|
Post by bro600 on Oct 14, 2014 20:16:00 GMT 1
Joe To be fair I fear you're missing the point I was trying to make. The prosecution's case appeared to rest on the fact the girl was incapable of giving consent (please correct my understanding if I'm wrong). There is no claim she refused consent as the girl cannot recall that point of the evening. To take a view she became lees capable of consent as the night progressed appears to have little logic to me (if anything you'd think she'd sober up). I'm not arrogant with regard to the jury, I accept I didn't hear all the evidence. However in what appears a mountain of comment on the case, I've not seen anything to suggest there was any evidence that would suggest or explain why the girl should become less capable of consent as she spent time in that hotel room. Again if I'm wrong please advise me of the evidence. If there is some reason TBH I'd like to understand it. It might increase my faith in the justice system. I'm not sure why the reference to Guildford 4 should be considered offensive. Barbie seems to feel CE should apologise. My point was simply attempting to outline that miscarriages of justice do take place (that point is surely true beyond debate). If there has been a miscarriage of justice (and CE clearly appears to feel there has) why should he apologise? Barbie and yourself seem to be simply dismissing any possibility of that scenario whatsoever. TBH I'm not sure from what I've seen and read I understand why you should be so strong in that opinion. All I'm trying to understand is why the jury felt CE was guilty but that Mcdonald was innocent based on the girl's ability (or not) to be capable of giving consent. If i was on the jury certain things would lead me to find him guilty. The girl was 19 and very drunk according to CCTV. Any normal gentleman would at this point tread carefully. He received a phone call from McDonald informing him that he was taking a female back to the hotel so knew that the hotel room was busy and that McDonald had a woman in the room. He lied to the hotel staff to gain entry to the room. He informed two of his friends of the situation and they took position at the room window and videoed the act. Which kind of leads one to believe that his actions were premeditated. McDonald then leaves the hotel and informs a member of staff that the woman in the room should be watched as she is ill giving an indication that she is not in a fit state. He then left the hotel via an emergency exit.
|
|
|
Post by lankystreak on Oct 14, 2014 20:20:08 GMT 1
You may struggle to get a response from Joe, he seems to pick and choose what he replies to.
|
|
|
Post by andyeastleake on Oct 14, 2014 20:36:51 GMT 1
You've demonstrated he's a scumbag Bro (& I knew that already) but not explained how the jury decided the girl was capable of consenting to Mcdonald but not CE.
Are you simply ruling out completely the possibility a girl could drunkenly consent (and the law has accepted drunken consent is consent) to sex with a scumbag just after having sex with another man. That seems a pretty big presumption to me.
TBF as well, the most relevant points apply to Mcdonald as well as CE. Why was he found not guilty?
|
|
|
Post by bro600 on Oct 14, 2014 21:24:19 GMT 1
You've demonstrated he's a scumbag Bro (& I knew that already) but not explained how the jury decided the girl was capable of consenting to Mcdonald but not CE. Are you simply ruling out completely the possibility a girl could drunkenly consent (and the law has accepted drunken consent is consent) to sex with a scumbag just after having sex with another man. That seems a pretty big presumption to me. TBF as well, the most relevant points apply to Mcdonald as well as CE. Why was he found not guilty? I feel that the woman had allowed McDonald to escort her to the room and therefore his guilt was questionable but Evans was more predatory in his actions and therefore the jury decided that by his actions and the girls accusations that he was guilty of rape on an individual who by McDonalds statement to the Hotel staff was "ill" and not in a fit state to consent. The jury have to take into account all the evidence and his deceit to the hotel staff and his 2 mates at the window do not look the actions of a man who was planning on asking a girl for sex and left him wide open to receive his fate. The presumption that a girl of 19 would get so drunk and then consent to sex and then cry rape is less of a possibility than Evans;s version .
