 sj |
||
|
||
BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ??
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Richard Bridge Date: 28 Jul 10 - 03:25 AM Silence is not consent. Nor is showing out. Sorry, folks, but we've had far too much impersonation in this thread. No additional Guest posts will be allowed in this thread. If you're not logged in, you're not allowed to post. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: mousethief Date: 27 Jul 10 - 07:00 PM Silence is no protest at all. Silence is acquiescence. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Richard Bridge Date: 27 Jul 10 - 05:52 PM There is quite an interesting note on the English law on similar fact evidence here: - http://www.richardwebster.net/similarfactevidence.html It contains some indications that might be quit damaging to Lord Denning's reputation. In my limited dealings with him I thought him conceited and prejudiced. It may well be that his reputation in jurisprudence may in due course decline. I would have thought it pretty obvious that the position on anonymity differs for rapist and victim. This thread has long been an obscenity. If people wish to dress or behave as if part of sexual display that is one thing. If they wish actually to consummate sex that is different. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: mauvepink Date: 27 Jul 10 - 04:09 PM I merely provided an update to the anonimity part of this thread rather than make a new thread. I can only suggest that with over 800 initial postings the matter was worthy of discussion and not an obscenity (though rape, of course, will and must always remain obscene) If you had no wish to comment on the thread perhaps silence would have made a better protest? Best wishes mp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: mousethief Date: 27 Jul 10 - 02:21 PM Was there really a need to resurrect this piece of obscenity? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: mauvepink Date: 26 Jul 10 - 01:37 PM Just an update... Rape charge anonymity pledge dropped This is one inequality that it seems is going to carry on being allowed. There really has to be an answer to this rather than continuining potential miscarriages of justice without guilt having been established. mp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: mauvepink Date: 26 May 10 - 10:46 AM Whilst visiting a client this morning there was an interview taking place on "This Morning" with Phillip Schofield and two guests. I could not listen to all of it but was quite mortified to hear some of the woman's comments. Paul Scofield highlighted the suicides and lives that have been ruined through false and malicious allegations. She seemed blind spotted to this by her own agenda of not allowing anonimity. I am more convinced than ever. The wrongs of the system against genuine victims will not be made right by allowing malicious allegations against alleged rapists to not be anonymous. It seems more than criminal and extremely cruel to put any innocent person through the ordeal of being exposed before any guilt is established. Where no guilt exists it is inhumane and as bad to that person's life as would be rape to anyone. Justice and satisfaction will never come from making innocent people victims of callous and cruel crimes such rape and false allegations of rape. We really do need to consider both parties in the name of humanity. You can never give a falsely accused person their life back once you have trashed it. No amount of compensation and apology will put the wrongs right. No more than if a real rapist paid their victim compensation would take away the damage they had done to them. The two things are closely linked. There has to be a way of doing this fairly whilst making prosecution of a genuine rapist less of a trial and ordeal for their victim. mp mp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Lox Date: 25 May 10 - 07:30 PM No worries Don. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Don Firth Date: 25 May 10 - 07:02 PM My apologies! Typo! That line, which says just the opposite of what I intended to say, should have read: "I do not believe that 'forceable rape' can be established 'beyond a shadow of a doubt.'At least in the absence of any medical evidence, such as bruising, etc. Again, sorry! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Lox Date: 25 May 10 - 04:50 PM gnu 1. I am not having a philosophical argument with you. I am informing you of how the courts deal with these issues in the UK. Go and read about evidence in court. Witness testimony is a form of evidence. The court has to decide which evidence to trust. When numerous unconnected women all testify that they have been raped by the same man, the court these days recognizes that accumulated evidence as giving the victim credibility whilst damaging the credit of the rapists testimony. 