[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
logo
news

Return ] Entire Thread ] First 100 posts ] Last 50 posts ]

Posting mode: Reply [Last 50 posts]
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 19143)
Message
File  []
close
JC6C4JPJNZG5JCBULYXR5GMRFU.jpg
191431914319143
>> No. 19143 Anonymous
29th April 2019
Monday 10:14 pm
19143 spacer
Rape victims among those to be asked to hand phones to police

Victims of crimes, including those alleging rape, are to be asked to hand their phones over to police - or risk prosecutions not going ahead.

Consent forms asking for permission to access information including emails, messages and photographs have been rolled out in England and Wales. It comes after a number of rape and serious sexual assault cases collapsed when crucial evidence emerged.

Victim Support said the move could stop victims coming forward. But police and prosecutors say the forms can plug a gap in the law which says complainants and witnesses cannot be forced to disclose relevant content from phones, laptops, tablets or smart watches.

Director of Public Prosecutions Max Hill said such digital information would only be looked at where it forms a "reasonable" line of inquiry, with material going before a court only if it meets stringent rules.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48086244

This seems like a worrying turn of events and the unintended consequence of the political pressure to increase the number of rape convictions spearheaded by Alison Saunders.
64 posts omitted. Last 50 posts shown. Expand all images.
>> No. 19307 Anonymous
16th May 2019
Thursday 5:14 pm
19307 spacer
>>19306
>Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Verizon, and AT&T have all refused to hook their data centers up to Netflix's servers without payment from the video streaming service.
There are two ways to get your network hooked up to another. This arrangement of getting direct links to exchange traffic is called peering. The other network agrees to carry your traffic in return for you carrying theirs. The other way to do it is transit, where you pay the other network to carry your traffic. Comcast basically demanded an arrangement where they got to act like peers but Netflix still paid for transit. Throw in that Comcast owns NBC and Hulu and the motivations become a little clearer. An awful lot of backsliding on the internet has come about from consolidation between comms and media, and the inherent conflicts of interest that come with it.
>> No. 19311 Anonymous
16th May 2019
Thursday 6:16 pm
19311 spacer
>>19307

The argument was that peering with Netflix isn't a traditional peering arrangement, because the traffic flow is effectively unidirectional. They're not joining up two networks for their mutual benefit, they're building an express lane for a massive data hog. We can debate the merits of that argument, but it isn't prima facie wrong.
>> No. 19315 Anonymous
16th May 2019
Thursday 6:41 pm
19315 spacer
>>19311
>They're not joining up two networks for their mutual benefit
How is it not to Comcast's benefit to provide their customers with a better connection to a service that evidently a significant number of them make significant use of?
>> No. 19317 Anonymous
16th May 2019
Thursday 7:07 pm
19317 spacer
>>19315
They don't give a shit about their customers.
>> No. 19318 Anonymous
16th May 2019
Thursday 10:14 pm
19318 spacer
>>19315
>>19317
In many places in Seppoland, there is only one broadband provider; they often use litigation to enforce their monopoly.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/24/17882842/us-internet-broadband-map-isp-fcc-wireless-competition
>> No. 20153 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 7:02 am
20153 spacer

18384574-7455421-image-a-15_1568276991926.jpg
201532015320153
Rape's up whilst convictions are down. Good time to be a rapist.
>> No. 20154 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 11:41 am
20154 spacer
>>20153

I wonder how much of that is daft internet culture leaking. #metoo inspired a lot of people to a logic that if they weren't 100% satisfied with a past sexual experience and decision they made it was rape, and that they should come forward and that would be recorded. I'm not saying #metoo was bad just that there are people who would act off of it, like with all social phenomena, like idiots.

Why actual rapes convictions are down is anyones guess? Maybe they finally caught all of the celebrity and muslamic ray guns? Maybe they spent too much time investigating all the more spurious claims to handle to work on the more solid cases?

Maybe as always there has been changes in the way the statistics are collected?
>> No. 20155 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 12:48 pm
20155 spacer
>>20154
I'm not sure how #metoo qualifies as "daft internet culture" and everything else you claim sounds like knee jerk nonsense and doesn't have any substance to it.

What I do know is that the CPS has had its budget slashed by about a quarter since the Conservatives rocked up ten years ago, there's a noticable decline in convictions beginning months prior to #metoo and your claim they "finally caught all of the celebrty and muslamic ray guns" doesn't really make sense give that complaints are still increasing while convictions fall. It is worth mentioing that convictions for rape were at record highs by the end of 2016, but that trash Daily Mail chart doesn't go far enough back to properly to say how unusual that could have been and this necessarily explain the complete reversal of fortunes the CPS is suffering. None of this is an answer, but that's rather my point, we don't know what's going on, but saying "girls are stupid liars" like you, at the very least, heavily implied is a really bone headed way of looking at things and if I was your dad I'd take away your wifi privileges for the rest of the weekend.