|
|
|
Post by Gag_N_Bone_Man on Oct 14, 2014 21:33:59 GMT 1
Joe To be fair I fear you're missing the point I was trying to make. The prosecution's case appeared to rest on the fact the girl was incapable of giving consent (please correct my understanding if I'm wrong). There is no claim she refused consent as the girl cannot recall that point of the evening. To take a view she became lees capable of consent as the night progressed appears to have little logic to me (if anything you'd think she'd sober up). I'm not arrogant with regard to the jury, I accept I didn't hear all the evidence. However in what appears a mountain of comment on the case, I've not seen anything to suggest there was any evidence that would suggest or explain why the girl should become less capable of consent as she spent time in that hotel room. Again if I'm wrong please advise me of the evidence. If there is some reason TBH I'd like to understand it. It might increase my faith in the justice system. I'm not sure why the reference to Guildford 4 should be considered offensive. Barbie seems to feel CE should apologise. My point was simply attempting to outline that miscarriages of justice do take place (that point is surely true beyond debate). If there has been a miscarriage of justice (and CE clearly appears to feel there has) why should he apologise? Barbie and yourself seem to be simply dismissing any possibility of that scenario whatsoever. TBH I'm not sure from what I've seen and read I understand why you should be so strong in that opinion. All I'm trying to understand is why the jury felt CE was guilty but that Mcdonald was innocent based on the girl's ability (or not) to be capable of giving consent. If i was on the jury certain things would lead me to find him guilty. The girl was 19 and very drunk according to CCTV. Any normal gentleman would at this point tread carefully. He received a phone call from McDonald informing him that he was taking a female back to the hotel so knew that the hotel room was busy and that McDonald had a woman in the room. He lied to the hotel staff to gain entry to the room. He informed two of his friends of the situation and they took position at the room window and videoed the act. Which kind of leads one to believe that his actions were premeditated. McDonald then leaves the hotel and informs a member of staff that the woman in the room should be watched as she is ill giving an indication that she is not in a fit state. He then left the hotel via an emergency exit. For me this is a key point, and one of the biggest question marks here. CCTV footage clearly shows her lucid, able to walk herself unaided, and competent enough to realise she'd left something behind in the taxi and fetch it. In my extensive experience of being drunk, in that state (entering the hotel) she appears more than capable of giving consent. And consent is the crux of the issue. Added to that the conduct of the victim as testified by former sexual partners, as well as her bragging about a big payday coming up etc on social media, and it should cause folk to question the conviction. A touch of healthy cynicism may be needed here. Yes his behaviour was reprehensible. But perhaps not illegal.
|
|
|
Post by Barbieterrier on Oct 14, 2014 23:05:19 GMT 1
If you've read up on the case as much as you imply and given your (apparent) certainty on CE's guilt, could you explain the logic that the jury found the girl incapable of giving consent to CE but was capable of giving consent to Mcdonald some time earlier. The logic of this beats me I'm afraid. If this case did nothing else, it convinced me that a jury should be required to explain it's decision (they don't at present) and that this should,if considered appropriate be subject to review by a panel of judges. I struggle to avoid the conclusion the differing verdicts had a more to do with the jury's opinion of CE's morals or persona (or perhaps how close his eyebrows are together) rather than whether or not consent was capable of being given. I struggle myself to view that as grounds to remove someone's liberty (and also his livelihood it would appear). PS Did you believe the Guildford 4, Birmingham 6 and Stefan Kiszco (a short selection from a long list) should have apologised? Does it matter? He's a convicted rapist seeking a career that entertains men, women and children whilst being on the sex offenders register and will be held in high esteem whilst doing so. It's not something I'd want to spend my money on. Don't begrudge him his his freedom he's done is time or finding a job but a high profile one entertaining families? That's all down to the freedom of choice though isn't it. Bit like whether or not you make sure a girl wants to have sex, be filmed and left in a hotel room wrecked whilst you escape through the fire exit once youve done with her I guess.