2. I know you didn't say your posts. I said I see no evidence that you have engaged with anyone elses. Your posts on the other hand stand as evidence that you have made no effort to engage with any of the points that have been raised. Your last post is a perfect example as you have failed to understand simple english. I'm used to you being a witty and reasonable observer and i don't know why you are being so obtuse on this thread. I'm sorry if asking you to think makes you feel tired. Don. 1. I think I may have accidentally given the impression that the question of whether Jack did or didn't rape tony is one that I have the remotest interest in. To clarify - I am interested in the wider conversation in this thread and in looking at examples given in the context of the discussion being had. I don't know whether Jack Raped Tony or not. Neither do you. You have your reasons for believing Jacks story. You may well be right. But neither of us is likely to ever know the truth. 2. "I do believe that "forceable rape" can be established "beyond a shadow of a doubt."" If you know of a reliable method of establishing this fact I suggest you let the courts and the police know, as currently rape is notoriously difficult to prosecute and prove so I am sure they would welcome a failsafe method with open arms. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: gnu Date: 25 May 10 - 04:23 PM Lox... "That is how criminal courts prove things..." No it is not. That is a tautology. If they cannot prove something, it cannot be proven. Give your head a shake to see if it rattles. Lox... "Reading your posts, I can find no evidence that you have engaged in any meaningful way with the clarifiations and distinctions that have been drawn. You have merely repeated your view and show no willingness to develop it. That is of course your choice." Your choice to misread my post and twist it around. I did not say MY posts. Shake your head again. This is tiresome. gnightgnu |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Don Firth Date: 25 May 10 - 04:11 PM Which is to say that in this case, in a court of law, I do believe that "forceable rape" can be established "beyond a shadow of a doubt." Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Don Firth Date: 25 May 10 - 04:07 PM "As I have pointed out in this thread, a man and woman mey be engaged in the act of coitus, yet the woman may for whatever reason wish to stop. "If the man refuses to stop, that is rape." Well--Jack swore that at no time did Tony indicate that she wanted to stop. He claimed that she was an enthusiastic participant. Again, for what it may be worth. But measured against that, when asked by a couple of people if she had actually told Jack that she wanted to stop, Tony dodged the issue and would not say one way or the other. To say "No!" the following day. . . . I'm sorry, but I have a pretty hard time believing in retroactive rape. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Lox Date: 25 May 10 - 05:44 AM Apologies for the mispelling of Don in my previous post - this was accidental. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Lox Date: 25 May 10 - 05:42 AM "I see right off that the story of Tony and Jack is being interpreted in the way that some folks want to interpreted it in terms of their own predispositions." It is certainly true that some will interpret the story the way they want to. Whether or not that is down to their predispositions may or may not be true, but DOne can have no knwledge of that. Whether or not Jack Raped Tony will always be a mystery and one mans guess is as good as another womans speculation. As I have pointed out in this thread, a man and woman mey be engaged in the act of coitus, yet the woman may for whatever reason wish to stop. If the man refuses to stop, that is rape. Again, I would ask people to reflect on the reality of their own sexual experiences before suggesting that the man is in any way justified in forcing her to continue regardless. It is possible that Tony said "no" in the room at ths late stage. It is also possible that she consented and then made a false accusation the next day. In My opinion, Her inexperience in reality is a more significant factor than Don is giving it credit for. Many inexperienced boys and girls are brassy on the surface to hide naivety underneath. "Not knowing what to do" would be a problem that would apply to numerous aspects of this story, from how to have sex, to how to say no, to whether or not she has the right to say no once she has gone back to jacks room, to how to deal with the possibility of being raped, to how to behave afterwards. People deal with trauma in different ways. When my mum died, I handled it by putting on a brave positive face and there were a few who found this upsetting as they couldn't understand what I appeared to be so happy about. There are no rules except one - if she says she doesn't want to at any stage then it stops. If you reflect back to your own sexual experiences, if a woman asked you to stop you would have to be a hard hearted bully to force her to keep going. The myth of the testosterone driven animal is nothing but fantasy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Don Firth Date: 24 May 10 - 06:55 PM By the way, to keep the record straight, neither Tony nor Jack were what I would call friends of mine. They were acquaintances. We met because we hung out at the same restaurant on University Way between classes. Dozens of people did. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Don Firth Date: 24 May 10 - 06:51 PM I see right off that the story of Tony and Jack is being interpreted in the way that some folks want to interpreted it in terms of their own predispositions. Considering what led up to the alleged rape, the way Tony was acting indicated to the closest witnesses (the couple with whom she and Jack were double-dating) that, judging from what was going on in the back seat, she was more than willing to have sex with Jack. They heard Tony say "Yes" when Jack asked her if she wanted to come home with him, and the driver was glad when they pulled up in front of Jack's apartment building because he and his date were afraid they were going to go at it right there in the back seat of the car. For what it's worth, Jack said that at no time did she indicate, by word or action, that she wanted him to stop. In fact, he said that she was totally and eagerly cooperative. Also, for however anyone wants to interpret it, Tony did not want to go to the police when several people advised her to. Nor did she ever claim that she actually asked Jack to stop. And Tony may have been a virgin, but she was anything but naïve. And—the incident sure didn't slow down her social life any. Those ARE the facts, folks. Do with them what you will. You will anyway. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Lox Date: 24 May 10 - 06:09 PM Gnu "But, the court cannot judge. The court must prove. That is the law." I'm not arguing a point here, I'm informing you of a legal reality. In addition, I agree that a back catalog of women, none connected, all all independantly having pressed rape charges against the same man, constitutes evidence that the accusations are true. That is how criminal courts prove things - by examining evidence to determine whether charges are true or not. "As far as me engaging a little more carefully, there are many posts to the effect to which I alluded." Reading your posts, I can find no evidence that you have engaged in any meaningful way with the clarifiations and distinctions that have been drawn. You have merely repeated your view and show no willingness to develop it. That is of course your choice. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: gnu Date: 24 May 10 - 05:51 PM Lox... "then the court is likely to judge that it is likely that he is lying." But, the court cannot judge. The court must prove. That is the law. And, "likely"??? That's laughable. As far as me engaging a little more carefully, there are many posts to the effect to which I alluded. Again, I shall say, have fun with it. See you in another 100 posts or so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Lox Date: 24 May 10 - 05:34 PM Gnu. British law allows testimony from previous alleged victims of a rapist. If a guy attacks a woman and it is his word against hers, but it turns out that he has been in the same situation with numerous other unconnected women, then the court is likely to judge that it is likely that he is lying. Some circumstancial evidence is allowed and in this case the accumulation of accusations against the same man by numerous women points towards the likelihood that he has been a naughty boy. "Oops... I posted again on this thread which exonerates "victims" carte blanche. No trial, no jury, guilty no matter what." I think you need to just engage a little more carefully with what has actually been said so that you can understand some of the distinctions that have been made a little better. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Lox Date: 24 May 10 - 05:26 PM Well I'm not prepared to make asumptions about Dons assumptions either. I interpret his post to be evidence of how it can be very hard to judge who is telling the truth and whgo is telling the lie. In the case of Dons story, there are reasons to believe both parties. In the case of the girl, there is the question of her inexperience which supports her trustworthiness. In the case of the guy, there is a well reasoned argument that gives credence to his denial. I would probably have erred the other way to Don on the basis that the guys cool headedness in the face of accusations against him, and his ready to hand list of reasoned explanations comes across to me as just a bit prepared. I also find it unlikely that a girl who has just lost her virginity would have the guile and deceit of some seasoned socialite. It is not impossible that she just didn't want to go the whole way. Remember being a teenager? "did you go the whole way?" She signed no contracts by kissing and touching. (it is irrelevant whether she was a teenager or not, what is significant was her lack of experience) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: gnu Date: 24 May 10 - 05:24 PM Lox... "Currently in British Law, previous accusations can be used as evidence to support a sexual assault or abuse charge." Would that not lead to a mistrial? Surely uproven accusations put forth by the plaintiff would be used by the defendant at least to discredit the credibility of the plaintiff??? How could such even remotely be admissible in a court of law??? Oops... I posted again on this thread which exonerates "victims" carte blanche. No trial, no jury, guilty no matter what. But, I had to as I just can't believe your statement, Lox. I shall try to refrain, once again, from even clicking on this thread. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Date: 24 May 10 - 05:10 PM Y'see that in Don's tale are embedded a whole heap of assumptions. I won't go through each one because there are so many. But the principle ones are a) if a woman is drunk and intimate with a guy, she's agreed to sleep with him. b) if she doesn't choose to sleep with him, she shouldn't be so stupid as to expect a guy not to force himself on her. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Lox Date: 24 May 10 - 05:01 PM "do judges get to know of a defenadants 'previous' before verdict? Would they remain impartial if they did know of previous offences? Would having a previous offence mean they could no longer be innocent of charges in the future?" Currently in British Law, previous accusations can be used as evidence to support a sexual assault or abuse charge. That was how my friend managed to get her abuser convicted. The testimony of a critical number (I'm afraid I don't know what that number was) of unconnected or loosely connected women was considered good evidence, even though on a case by case basis it was only his word against each victims. In terms of capacity, I seem to remember reading some research recenly which showed the whole "I was drunk and didn't know what I was doing" excuse to be a load of bollocks. In the case of Dons story, we reman in the dark about the key part of the story. Did Jack have Tony's consent when he penetrated her. I have been in many similar circumstances and on occasion the girl I was with said that she didn't want to go all the way despite having been very intimate with me. The reality of that situation has no bearing on the myth that hot testosterone turns off the brain and conscience. In fact, to have gone ahead and done it anyway would have required me to make a decision to ignore her and force her to do what I wanted. There is no way that such a decision could be confused with "getting carried away" as couples sometimes claim to do together. Undressing someone and positioning them and oneself to be able to engage in sexual intercourse can be a complicated procedure when both partners are consenting. The decision to rape would have to be cold blooded and cruel. There is no "I got carried away" about it. Such ideas of loss of control belong to rape fantasies and have no bearing on reality. Men are no more animalistic than women. Just as black men and white men are no more animalistic than each other. Such stereotypes are pathetic excuses built on public prejudice. There is no evidence to support those prejudices, except in the testimonies of rapists who play on those prejudices to get away with their crimes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Don Firth Date: 24 May 10 - 04:42 PM Well, there are a few more facts than just those you choose to cite, Crow Sister. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Date: 24 May 10 - 04:28 PM So, we have a bunch of stories... But these are the facts: Jack invites Tony on a date. Tony goes on a date with Jack. A third party states that Tony agreed to go to Jack's room. Tony tells you, that she was raped by Jack. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Don Firth Date: 24 May 10 - 03:44 PM I must admit, I have not waded through every post on this thread. In general, I would say that in case of rape, the guy is responsible for his actions no matter what his excuses might be. But—back when I was at university, I knew a guy named Jack, who was a notorious womanizer. He would proposition every halfway good-looking woman he ever met. Including (and I saw this) a woman he had never seen before who just happened to be standing in line with him at the cash register waiting to pay her check. He was asked once, "Don't you get slapped a lot?" To which he responded, "Oh, yeah! But I get laid a lot, too!" He claimed that about one in twenty of the women he propositioned said "Okay." This is by way of establishing that Jack was just bloody notorious! Everybody around the University District knew him and knew his reputation. Including Tony (a girl). Tony, more than just incidentally, happened to let it be known to all and sundry, that she was a virgin—and that she was not particularly happy with that state. Had I not been going with a wonderful young woman at the time (who, incidentally, was largely responsible for introducing me to folk music—she sang and was teaching herself to play the guitar and inspired me to do likewise), I might have been quite willing to help Tony with her little problem. Tony knew all about Jack. One Monday afternoon, while sitting in a U. District restaurant between classes, Tony came in and joined me at my table. She told me that Saturday night, Jack had raped her. She was quite fuzzy about the details, but she did say that she had been out on a date with him Saturday night and late in the evening, he had forced himself on her. My immediate reaction was two-fold: anger at Jack, 'cause the sonofabitch was nothing but a drooling satyr and he seemed to regard women as being as usable and dispensable as Kleenex; and the thought that with what Tony knew about Jack, to agree to go out with him in the first place was just bloody stupid unless she wanted to get laid. She spread the word to quite a