Hey, look, some sources!

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/law/cps-staff-working-hard-to-keep-sinking-ship-afloat/5059341.article
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/05/violent-crimes-against-women-in-england-and-wales-rise-by-10-in/
>> No. 20156 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 12:59 pm
20156 spacer
>>20155
>and if I was your dad I'd take away your wifi privileges for the rest of the weekend.
If I was his mum I'd be campaigning for post-natal abortion.
>> No. 20157 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 2:45 pm
20157 spacer
>>20154

> #metoo inspired a lot of people to a logic that if they weren't 100% satisfied with a past sexual experience and decision they made it was rape, and that they should come forward and that would be recorded.


Pretty much this. Having second thoughts about the sex you agreed to have the night before should never treated the same way as somebody falling victim to actual forcible rape against their will.

Adult life means you have to live with your poor decisions and their consequences, and that must include sex that was consensual as far as you were concerned during the actual act, even if you later wish you hadn't had it.

So my guess is the rise in rape complaints is indeed owed in part to women, but maybe also a few men, who regretted having had consensual sex with someone. And because the law still mandates that a punishable offence can only have occurred if the sex wasn't legally consensual at the time, I can see why some rape accusations will then be dismissed.

Also, the principle of legal certainty requires that an average, reasonable person will be able to tell where legally permissible behaviour ends, and where punishable criminal offences as mandated by a law begin. And if you then engage in consensual sex with another person where neither the circumstances nor the person's behaviour at the time of the act give you reason to believe that you are about to commit a punishable offence, the principle of legal certainty is violated if that person is then free to change their mind about the act's consensuality the next day. Because as a result, you will have no way of establishing with reasonable certainty if your behaviour that you are about to engage in will eventually be deemed criminally punishable or not.
>> No. 20158 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 2:48 pm
20158 spacer
>>20157
see >>20155
>> No. 20159 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 2:59 pm
20159 spacer
>>20155

Your knee is jerking so hard that I'm not even sure you were able to finish reading the post you are replying to.
>> No. 20160 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 3:12 pm
20160 spacer
>>20157
>but maybe also a few men
Your ignorance on the subject at hand is apparent all the way through your post, but nowhere more so than here. Rape, in the UK, is defined as forcible penetration of a vagina by a penis. I doubt the FtM population of Britain is skewing the results all that much. You're chatting so much shit, it's embarrassing.

>>20159
>"no u"
Brilliant. Do you mean the bit where he says "maybe they're collecting the results differently", but does nothing to clarify if that's true?
>> No. 20161 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 3:13 pm
20161 spacer
>>20160

What? Are you saying that under UK law there's no such them as female on male rape?
>> No. 20162 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 3:25 pm
20162 spacer
>>20161
There are laws covering incidents of that nature of course, but such circumstances would not called "rape", no. Although I've a feeling you knew this already, ChronicMasturbaterLad.
>> No. 20163 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 3:36 pm
20163 spacer
>>20162

I'm not otherlad, no. What do they call it when a female forcibly has non-consensual sex with a male, then, Lawyerlad?
>> No. 20164 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 3:44 pm
20164 spacer
>>20160
Because men in the UK only have sex with women.
>> No. 20165 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 3:44 pm
20165 spacer
>>20160

Let us not forget it is a known point that at least 12% of rapes are immediately concluded to be false accusations by virtue of impossibility by the police recording them as such the actual numbers are obviously higher but that is an unknown factor as it is anywhere between that and the conviction rate that aren't later overturned. But the anecdotal evidence from police is that it is about half, no one wants to be the arsehole who records a rape as a false accusation though.

Obviously proving a rape beyond reasonable doubt is very hard paticularly when it comes down to one persons word against another it is very likely then a lot of cases fail too. The real statistics for the rise are as yet unknown but if it a influx of historical date rape cases there is often very little that can be done. We will have to wait for in depth analysis to find out what this really means. I certainly know for person anecdote that the number of cases that the CPS handles where it turns out that the person regretted their decision later has gone up. Obviously you are right the CPS is a bit of an underfunded shambles at the moment and it is very possible that the hard to prove cases of which most rapes are, are the ones that suffer the most.
>> No. 20166 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 3:49 pm
20166 spacer
>>20161
Not him, but yes and no.

Rape is specifically the offence committed when a person penetrates the mouth, vagina or anus or another with their own penis, and thus can only be committed by a man or a transwoman. There is an offence of "assault by penetration" which applies to any other form of penetration, which carries a life sentence. There is also an offence of "causing sexual activity without consent" which also carries a life sentence when it involves penetration.