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Oct 14, 2014 23:11:35 GMT 1
Definitely good to have a female opinion on DATM
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2014 23:39:24 GMT 1
Joe To be fair I fear you're missing the point I was trying to make. The prosecution's case appeared to rest on the fact the girl was incapable of giving consent (please correct my understanding if I'm wrong). There is no claim she refused consent as the girl cannot recall that point of the evening. To take a view she became lees capable of consent as the night progressed appears to have little logic to me (if anything you'd think she'd sober up). She been drinking very heavily towards the end of the night- shots of vodka etc so reasonable that she had become more intoxicated in the hours after she left the club. This is key.I'm not arrogant with regard to the jury, I accept I didn't hear all the evidence. However in what appears a mountain of comment on the case, I've not seen anything to suggest there was any evidence that would suggest or explain why the girl should become less capable of consent as she spent time in that hotel room. Again if I'm wrong please advise me of the evidence. If there is some reason TBH I'd like to understand it. It might increase my faith in the justice system. I'm not sure why the reference to Guildford 4 should be considered offensive. Well, The guildford four was one of this country's most appalling miscarriages of justice. They were essentially just 4 irish guys in london who were fitted up as scapegoats by a completely corrupt police force. They eventually gave confessions after days of torture. Paul Hill was from a mixed faith family- hardly IRA material. To compare that to Ched Evans who had sex with a paraletic teenager is at best a very bad example and at worst offensive. Barbie seems to feel CE should apologise. My point was simply attempting to outline that miscarriages of justice do take place (that point is surely true beyond debate). If there has been a miscarriage of justice (and CE clearly appears to feel there has) why should he apologise? Because what he did was wrong. Whether or not it was rape in his own mind or not- it was deplorable behaviour. His mate set it up. It was premeditated. Seedy abuse of his position. Why couldn't the prick have paid for a whole group of girls to come to his hotel room for consentual sex, why prey on a shit faced teenager. He could've shown some remorse for his actions without admitting to rape.Barbie and yourself seem to be simply dismissing any possibility of that scenario whatsoever. TBH I'm not sure from what I've seen and read I understand why you should be so strong in that opinion. You're right I have discounted any possibility of that scenario based on the evidence thats been reported. She consented to mcdonald but not to Evans. She wasn't fit state to give consent to Evans and it was reasonable to assume he knew this but he carried on regardless. That's rape.All I'm trying to understand is why the jury felt CE was guilty but that Mcdonald was innocent based on the girl's ability (or not) to be capable of giving consent. My argument on this thread is all moot anyway as the law wont change. Evans will be released and get a high paid high profile job straight away. Football could be such a positive platform for change but it will continue along its seedy, financially driven agenda and rapist, murdering footballers will get a bit of grief on the terraces as they pick up their £000k+ salaries. Others convicted of similar crimes have it used against them forever and are virtually unemployable whereas footballers pick up where they left off.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2014 23:41:58 GMT 1
Definitely good to have a female opinion on DATM Absolutely. I'm not surprised there aren't more though.
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Oct 14, 2014 23:42:58 GMT 1
Definitely good to have a female opinion on DATM Absolutely. I'm not surprised there aren't more though. Might be something to do with the overt sexism permeating most threads
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2014 23:53:05 GMT 1
Its a shame Ted. There are plenty of women at town games but there numbers aren't reflected on here. Makes for a far more balanced, informed debate imo. Without any patronising the ironically titled Barbie has held her end up superbly well against some pretty patriarchal views. Hope she isn't put off.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2014 7:00:57 GMT 1
Judging by the tone of some of the posts in this thread, it's little wonder that so many rape crimes go unreported by the victim.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2014 8:38:41 GMT 1
Definitely good to have a female opinion on DATM Absolutely. I'm not surprised there aren't more though. I don' t think we have that many female posters these days. Have we driven them away .Just an a query and observation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2014 8:40:33 GMT 1
Absolutely. I'm not surprised there aren't more though. I don' t think we have that many female posters these days. Have we driven them away .Just an a query and observation. A lot of good posters have been driven away unfortunately mate.
|
|
|
Post by lankystreak on Oct 15, 2014 8:45:30 GMT 1
Judging by the tone of some of the posts in this thread, it's little wonder that so many rape crimes go unreported by the victim. I think you are being very unfair on those of us in this thread who haven't simply accepted the decision of the jury without posing a few questions in this instance. As I have mentioned on here before on threads regarding this case I do have some personal experience of drunken girls making completely bogus claims and the effects they can have on not just the supposed rapist but also the circle of people around them. I would say it is more the amount of girls making false claims that keeps the reporting of rape down as it is that affects the conviction rates of these truly heinous crimes, also, due to the rates of false claims that are made that is also why only a small percentage of the fake "victims" are prosecuted as the CPS take the view that the more of these that are seen in the media the lower the overall reporting of actual rapes will be.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2014 8:51:57 GMT 1
I don' t think we have that many female posters these days. Have we driven them away .Just an a query and observation. A lot of good posters have been driven away unfortunately mate. They certainly have and I miss them. We seemed to get a more balanced view.
|
|
|
Post by lochnessterrier on Oct 15, 2014 10:22:03 GMT 1
This topic seems to have generated more interest on here than on the Sheffield United forum!
Personally I wouldn't want Evans to ever play for Town, but I have no problem with him playing for anyone else. I think his presence would tarnish the reputation of any club and I don't want to see that at Huddersfield Town. However I have no such concerns over the reputation of SUFC or indeed anyone else. They make their own choices and take the consequences.
|
|
|
Post by rantinray on Oct 15, 2014 10:49:05 GMT 1
The guy to this day refutes the allegations. His easiest way out of this would have been to: Apologies to the defendant and to the fans for the support prior to his moment of madness. He did neither of these things because he feels he has unjustly been sentenced. That surely must make you wonder. He is a human being as we are and he has a special skill on the football pitch why take that away from him when he has served his sentence? Would you condemn a plumber to no longer picking up a pipe wrench, no. People from all walks of life do stupid things b ut I just have this feeling that all is not quite right with the final verdict. I dont want to get into all the debate of the young woman getting blasted on booze and then going to a hotel room.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2014 10:58:56 GMT 1
The guy to this day refutes the allegations. His easiest way out of this would have been to: Apologies to the defendant and to the fans for the support prior to his moment of madness. He did neither of these things because he feels he has unjustly been sentenced. That surely must make you wonder. He is a human being as we are and he has a special skill on the football pitch why take that away from him when he has served his sentence? Would you condemn a plumber to no longer picking up a pipe wrench, no. People from all walks of life do stupid things b ut I just have this feeling that all is not quite right with the final verdict. I dont want to get into all the debate of the young woman getting blasted on booze and then going to a hotel room. So if that plumber had a rape conviction assuming your wife is at home, would you be happy for him to work in your house while you are at work?
|
|
|
Post by rantinray on Oct 15, 2014 11:07:53 GMT 1
The guy to this day refutes the allegations. His easiest way out of this would have been to: Apologies to the defendant and to the fans for the support prior to his moment of madness. He did neither of these things because he feels he has unjustly been sentenced. That surely must make you wonder. He is a human being as we are and he has a special skill on the football pitch why take that away from him when he has served his sentence? Would you condemn a plumber to no longer picking up a pipe wrench, no. People from all walks of life do stupid things b ut I just have this feeling that all is not quite right with the final verdict. I dont want to get into all the debate of the young woman getting blasted on booze and then going to a hotel room. So if that plumber had a rape conviction assuming your wife is at home, would you be happy for him to work in your house while you are at work? Metaphor. I could have used tinker, tailor, soldier any other profession. The issue is not about me so leave me out of it. The issue is about the holier than thou who would remove the mans ability to make a living and get on with his life after serving his sentence for the alleged offence.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2014 11:14:32 GMT 1
I think to call those of us " HOLIER THAN THOU" who have concerns about his re-introduction to such a high profile career is very harsh.We can ALL surely have our opinions without resorting to slagging one another off for differing. IMO.
|
|
|
Post by lankystreak on Oct 15, 2014 11:28:51 GMT 1
His career had nothing to do with the night in question as the girl was in no state to know who he was in the eyes of the law, if she did the verdict would have been not guilty. He also wasn't working at the time so his career had nothing at all to do with his actions, I would guess he would have acted in exactly the same way that night if he was a plumber as mentioned.
Now, if it was a plumber who had raped a customer while working I would be very very surprised if anyone would ever use that plumber again as it would have been publicised (as this case has) and I'm guessing there would be some condition of his release that stopped him from working in that environment again. To my knowledge Ched Evans has never raped anyone on a football pitch and no one on the pitch, in the stadium, at the training ground, is at a greater risk of being raped for Ched Evans being there. As such he should be allowed to continue working.
The amount of coverage and debate that his release and potential return to work has generated is for my mind the best publicity that any anti rape campaign could possibly have in terms of getting a cross section of society talking about it, far more than if he was to just disappear into the sunset upon his release.
