#MeToo - is it just different for men and women?

VincentHanna said:
Well social media does seem to be breeding a generation of narcissists.
Click to expand...

No, they were always there. Now they have a world wide platform and the media loves to stir it up. The media also knows how to troll the masses and push all the right buttons to rile them up for all the clicks and trends.
 
Jokester said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-46856934

This has blown up in the Scottish government's face by the looks of things. Found to have acted unlawfully in the Salmond accusations, now Sturgeon has referred herself to the standards committee over her involvement.

Total shambles.
Click to expand...

Sturgeon has been brilliant, but such is the thirst for male blood these days it must've seemed like a no brainer to her at the time.

Could be costly, and as they say in Scotland; hell mend her.
 
Unfortunately that doesn't mean much nowadays. Given that men are to be presumed guilty and the police and CPS are ordered to manipulate or suppress evidence in order to convict more men (whether they're guilty or not), an arrest no longer means very much. Even a conviction is far from conclusive regarding whether the man actually is guilty or not. When a jury is primed to presume guilt based on biological group identity and the evidence is "adjusted" towords guilt, verdicts are unreliable.

Maybe he's guilty. Maybe not. We'll probably never know.
 
explicit4u said:
. . . there's been a few cases where crucial evidence has been conveniently left out of a trial. . . .
Click to expand...
As with Anglion's claim about the CPS being "ordered to manipulate or suppress evidence", I would suggest that you might like to justify your paranoid claim that crucial evidence was conveniently not disclosed to the defence.
 
stockhausen said:
As with Anglion's claim about the CPS being "ordered to manipulate or suppress evidence", I would suggest that you might like to justify your paranoid claim that crucial evidence was conveniently not disclosed to the defence.
Click to expand...

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...d-cps-apologise-to-man-after-collapse-of-case

Guy is on bail for two years, spends three days in court, seemingly the CPS forget to disclose a text message from the supposed victim to her friend stating: “It wasn’t against my will or anything.” That was rather convenient to forget about/apparently miss while cherry picking other messages from the pov of wanting to get a conviction.
 
stockhausen said:
Do you have any actual evidence to support this scurrilous assertion?
Click to expand...

Yes, of course. It was briefly made public in a number of trials recently. You already know that, so there's no point in me telling you again.

You also already know that pressure is applied to increase the conviction rate for men (not guilty men - just men) - that too is public. Very public. It's not at all hidden.

You know these things already. As does everyone else. It's just that some people think it's a good thing.
 
stockhausen said:
From where in that report did you get the information that the CPS "forgot" to disclose anything, or did you "imagine" that detail as well?
Click to expand...

note: "seemingly"

It is possible they and/or the police didn't do their jobs properly and despite that, by sheer chance, they managed to get text messages that were useful to them.

It is possible they deliberately withheld the text messages.... etc..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom