They understand. They just, don’t care. The ends justify the means and all that.
sexual harassment (related to the recent C4 undercover program)
- Thread starter dowie
- Start date
"Believe all victims" are your words.
Presumption of innocence doesn't exist in your world does it, you just automatically assume guilt because it fits your ideological worldview. Like i said, dangerous
Last edited:
Soldato
That's probably because they do actually mean different things....
Religious people believe in God.
Anthropologists take the study of ancient religions seriously, but they (probably) don't believe in their gods.
Argument over then, we all agree it is semantics on words and no one is thinking we should whack people in prison just because someone has made an accusation, until due process is completed and beyond reasonable doubt the accusation is proved true?
Apologies if I have just prevented 400 pages of alt-right mouth frothing.
Last edited:
Soldato
Sounds good. But it would be easier if words weren't misused. It's particularly likely in contexts like this because there are actually people who don't seem to think that 'believe them' means a full and open minded investigation should take place.
Believe? Yes. Prosecute, no. As a minimum I'd want something recording against someone, that way if multiple people complain about a person over a period of time, even if there's no evidence, then the likelihood of them being someone worth keeping an eye on increases.
What's your take? That as long as someone commits a crime they're innocent unless they've left evidence?
so we agree you need to choose your words better, good stuff.
Fixed that for you
yes, how do you prove a crime has taken place without evidence? That's also the laws definition, and any sane person.
Last edited:
Well firstly, no. It's why acquittal is a thing and the opposite of guilty isn't 'innocent'. But using your logic, if someone kicked the **** out of you and put you in hospital but no one else sees it, you'd class the attacker as innocent because there's no evidence?
Soldato
SMH at the 'mouth frothy alt-righters' objecting to stuff like this:
Operation Midland - Wikipedia
If something goes to trial it's because the CPS believe there's enough evidence to mount a case, totally different from the original claim of 'believe all victims'. If I claim your brother kicked the **** out of me have to believe me right?
As someone mentioned above 'believe' and 'take seriously' are 2 different things.
Last edited:
If there was no belief in what you were saying, why would anyone take it seriously?
Last edited:
Gotcha. So you guys are seriously just here to froth over people using the world believe vs. "take seriously"?Obviously that could never happen
But
There's a huge difference between the statements "believe victims" and "take any accusation seriously", can you not see that?
So you want people to be given a criminal record without prosecution?
Explain to me how your idea can be abused and how you would mitigate it?
Last edited:
Noting a pattern of behaviour is not a 'criminal record'.
"noting"
So you want it written on a scrap piece of paper? Maybe the back of a notebook?
Or do you want an electronic system that follows an individual that can be queried by law enforcement and other enities that may be interested? I guess you could call it a "pattern of behaviour" record
.What do you think about tracking other patterns of behaviour on this record? Maybe assign a score while we are at it? No surprise you didn't think this idea through, probably why you ignored the second part of my comment.