|
|
|
Post by rantinray on Oct 15, 2014 12:00:34 GMT 1
I think to call those of us " HOLIER THAN THOU" who have concerns about his re-introduction to such a high profile career is very harsh.We can ALL surely have our opinions without resorting to slagging one another off for differing. IMO. Wheres peoples Christian spirit. And we are all without blame, never made a mistake, never done something we are ashamed of. Give the guy a break. Let him get his life going again which includes football. Many people in high positions have done things shameful but their lives and careers have carried on. Show some humanity and Christianity. Second chances.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2014 12:11:47 GMT 1
Judging by the tone of some of the posts in this thread, it's little wonder that so many rape crimes go unreported by the victim. I think you are being very unfair on those of us in this thread who haven't simply accepted the decision of the jury without posing a few questions in this instance. As I have mentioned on here before on threads regarding this case I do have some personal experience of drunken girls making completely bogus claims and the effects they can have on not just the supposed rapist but also the circle of people around them. I would say it is more the amount of girls making false claims that keeps the reporting of rape down as it is that affects the conviction rates of these truly heinous crimes, also, due to the rates of false claims that are made that is also why only a small percentage of the fake "victims" are prosecuted as the CPS take the view that the more of these that are seen in the media the lower the overall reporting of actual rapes will be. I didn't mean to be rude yesterday Lanky but this is exactly the wildly incorrect and nieve kind of statements I was referring to. False claims has nothing to do with rape conviction rates. I don't know where you've get this idea from. False claims keepin the reporting down? What planet are you on seriously? Rapes are not reported beause of the position the victim is 1) In an abusive relationship and unable to report for psychological reasons or fear or recrimination. 2) working in prostitution or vice of some kind and unable to report on their pimp 3) in gang culture where police involvement would result in exclusion or physical violence 4) in a controlled situation by older men like on Roherham, Rochdale, Peterborough. The reality of rape isn't students having the odd drink too many. In the vast majority of cases the woman will be in a non equal position in society and vulnerable to abuses. I can assure you that the CPS do not make decisions on whether or not to pursue rape cases because they've read about a false claim in some third rate media. What a bizarre and delusional thing to write. Where have to I got this stuff from- mates down the pub or have you just made it up yourself? Conviction rates are low because witnesses are rare, victims are usually vulnerable & not confident, their credibility is attacked of they work in vice or were in a relationship with the man. The issue of consent will be suggested to be ambiguous by defence council. It is often one word agaisnt the other and jury's are led towards reasonable doubt. Rape is not a white collar crime. If it were then conviction rates would be much higher. Your whole concept of 'bogus' claims is total nonsense. A minute proportion of actual rape cases. It is ill informed and extrovertly sexist. I hope to god you don't get pulled up for jury service in a rape case that's for sure.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2014 12:13:55 GMT 1
I bet Clough Snr. wouldn`t have given him a second chance.I know where you are coming from but it is a very devisive debate one on which everyone has their right to feel as they do.
I for what its worth don`t have sufficent knowledge of the ins and outs of the case ,trial etc. but he was found guilty of a dreadful crime.
Somewhere he`ll find employment but certainly not at Town and for me thats how it should be.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2014 12:25:45 GMT 1
The guy to this day refutes the allegations. His easiest way out of this would have been to: Apologies to the defendant and to the fans for the support prior to his moment of madness. He did neither of these things because he feels he has unjustly been sentenced. That surely must make you wonder. He is a human being as we are and he has a special skill on the football pitch why take that away from him when he has served his sentence? Would you condemn a plumber to no longer picking up a pipe wrench, no. People from all walks of life do stupid things b ut I just have this feeling that all is not quite right with the final verdict. I dont want to get into all the debate of the young woman getting blasted on booze and then going to a hotel room. You're in good company with your horseshit on this thread. A plumber isn't in the public eye for he 100th time. A convicted rapist proclaims his innocence before he goes back into public eye and hopes to gain the highest profile & highest paid football job he can. Oh yes that really makes me wonder? Why on earth would he try and foster the notion he is not guilty of rape. Were you born yesterday? Strewth the stupidity of some people knows no bounds. You've made your view clear 'getting blasted going to room' clearly implying she was 'askin' for it. Etc. Views like yours and lankys and countless others on here & in society are what rape victims are up agaisnt in society today and ultimately play a large part in why convictions rate are so low. It's called implicit sexism within a patriarchal society. I really must remember in future to stick to off topic when debates arise on here non football related.
|
|
|
Post by Barbieterrier on Oct 15, 2014 12:27:17 GMT 1
Definitely good to have a female opinion on DATM Thank you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2014 14:00:38 GMT 1
I have no doubt he will be back in football sooner rather than later but thankfully not for us or Sheff utd who's fans have voted in massive numbers on an on line poll not to have him back.Some teams however don't seem too bothered who they employ so I can see him turning up at Blackpool or Swindon, because if you employ Nile Ranger you'll have anyone. It will be interesting to see how his own teams fans react who ever he joins, it won't be easy explaining to your young kids why opposition fans are chanting f--k off you rapist every time he touches the ball.
