| >> |
No. 38772
Anonymous
18th June 2022
Saturday 12:57 pm
38772
>>38767
>One camp which believes in the concept of innocent and proven guilty and that overly trigger happy laws will lead to false convictions, which is overall worse than letting a potential rapist go unpunished;
I had this exact conversation with the wife of a good friend who is a dyed in the wool fisherperson, to the point that I wonder if she shits purple turds. Anyway, she said, well, even if a man is fasely convicted of a rape, he still goes free again if either he is proven innocent after all or in some cases if the real rapist is found. So I said, no, you're essentially arguing that it is okay to lock somebody up, potentially for many years, who either didn't commit a rape or was misidentified as an attacker in the first place. You're destroying someone's life who shouldn't spend a single day in jail at all. While, by chance, the real rapist may still be at large and hurt more people.
It's true that the requirement of evidence beyond reasonable doubt to convict somebody of a crime can lead to unsatisfactory results in a court of law. Murderers and rapists, but also fraudsters will occasionally go free. On the other hand, in most countries, rape and murder have very long statutes of limitation, if they expire at all. So not just technically, a murderer or rapist can be brought to justice years after their crime, when there is by whatever turn of events new evidence to convict them after all. So why drag an innocent person into it, just so you'll have somebody to pin a crime on. The latter is the way a lot of law enforcement in the U.S. functioned for decades, especially in rural areas or urban areas with many minorities. It's only now with DNA sequencing being abundantly available that many of these prisoners are exonerated, some of them having spent three or four decades locked up for something they never did. Is that the way our justice system should function here in the UK?
>because women never ever lie, and sometimes even goes as far as saying that false convictions are a price worth paying for the overall good.
Two things there though; both men and women have lied egregiously about all sorts of crimes in court since time began. Why should it be impossible for somebody to make up rape charges for whatever motive, if just to damage somebody's reputation or to exact revenge.
Also, I don't know if Sweden still does this, but for a while, men (and only men) accused of rape got their written criminal charges mailed to them in a distinctive red envelope which was only used by authorities for this purpose. It goes without saying that if somebody saw you receive a red envelope like that, your reputation as such either on your street or in your block of flats was ruined beyond repair. I remember reading that one of the politicians who came up with this measure was asked if that wasn't fraught with problems, especially if either somebody was mailed such an envelope by sheer mistake, or if their rape charges were later found by a court to be completely unfounded, and they said that that was ok, because men needed to acknowledge their "collective guilt" in facilitating a climate of rape culture in Sweden.
Message too long. Click here to view the full text.
|