A woman forcibly riding your cock "isn't rape" the same way a joyrider nicking your car "isn't theft".
>> No. 20167 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 4:37 pm
20167 spacer
I know someone who was raped by a fat lass. A lot of people didn't believe him because they said it couldn't be rape if he got hard, but I drunkenly fell through the door and saw it happening.
>> No. 20169 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 4:58 pm
20169 spacer
>>20167
Did you see his lack of consent?
>> No. 20170 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 5:11 pm
20170 spacer
>>20169
He was pathetically whimpering for her to get off him. Once she was rumbled she shamefully slid off his cock and then left the party. I'll never forget the look of shame on her face.
>> No. 20171 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 5:14 pm
20171 spacer
>>20160

So a man can't rape another man in the anus then?


>Your ignorance on the subject at hand is apparent all the way through your post

Show me where I was being ignorant, and didn't state a fair and reasonable opinion adhering to the law as it is.
>> No. 20172 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 5:24 pm
20172 spacer
>>20166

> the same way a joyrider nicking your car "isn't theft".
> nicking your car "isn't theft".


Think about that again for a moment, lad.
>> No. 20173 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 5:28 pm
20173 spacer
>>20172
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/contents
>> No. 20174 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 5:45 pm
20174 spacer
>>20166

So if a bird sodomises someone with a strap-on, it's not rape? If a bloke bum fucks you, it's not rape?

Blimey, you learn something new every day. I think we need a hashtag to sort this injustice out.
>> No. 20175 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 5:48 pm
20175 spacer
>>20174
Reading comprehension not your strong point, is it?
>> No. 20176 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 5:53 pm
20176 spacer
>>20174

>Blimey, you learn something new every day


With the exception of the lads who make all those bold claims in the first place.
>> No. 20177 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 11:32 pm
20177 spacer
>>20175

It should be noted that my post was intended to express shock and surprise, not disagreement or smart-arsery.

>>20176

Not sure what claims you're on about.
>> No. 26955 Anonymous
9th August 2020
Sunday 10:02 pm
26955 spacer
Downing Street plans rape prosecution targets for police and CPS

Downing Street is planning a controversial intervention to reverse the record decline in rape prosecutions by imposing targets on police and prosecutors, the Guardian has learned.

In a highly unusual move, the prime minister’s crime and justice taskforce is planning to set targets for police to refer more high-quality rape cases to the Crown Prosecution Service and for the CPS to prosecute and bring more rape cases to trial.


https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/aug/09/downing-street-to-set-rape-prosecution-targets-police-and-cps

The article mentions that rape prosecutions have fallen to an all-time low but conviction rates are at an all-time high.
>> No. 26962 Anonymous
10th August 2020
Monday 2:20 am
26962 spacer
>>26955
The statistics are absolutely appalling though - too many people get away with it.
>> No. 26963 Anonymous
10th August 2020
Monday 8:13 am
26963 spacer
>>26962
It doesn't feel like the right way to go about things is to make large cuts to the prosecution service and then set them targets because you're unhappy with negative press resulting from the outcome of said cuts.
>> No. 26964 Anonymous
10th August 2020
Monday 8:21 am
26964 spacer
>>26955
"High quality rape cases" is quite the turn of phrase
>> No. 26965 Anonymous
10th August 2020
Monday 2:38 pm
26965 spacer
>>26963

Nothing good has ever come of target setting, for any service, industry or trade, in the history of anything. With the possible exception of sales, and even then only debatably, it is a flat out ineffective management technique that only encourages sacrificing the quality of work.

Applied to the concept of justice it's nothing short of dangerous.
>> No. 26966 Anonymous
10th August 2020
Monday 2:49 pm
26966 spacer
>>26965
>Nothing good has ever come of target setting

Dear oh dear. Do you work in the NHS?
>> No. 26970 Anonymous
10th August 2020
Monday 11:17 pm
26970 spacer
>>26965

>Applied to the concept of justice it's nothing short of dangerous

Agreed. How can it not invite questionable practices by law enforcement. There is such a thing as overpolicing, you know. And setting targets or quotas very plainly encourages it.
>> No. 26977 Anonymous
12th August 2020
Wednesday 12:06 am
26977 spacer
>>26970
Police quotas/targets are indeed quite concerning. IT pre-supposes that there is a certain amount of crime but the current policing efforts somehow don't catch them. It's really some middle-management level of bullshit. If a police force makes no arrests in a quarter, that ought to be celebrated.

It's applying sales tactics to human problems and it falls flat on its face in achieving its supposed goal. Instead of encouraging police to be a local (dubious, if you like) friend, it makes them beholden to corporate goals and removes all judgement. It treats a community like a business opportunity, and where that ends we can already see in Some Country.