|
|
|
Post by lankystreak on Oct 15, 2014 14:08:17 GMT 1
I think you are being very unfair on those of us in this thread who haven't simply accepted the decision of the jury without posing a few questions in this instance. As I have mentioned on here before on threads regarding this case I do have some personal experience of drunken girls making completely bogus claims and the effects they can have on not just the supposed rapist but also the circle of people around them. I would say it is more the amount of girls making false claims that keeps the reporting of rape down as it is that affects the conviction rates of these truly heinous crimes, also, due to the rates of false claims that are made that is also why only a small percentage of the fake "victims" are prosecuted as the CPS take the view that the more of these that are seen in the media the lower the overall reporting of actual rapes will be. I didn't mean to be rude yesterday Lanky but this is exactly the wildly incorrect and nieve kind of statements I was referring to. False claims has nothing to do with rape conviction rates. I don't know where you've get this idea from. False claims keepin the reporting down? What planet are you on seriously? Rapes are not reported beause of the position the victim is 1) In an abusive relationship and unable to report for psychological reasons or fear or recrimination. 2) working in prostitution or vice of some kind and unable to report on their pimp 3) in gang culture where police involvement would result in exclusion or physical violence 4) in a controlled situation by older men like on Roherham, Rochdale, Peterborough. The reality of rape isn't students having the odd drink too many. In the vast majority of cases the woman will be in a non equal position in society and vulnerable to abuses. I can assure you that the CPS do not make decisions on whether or not to pursue rape cases because they've read about a false claim in some third rate media. What a bizarre and delusional thing to write. Where have to I got this stuff from- mates down the pub or have you just made it up yourself? Conviction rates are low because witnesses are rare, victims are usually vulnerable & not confident, their credibility is attacked of they work in vice or were in a relationship with the man. The issue of consent will be suggested to be ambiguous by defence council. It is often one word agaisnt the other and jury's are led towards reasonable doubt. Rape is not a white collar crime. If it were then conviction rates would be much higher. Your whole concept of 'bogus' claims is total nonsense. A minute proportion of actual rape cases. It is ill informed and extrovertly sexist. I hope to god you don't get pulled up for jury service in a rape case that's for sure. If you read my post correctly you will see that I never said they did, I said they decide whether to prosecute the people who have made these bogus claims based on that view. I know that this is factually correct and I know that the police who I have been in contact with are disgusted by this attitude. I haven't put forward a single view on this thread that is in anyway based on sexism. Some of your comments on this thread are bang out of order when aimed at individuals such as myself with nothing to back them up.
|
|
|
Post by lankystreak on Oct 15, 2014 14:13:03 GMT 1
I think you are being very unfair on those of us in this thread who haven't simply accepted the decision of the jury without posing a few questions in this instance. As I have mentioned on here before on threads regarding this case I do have some personal experience of drunken girls making completely bogus claims and the effects they can have on not just the supposed rapist but also the circle of people around them. I would say it is more the amount of girls making false claims that keeps the reporting of rape down as it is that affects the conviction rates of these truly heinous crimes, also, due to the rates of false claims that are made that is also why only a small percentage of the fake "victims" are prosecuted as the CPS take the view that the more of these that are seen in the media the lower the overall reporting of actual rapes will be. I didn't mean to be rude yesterday Lanky but this is exactly the wildly incorrect and nieve kind of statements I was referring to. False claims has nothing to do with rape conviction rates. I don't know where you've get this idea from. False claims keepin the reporting down? What planet are you on seriously? Rapes are not reported beause of the position the victim is 1) In an abusive relationship and unable to report for psychological reasons or fear or recrimination. 2) working in prostitution or vice of some kind and unable to report on their pimp 3) in gang culture where police involvement would result in exclusion or physical violence 4) in a controlled situation by older men like on Roherham, Rochdale, Peterborough. The reality of rape isn't students having the odd drink too many. In the vast majority of cases the woman will be in a non equal position in society and vulnerable to abuses. I can assure you that the CPS do not make decisions on whether or not to pursue rape cases because they've read about a false claim in some third rate media. What a bizarre and delusional thing to write. Where have to I got this stuff from- mates down the pub or have you just made it up yourself? Conviction rates are low because witnesses are rare, victims are usually vulnerable & not confident, their credibility is attacked of they work in vice or were in a relationship with the man. The issue of consent will be suggested to be ambiguous by defence council. It is often one word agaisnt the other and jury's are led towards reasonable doubt. Rape is not a white collar crime. If it were then conviction rates would be much higher. Your whole concept of 'bogus' claims is total nonsense. A minute proportion of actual rape cases. It is ill informed and extrovertly sexist. I hope to god you don't get pulled up for jury service in a rape case that's for sure. My point about false claims affecting reporting of rapes is that when these claims are publicised I think it will affect people who want to report rapes and make them think twice. If no false claims were ever made and reported this effect would never happen.
|
|