number of people that Jack had raped her. She did not, however, want to go to the police, as many advised her to do. Three guys who didn't like Jack very much, went up to his apartment with the idea of a) beating the crap out of him, and b) inducing him to get the hell out of the University area and leave the women alone. Jack talked fast and what he said and what he suggested (talk to the couple that he and Tony had double-dated with) saved him a beating. Further investigation turned up that Jack and Tony had been on a double date with another couple. The other guy, who was driving, said that, at the end of the evening as he was driving people around and dropping them off, Jack and Tony were all over each other in the back seat, that Tony's blouse was open and her bra unhooked, and her skirt was up around her waste—and that there was considerable mutual groping and fondling going on. A bit embarrassing to he and his date. He heard Jack ask Tony if she wanted to come up to his apartment and she panted, "Yes!" Also, Jack told the committee that had gone to rough him up that Tony had, at no time, indicated that she didn't want to "do it." He said, "If she had said 'No,' I would have stopped and she could have left. I don't need to rape girls! There are enough around who are perfectly willing!" I didn't like Jack. Not many guys did. Nor did all that may of the women I knew. But in the light of what I did know about him, and in the light of what I knew about Tony and the way she came on, I have serious doubts about the "rape" thing. I think Tony just wanted to announce her new status to the world and garner a bit of sympathy, as if the loss of her virginity was not her fault. Don Firth P. S. This incident may not even be relevant to this thread, because I don't think genuine rape was actually involved. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: mauvepink Date: 24 May 10 - 02:59 PM ...and then we get into a whole different area of capacity and whether one was able to give legal consent. Certain capacity issues are covered in law I think. Like mental health issues and certain disabilities. I am not sure where being intoxicated falls on the scale of legal definition of capacity. For instance, had one had an anaesthetic in the last 24 hours one could certainly be said to have some diminished capacity to make decisions (I think some talk of not signing legal documents if you have had an anaesthetic for at least two weeks has been mentioned but I cannoit find a good reference to it, sorry). Drink and many drugs undoubtedly affect capacity to make good, informed decisions. For me then the onus shifts to the person who is trying to get you to agree to do something you may not ordinarily do if you were sober. Quite how that stands in law I am not sure. But, then, what happens if both party's are drunk and 'incapacitated'? All sorts of legal arguments would ensue, and have surely done so when some rapes have come out and been reported. Capacity to make an informed choice should be in there somewhere and anyone taking advantage of that incapacity is, in the least, in the wrong. Capacity is a whole minefield in itself and not just in rape cases. mp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Penny S. Date: 24 May 10 - 02:38 PM I don't think there would be arrest just on the word - there would have to be corroborative evidence. But in a lot of cases the argument would be about whether the action was consensual or not. There was a case where someone arranged for a woman who had become drunk to be escorted "safely" back to her room, and the escort took advantage of the situation. He was acquitted on the grounds that he claimed that he thought there was consent, and this was supported by the judge. Subsequently, the issue of whether a drunken person can be held to be in a position to give consent to anything has been discussed, and the obvious conclusion drawn. Meanwhile, I think I would want to know if a man I was with had been involved in making such a decision, and his being anonymised would not let me know that. Penny |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: mauvepink Date: 24 May 10 - 02:16 PM Penny... the points you raise have full validity with me and, I would think, with most caring people. There is certainly something wrong with the system that allows a victim to be abused by the system itself. This very recent and tragic case of the ten year old boys and the attempted rape of an eight year old girl has highlighted a lot of the flaws in the system I feel. Hopefully some things will come out of that when it is revisited as to how that young girl was cross-examined. It's all extremely sad and yet, as that case itself has shown, a Judge can use discretions to make a trial so less stressful and advisarial if they wish to. I would argue, still, that unless a defendant has been caught 'red handed' then they should be given the benefit of anonimity until a guilty verdict has been brought. If there is previous 'intelligence' on this person, then the Police could be instructed to go seek more 'proof', but with winesses not being allowed to speak to others about it until the case is finished. I am not sure at all of the legal precedent but do judges get to know of a