Policing is not a business. It should not be run like a business. It will not be made more efficient by being run like a business. A policeman is essentially a social worker, who knows their beat, who is allowed to use force an allowed to call in mates to help. Quotas alienate people from talking to the police because you never know if they are trying to help or if they're trying to tick a box.

Thankfully, the UK Police is of the helpful mindset. But this can change and it would be really quite scary to live in a world where stop-and-search is not just common but the norm.
>> No. 26978 Anonymous
12th August 2020
Wednesday 12:09 am
26978 spacer
>>26977
>Thankfully, the UK Police is of the helpful mindset. But this can change and it would be really quite scary to live in a world where stop-and-search is not just common but the norm.
We're way past that already. It's less obvious if you're white, but it's happening and spreading.
>> No. 26979 Anonymous
12th August 2020
Wednesday 12:37 am
26979 spacer
>>26978
You are right in the sense that, particularly in London and other major urban centres, the police force is already quite disconcerting. There used to be a joke, that:

> Heaven is where the police are British, the cooks are French, the mechanics German, the lovers Italian, and it's all organised by the Swiss.

Where beat police still exist this might hold up, but elsewhere this has lost its reputation.
>> No. 26980 Anonymous
12th August 2020
Wednesday 1:19 am
26980 spacer
>>26978
>We're way past that already.

Agreed - even as a white person you only have to encounter the Met once to find they're not the kindly beat bobbies of yore.
>> No. 26997 Anonymous
12th August 2020
Wednesday 9:48 pm
26997 spacer
>>26966

Dear oh dear. Which do you work for, Capita or Serco?
>> No. 27000 Anonymous
12th August 2020
Wednesday 10:01 pm
27000 spacer

96185bc81fa2b6edaef10d2e125d13f5_400x400.jpg
270002700027000
>>26997
>Capita or Serco?

Oh sweetheart. Like I would work for cunts like this.
>> No. 27001 Anonymous
12th August 2020
Wednesday 10:50 pm
27001 spacer
>>27000

So which cunt do you work for?
>> No. 27004 Anonymous
13th August 2020
Thursday 2:38 am
27004 spacer
>>27001
Nobody as ugly or establishment as that.
>> No. 39681 Anonymous
11th December 2022
Sunday 9:40 pm
39681 spacer
Street harassment to be banned in crackdown, government says

Sexual harassment on the street will be made a crime with jail sentences of up to two years, the government has said. Catcalling, following someone and blocking their path will be criminalised in England under plans backed by the Home Secretary.

"Every woman should feel safe to walk our streets," Suella Braverman said. Sexual harassment is already illegal but it is hoped creating a new offence for street harassment will encourage more people to report it to police.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63916328
>> No. 39682 Anonymous
12th December 2022
Monday 12:40 am
39682 spacer
>>39681
A yoof repeatedly called me a "baldy twat" while I was waiting for a bus a couple of weeks ago. Could I get him arrested?
>> No. 39683 Anonymous
12th December 2022
Monday 4:12 am
39683 spacer
>>39682

Section 5, Public Order Act 1986.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/5

>>39681

This thing is already illegal, but people are complaining that it's still happening, so we're going to make it extra illegal. We aren't going to give the police any more resources to enforce that law, we aren't going to give the CPS any more resources to prosecute and we aren't going to make any more court time available. We don't actually need to enforce laws, right?
>> No. 39684 Anonymous
12th December 2022
Monday 9:23 am
39684 spacer
>>39683
>Section 5, Public Order Act 1986.
Would require the prosecution to prove that the baldy twat is a sensitive snowflake who gets distressed and has a teary when someone calls him a baldy twat, or alternatively run an empty-chair argument offering up a little old straw lady.

>We aren't going to give the police any more resources to enforce that law
Sure, let's give the police more resources and broader powers to enforce one of the most widely-abused bits of law on the books. There's no way that can possibly go wrong, right?
>> No. 39685 Anonymous
12th December 2022
Monday 12:24 pm
39685 spacer
>>39681

Anyone with common sense can see what bollocks this is, but when it comes to fisherpersonry I don't think common sense is allowed.

Perfect example of the sort of petty authoritarianism to appease Mumsnet arseholes I was alluding to in the other thread. Doesn't do much of anything in real life, but makes the Karens feel like they've been listened to, which is all that matters.
>> No. 39686 Anonymous
12th December 2022
Monday 12:48 pm
39686 spacer
>>39684

I'd be distressed if someone repeatedly called me a baldy twat. I think most people would, regardless of whether they were bald or indeed a twat. I think you'd be hard pressed to argue that "baldy twat" isn't a term of abuse when directed at a stranger. What >>39682 describes is a textbook example of public disorder.

Return ] Entire Thread ] First 100 posts ] Last 50 posts ]
whiteline

Delete Post []
Password