This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Badger11 Beckenham 10 Feb 23 10.11am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by YT
We have a criminal law system where everyone is presumed to be innocent unless and until proven guilty. That is a fundamental principle regardless of the crime that has been alleged and it's a valuable protection for the individual against the state. I would probably be classed as an authoritarian, however even I feel uncomfortable when people start asking: "how can we can get more convictions for this, that or the other crime?" - sex crimes in this example. The only way to get a conviction is to present evidence of a crime that is sufficient to convince a jury "beyond reasonable doubt" that the person committed it. Period. Frustrating though this must be for victims. Fair point and that is why I started this thread. Whenever this topic comes up politicians always start out saying that men / boys need to be educated about this unacceptable behaviour. I don't disagree they should but there will always be people who break the law so it's a politicians answer which doesn't really solve the problem. We shouldn't speed but we do. Better police investigating definitely, I think the way they handles these cases has got better but no doubt people who understand this in detail would say more could be done. So we come back again to the central point how can these victims get justice whilst ensuring the defendant gets a fair trial.
One more point |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Badger11 Beckenham 27 Apr 23 12.50pm | |
---|---|
So Scotland is to trial rape cases without a jury. I would like to know the thinking behind this considering they are doing away with one of our most basic human rights.
One more point |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Forest Hillbilly in a hidey-hole 27 Apr 23 2.05pm | |
---|---|
The reason most defence lawyers plump for the jury, is that you are bound to get disagreement amongst 12 people on a decision. Therefore you are far more likely to get a Not Guilty verdict with a jury, than with a single judge.
I disengage, I turn the page. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Badger11 Beckenham 27 Apr 23 2.31pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Forest Hillbilly
The reason most defence lawyers plump for the jury, is that you are bound to get disagreement amongst 12 people on a decision. Therefore you are far more likely to get a Not Guilty verdict with a jury, than with a single judge. A judge who may have access to material that a jury would not see as inadmissible, he then has pretend he doesn't know about it? I don't think the issue is with juries but with the evidence or lack of it. On the case sat I sat on we found the defendant not guilty almost immediately due to the lack of evidence. Quite frankly I was surprised that such a weak case was brought by the CPS however activists have rightly complained about the lack of prosecutions for sex cases so now the CPS is probably putting cases forward it knows are weak. Apart from the judge having accessing to evidence which they will rule on will that judge also have access to the defendants previous? So a jury has no knowledge of evidence a judge rules out or the defendants previous record. However a judge sitting as a jury will but not to worry it wont influence him.
One more point |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Forest Hillbilly in a hidey-hole 27 Apr 23 3.01pm | |
---|---|
And a jury is not a 'right'. The UK doesn't have a bill of Rights, we have liberties. And in any event a Jury is not required in all courts, for example a Magistrates.
I disengage, I turn the page. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Forest Hillbilly in a hidey-hole 27 Apr 23 3.04pm | |
---|---|
Some Judges have knowledge of previous convictions if 'previous form' exists, so it could well influence decisions. Even subconsciously. Maybe, not a bad thing in some cases. Edited by Forest Hillbilly (27 Apr 2023 3.35pm)
I disengage, I turn the page. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
PalazioVecchio south pole 28 Apr 23 8.28am | |
---|---|
the problem pivots on ambiguity and consent. A law graduate, from Limerick, just got 4 years in Jail. The crime started as consensual sex but then he started behaving roughly.....probably copying a blue movie or got a bit stupid with the drink. Now if she lets you in there, she should still have the right to say 'No' and say 'stop'. But it is very different to a rape by a stranger in a dark alleyway. Rapes also occur within marriage. How does a justice system deal with a man and a woman telling conflicting stories ? Divorces are often adversarial. Edited by PalazioVecchio (28 Apr 2023 8.34am)
Kayla did Anfield & Old Trafford |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
cryrst The garden of England 28 Apr 23 8.53pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by PalazioVecchio
the problem pivots on ambiguity and consent. A law graduate, from Limerick, just got 4 years in Jail. The crime started as consensual sex but then he started behaving roughly.....probably copying a blue movie or got a bit stupid with the drink. Now if she lets you in there, she should still have the right to say 'No' and say 'stop'. But it is very different to a rape by a stranger in a dark alleyway. Rapes also occur within marriage. How does a justice system deal with a man and a woman telling conflicting stories ? Divorces are often adversarial. Edited by PalazioVecchio (28 Apr 2023 8.34am) Wonder how much she got paid in compo from the criminal compensation board. Call me cynical but I bet she’s f***ed men since this ‘event’ or am I just a mysogenistic barstard.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Mapletree Croydon 28 Apr 23 10.58pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by cryrst
Wonder how much she got paid in compo from the criminal compensation board. Call me cynical but I bet she’s f***ed men since this ‘event’ or am I just a mysogenistic barstard. Yes you are. Pretty sad to see and completely at odds with the thoughtful discussion up to that point
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
cryrst The garden of England 29 Apr 23 7.43pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Yes you are. Pretty sad to see and completely at odds with the thoughtful discussion up to that point Ok maple. Find out if she got compo and let’s discuss it again and wonder if there was an ulterior motive. She lets a bloke shag her, then realises she’s goner get in trouble so goes down this route. I know I’m right so prove I’m wrong !
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Forest Hillbilly in a hidey-hole 29 Apr 23 8.19pm | |
---|---|
it's easy to blur the lines with a lot of alleged sexual offences, which is a significant reason why conviction rates are low. Also evidence gathering is problematic, especially (you would think) for historical allegations. It is so much easier for an experience defence lawyer to cast significant doubt over any alleged offences, even besmirching victims characters, than try to get a cast-iron conviction. And just to add , when conviction rates are so low, coupled with the ridiculously lenient sentences, no wonder victims are reluctant to come forward. I bet there are a large number of convicts, who upon release , offend again. That is the really sickening bit.
I disengage, I turn the page. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
PalazioVecchio south pole 29 Apr 23 9.51pm | |
---|---|
the Mike Tyson rape conviction. It all started with her visiting his Hotel room.....and him lying on the bed in his underpants. Tyson continues to protest his innocence. And the link below, many believe him. The legalities & morality of Rape trials must be a nightmare for any Court ?
Kayla did Anfield & Old Trafford |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.