defenadants 'previous' before verdict? Would they remain impartial if they did know of previous offences? Would having a previous offence mean they could no longer be innocent of charges in the future? There are so many 'grey areas' and the consultation/research that you mention seems a good way forward too. There has to be a way to make this rather terrible crime and it's reporting safer for the genuine victims. Quite what it is I think we would all have some thoughts. Nonetheless, one cannot simply assume someone guilty just because someone has been arrested on the word of someone else. There has to be due process. Without that safeguard then we all run the risk of ending up being charged on the say so of anyone on anything. Today I have been on a Safeguarding course for Children. It was harrowing at times. I sure know how it feels to want to lock someone up and throw away the key (and worse) BUT I also know in the cold light of day mistakes get made. Prosecuting someone who is innocent is also damaging to that person. We need fairness (and that would involve more safety and care for genuine victims). What we also need are strong sentences for anyone bringing false and malicious charges agsinst others. :-( mp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Penny S. Date: 24 May 10 - 01:35 PM I actually think, along with Lox, that it would be more important to have a barrister to support the victim, for example to challenge improper questioning by the defence (eg about the victim's previous history, which is supposed not to be discussed, but often is), and for this barrister to have spoken with the victim before the trial. The trial is between the Crown and the defendant, and the victim is a witness, not an injured party with the Crown acting to right the wrong done - if done. It isn't currently the job of the prosecutor to protect the victim. That police might have access to previous complaints about a defendant, not continued with, might apply, but as there is apparently a pattern of women not reporting, because of their fears about the way the police might regard them, that the CPS might not take up the case because of perceived possibility of acquittal, the way the defence barrister may attack them, and the possibility that the defendant may walk free. There has been at least one case in the past, I recall, of a judge advising a jury that women have been known to lie in such cases. It's not an easy problem, but I would feel happier if the gov. had waited for the people working on it to report before making their minds up. Penny |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Ebbie Date: 24 May 10 - 01:36 AM "Personally I do not think it is right that anyone can be named on any charge before guilt has been established." mauvepink I fully agree. Several years ago in Juneau a local priest was named by a 34-year-old man as having molested him when he was a boy. The priest denied it. The young man had a history of mental problems. However, the story was carried on Page 1 in the local paper for several days, along with the priest's photo and his diocesan history. Ultimately, the paper said - several times - that the priest had been dismissed from the priesthood; the priest, however, said he had requested release. It never went to trial; eventually, the local Bishop wrote this: "On behalf of the Catholic Diocese of Juneau, Alaska, I hereby certify that XXX XXX, formerly a priest of this Diocese, has never been found guilty in any ecclesiastical process to have committed any sexual assault upon XXX XXX. Mr. XXX alleged that (the priest) had committed such assaults on many occasions between 1979 and 1982, but (the priest) responded by producing documentary evidence of unquestioned authenticity and authority that directly contradicted important details of Mr. XXXX's allegations. I then determined, in accordance with canon law, and upon the advice of the Diocesan Review Board for the Protection of Children and Young People, that the truth of these allegations was insufficiently probable for me to submit them to the Holy See." I have no idea as to the truth of it. I do know, however, that that priest's reputation has been ruined for the rest of his life. I called the editor of the paper and we had quite a long talk, I insisting that no names should be made public unless and until the person has been charged and arrested. The editor insisted that the people "had a right to know", finally conceding it was a "gray area". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Lox Date: 23 May 10 - 05:01 AM Its an interesting article, but the crux of it appears to me to be that annonimity for suspected rapists would be unfair in addition to a list of other procedural issues. However, it seems to me that the solution with regard to those issues is to fix them, not to use them as arguments against anonymity. The solution to the video link question could be to wheel the defendant out of the room before the victim gives evidence. The solution to the problem of the defendant seeing the victims evidence but not the other way round, would be to make that fair. etc etc It could be possible to make proceedings confidential and correct those flaws at the same time. Having said all that, I was friends with a woman in leicester who managed to convict a guy who had been beating her up quite badly, and she was able to do this because previous victims of the same guy came forward to testify to their experiences. I don't know how they found out as I never saw anything in the papers about it, but I would definitely be curious to know how my friend and the police went about discovering his previous track record. My own feeling is that there was more than one complaint made, and probably withdrawn as I believe that that is often how rapists and abusers slip through the net. I suspect that the police had a record of these previous complaints and were able to go and investigate based on them. I think that the local grapevine played a large part in his conviction too. So its a tricky question ... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: mauvepink Date: 22 May 10 - 02:38 PM Having now read the article too (as we were crossing posts) I can see some added problems over the serial attackers. There has to be some compromise somewhere whereby they firm up the victim's support but also protect an alleged attacker better than they presently do. Personally I do not think it is right that anyone can be named on any charge before guilt has been established. Quite what the 'cure' is to capture the serial criminal though I have no idea. It certainly warrants discussion and good decisions for all involved don't you think? Thanks for the URL mp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: mauvepink Date: 22 May 10 - 01:48 PM Incidentally, according to a recent poll, Men are bigger liars than women ! That does not mean they should be sentenced to hell without being found guilty first. I hope it is nothing any of us have to go through (though we already heard on this thread of some it has already) mp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: mauvepink Date: 22 May 10 - 01:45 PM "Several people believe there needs to be research into the number of false accusations - this is not necessarily equal to the number of acquittals. and is beleived by police and solicitors to be extremely rare. Yet the implication of the change is that women frequently lie, and men need protection from this. Such research needs to precede change in the law." Penny. Who is making the implication that women frequently lie? Even if there are only ten false accusations a year that is ten people's lives trashed through malicious allegation. That can never be right. There are things wrong with the whole rape charge situation and women are frequently abused by the system. I would totally agree that needs looking at, but to be named and accused for something that is alleged, before any guilt has been establsihed, also trashes lives. Giving defendants anonmity before trial would not change any of the things you mention. They need to be changed in themselves. Can you imagine the consequences of being accused of a serious crime, it splattered across the papers and on the televison, it's effects on your friends, family and career, when you are totally innocent? I am all foir rapists getting harsh sentences... but let it happen once they are proven guilty. That seems only fair Thouigh I respect completely the points you have raised as also being very unfair mp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Penny S. Date: 22 May 10 - 01:44 PM Here's the link. I don't agree with all the opinions - there seems to be a counteracting response to the suggestion that many women lie of suggesting that many guilty men are acquitted falsely. That of course would make it more important to preserve anonymity. Guardian report Penny |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Penny S. Date: 22 May 10 - 01:32 PM Joe, sorry I guested, but I was on a computer I could not login on, and did not want to wait. There's a piece in the Guardian today, making a number of points. There is currently a working group on rape policy in the justice system, who were not consulted before the plan, which was not in either manifesto, was brought forward. It had been in place from 1976, but was subsequently repealed. Several people believe there needs to be research into the number of false accusations - this is not necessarily equal to the number of acquittals. and is beleived by police and solicitors to be extremely rare. Yet the implication of the change is that women frequently lie, and men need protection from this. Such research needs to precede change in the law. One woman pointed out that the victim has no representation in court, no access to defence documents (thought the defendant has access to documents from the victim), no character witnesses, and is under attack from the defence. Perhaps if there were changes in these areas, protecting the defendant might be a higher priority. Already women are reluctant to report, and it is seen that this change mught reduce the level again. I'm trying to get to the page to post a link to the report, but it's being a bit slow. Penny |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Lox Date: 22 May 10 - 06:22 AM Robert - go and read the rules - they're easy to find. And then fuck off. This message will be deleted in ... 5 ... 4 ... 3 ... 2 ... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: mauvepink Date: 22 May 10 - 06:13 AM Apologies. Mt last post was in reply to Donuel and not Donnel. I had the wrong glasses on! mp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: mauvepink Date: 22 May 10 - 06:01 AM Donnel. The title of this thread was not a flamer. It was taken from the original article on the BBC website and was meant to create discussion which, on the whole, it has done. I don't do flames and I am fully aware of the uphill struggles genuine rape victims have if they go through with reporting it. I, personally, would be agaisnt any hypnotic techniques being using on victims. There is enough evidence to suggest that some people under such techniques have not told the truth. They may believe it to be the truth but it has ben shown to be 'imaginiation'. I would think the defendants lawyers would have a field day discrediting such techniques if they found the victim had given 'evidence' under such conditions. TBH I would have thought it would be in some way illegal to take a statement under such conditions (for instance you are not supposed to take evidence from people under the influence of alcohol, anaesthesia, etc..). The lawyers on the site would be able to say better I am sure as to what is/is not allowed when taking statements from victims. mp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: GUEST,Robert Zuiker Date: 22 May 10 - 04:26 AM Joe, please explain something for me. Last year you stated that a "Guest" could not start a thread here under any circumstances. Yet I am currently posting on a thread started by a guest ! Yesterday you said "guest posts on this thread are not permitted and will be deleted". So what in fact you are saying is, No guest posts are permitted on a thread started by a guest which isn't allowed anyway because it can't be up here in the first place. So if a guest starts a thread, you will delete it. Excellent idea Joe. And all guest posts on this thread will be deleted, Excellent idea Joe. So how am I posting as a guest on a thread started by a guest ? Have you Irish blood by any chance Joe ?
-Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Donuel Date: 21 May 10 - 04:12 PM I used to teach detectives how to compassionatley interrogate rape victims using hypnotic techniques. Despite the flamer title of this thread, I thought I would mention that victims in general face an uphill battle of telling their story which on its face makes the victim sound a bit crazy and sadly are often challenged by people who react to the victim's story with incredulity. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: mousethief Date: 21 May 10 - 03:14 PM All three men were African living in the U.K. Says it all really. Says that you're racist? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Lox Date: 21 May 10 - 03:12 PM Penny, I agree with you that it is unfair that Jill Saward should have had to endure public attention while the person who raped her was entitled to anonimity. Thats why I think that absolute confidentiality should be mandatory in rape cases just as it is in chils abuse cases to protect the victim as much as to protect the innocent accused. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Joe Offer Date: 21 May 10 - 02:38 PM Sorry, folks, but we've had far too much impersonation in this thread. No additional Guest posts will be allowed in this thread. If you're not logged in, you're not allowed to post. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: mauvepink Date: 21 May 10 - 12:23 PM "The problem with anonymity for a defendant is that in order to preserve the assumption of his innocence, it immediately implies the guilt of the victim." How so Penny? We have to have fairness for both parties Penny until guilt is established. How else are we to protect defendants from false accusations and the hell they are put through? A person should be presumed innocence until proven guilty. I dare say it is slightly different if the defendant is caught in the act but where any doubt of guilt exists we have to be fair to all parties. Once guilt is established... so be it! mp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 May 10 - 11:27 AM That explains why she was so edgy, as you put it Penny. Still an over-reation, I feel, but a understandable one from her POV. Wonder why the BBC (if it was the same news we were listening to) did not give a more balanced view? Still, as I said, nowt to do with the point in question so I really will leave it there this time! DeG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: GUEST,Penny S. (elsewhere) Date: 21 May 10 - 11:19 AM The guilt I suggested was implied in the victim was the guilt of having made a false accusation, not guilt of having been raped. It is tricky. The woman on the radio was Jill Saward, raped during a burglary of her father's home, and who had no anonymity, while the man was anonymous until convicted. She clearly feels that inequity still. She has broadcast a number of times over the years, and I haven't heard her so edgy before. Penny |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Some rape victims should take blame'- ?? From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 May 10 - 09:57 AM Maybe on a seperate thread? |
