Russell Brand.

You said "nearly impossible to prove". Your own words.

What action should we take against a person when it's "nearly impossible to prove" that he did anything, at all???!

I mean, that's a weird place to be, logically, trying to seek prosecution and punishments when you can't prove anything even happened.
Since it's something inherently difficult to have evidence for (getting grabbed in busy public areas or someone under-skirting on trains/buses) justice can't really be had without the mob being involved.

I shall be exceedingly blunt here... if someone is accused of a criminal act and it's not proven I will naturally forever remain skeptical of their character unless I had absolute knowledge it was untrue. I know it's unfair but I'm not about to let some utopian fantasy get in the way of maximising my own survival.
 
Last edited:
And yet she can stand for a journalist to plaster it all over the world news?

Years later. Damn have you no thought for what it might be like to be raped, the trauma, the guilt, the self blame. Maybe she finally felt she could talk about it. I believe she has remained anonymous so her name isn't plastered anywhere. You seem to be coming from the stand point that they are liars and so are the journalists. We simply don't know the truth of it either way.
 
Years later. Damn have you no thought for what it might be like to be raped, the trauma, the guilt, the self blame. Maybe she finally felt she could talk about it. I believe she has remained anonymous so her name isn't plastered anywhere. You seem to be coming from the stand point that they are liars and so are the journalists. We simply don't know the truth of it either way.

But she had the presence of mind at the time to tell her mate and go to a rape centre.
Behavioural conflict.

Damn, have you no thought for people falsely accused of heinous crimes? You seem to be coming from the stand point that they are paragons of honesty and he's Satan incarnate.
I'm simply pointing out things that can be flaws in their argument and cast doubt upon the allegations.
 
Last edited:
Since it's something inherently difficult to have evidence for (getting grabbed in busy public areas or someone under-skirting on trains/buses) justice can't really be had without the mob being involved.

I shall be exceedingly blunt here... if someone is accused of a criminal act and it's not proven I will naturally forever remain skeptical of their character unless I had absolute knowledge it was untrue. I know it's unfair but I'm not about to let some utopian fantasy get in the way of maximising my own survival.
Yikes. "Mob justice" isn't justice at all.

Advocating for a society where we punish without proof is a dark and dangerous thing to do.

Honestly did not expect you to be saying that.
 
What should the target for successful prosecutions be? 100%? 50%? I'd think very carefully about your answer.

The target should be that those guilty get served justice. However the benefit of the doubt has to fall on the one who would lose their liberty. Better to have 10 people guilty walk free than 1 innocent locked up. That is of little comfort to those victims however. Just because someone was not found to be guilty doesn't mean they didn't do it. It just means the state can't punish you.
 
The target should be that those guilty get served justice. However the benefit of the doubt has to fall on the one who would lose their liberty. Better to have 10 people guilty walk free than 1 innocent locked up. That is of little comfort to those victims however. Just because someone was not found to be guilty doesn't mean they didn't do it. It just means the state can't punish you.
So you're agreeing that % targets are meaningless, and each case should be evaluated on merit.
 
But she had the presence of mind at the time to tell her mate and go to a rape centre.
Behavioural conflict.

Are you a robot? This is like talking the Data from Star Trek, no in fact I think Data had more understanding of human emotions. People aren't robots, they don't always act in ways you think they should. People who have suffered trauma don't act logically. Many actually go back to their attackers. Does that mean they weren't raped?
 
The target should be that those guilty get served justice. However the benefit of the doubt has to fall on the one who would lose their liberty. Better to have 10 people guilty walk free than 1 innocent locked up. That is of little comfort to those victims however. Just because someone was not found to be guilty doesn't mean they didn't do it. It just means the state can't punish you.

Likewise, just because allegations are made it doesn't mean you're guilty and should be punished.
 
Are you a robot? This is like talking the Data from Star Trek, no in fact I think Data had more understanding of human emotions. People aren't robots, they don't always act in ways you think they should. People who have suffered trauma don't act logically. Many actually go back to their attackers. Does that mean they weren't raped?

No, it means it puts a massive flaw in any convincing legal argument that they were however!
You're complaining about a drop in rape prosecutions and its because of things like that, things that cast doubt, that its so hard to prove!
 
I think she did, this is from 2006. She probably kept it in the hopes that one day maybe someone might take her claim seriously?

No the text message is from an American women, living in LA i believe.

Also

 
I whole heartedly wish that some posters in here have no daughters, nor sons.
There is a place for looking at things dispassionately, and not rushing in with emotive cries of "won't somebody think of the children!"

The need for safeguarding cannot override the need for justice, and justice is equally about not punishing the innocent as it is about punishing the guilty.
 
So you're agreeing that % targets are meaningless, and each case should be evaluated on merit.

The point is that clearly many victims are not being well served by the justice system. There is no way that 99.9% of accusations are false. Women are more aware of these stats than anyone. Why put yourself though the trauma again just to only see their attacker walk free. The CPS have said they are failing victims. I'm not as lawyer so I've zero thought on how they can fix it.
 
There is a place for looking at things dispassionately, and not rushing in with emotive cries of "won't somebody think of the children!"

The need for safeguarding cannot override the need for justice, and justice is equally about not punishing the innocent as it is about punishing the guilty.
Whatever mate, it dont change my statement.
 
Last edited:
No, it means it puts a massive flaw in any convincing legal argument that they were however!
You're complaining about a drop in rape prosecutions and its because of things like that, things that cast doubt, that its so hard to prove!
show me you have zero understanding of being in a desperate and unknown situation....
 
Likewise, just because allegations are made it doesn't mean you're guilty and should be punished.

It does not mean that so no worries then.
If allegations are made :
1) the police need to gather evidence and decide if they think there is enough to warrant referral to the CPS
2) the CPS then review the evidence and decide if they believe on balance there is strong enough evidence in order to secure a conviction
3) the courts then try the defendant based on the CPS case, with evidence to the contrary from the defendant

There is no punishment until the court finds the person guilty.
 
Back
Top Bottom