any admission that he abused the girls.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom