BaaLocks Posted September 21, 2023 Share Posted September 21, 2023 18 hours ago, GboroRam said: Bleedin' hell, someone mark the calendar! Even a broken clock is right twice a day 🙂 GboroRam 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YorkshireRam Posted September 21, 2023 Share Posted September 21, 2023 3 minutes ago, Archied said: First and foremost I’m not going to take offence at you saying my rhetoric ties closely to rape apologists ect ect and the reason for that is I don’t know where your coming from on stuff and your life experience, im aware there are issues treat with more emotion because I’ve been touched by them , wrongful convictions is not really the metric I’m looking at , im more concerned at the best way to achieve rightful convictions and am pro anything proposed to achieve that and bring the least pain and harm to victims , even with the best system possible you can never eliminate ALL wrongful convictions ,we are talking about a post on here that showed 3 messages in isolation and I simply said I could not convict someone on THAT ALONE, if you and the original poster are saying you can then I disagree 🤷🏻♂️ I have a daughter and a son Good, it genuinely wasn't mean to be offensive, just an explanation why devils advocacy on this issue can sometimes come off as provocative, but you provided enough nuance within your comments for me to know that wasn't the intention. The only suggestion for increasing conviction rates I have is to also greatly increase the severity of punishments for false accusations. This should reduce the number of false accusations to a negligible level, after a few examples are made. If the same flawed methodology is applied for proving accusations, then the risk of multiple years in prison should be a successful deterrent. Then simply lower the threshold for conviction: that text message should be good enough to convict, in my opinion; or if there is a marginal chance he was lying, then he has to prove that he was lying. Confessions should carry weight and when difficulty ascertaining level of consent is omnipresent, they should hold even more water. Corroboration should also be more legally impactful, neatly bringing us back to Brand, and when multiple victims recount similar testimonies- that's enough for me to assume guilty until proven innocent, in light of the flaws in proving culpability in a criminal sense. Jubbs 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archied Posted September 21, 2023 Share Posted September 21, 2023 (edited) 26 minutes ago, YorkshireRam said: Good, it genuinely wasn't mean to be offensive, just an explanation why devils advocacy on this issue can sometimes come off as provocative, but you provided enough nuance within your comments for me to know that wasn't the intention. The only suggestion for increasing conviction rates I have is to also greatly increase the severity of punishments for false accusations. This should reduce the number of false accusations to a negligible level, after a few examples are made. If the same flawed methodology is applied for proving accusations, then the risk of multiple years in prison should be a successful deterrent. Then simply lower the threshold for conviction: that text message should be good enough to convict, in my opinion; or if there is a marginal chance he was lying, then he has to prove that he was lying. Confessions should carry weight and when difficulty ascertaining level of consent is omnipresent, they should hold even more water. Corroboration should also be more legally impactful, neatly bringing us back to Brand, and when multiple victims recount similar testimonies- that's enough for me to assume guilty until proven innocent, in light of the flaws in proving culpability in a criminal sense. Make no mistake ,I would throw away the key on rapists and would feel pretty much the same with any false accuser but I’m certain that the number of people who get away with rape dwarfs false accusers, I really don’t know the perfect answer to this issue other than searching for and weighing all the evidence that can be found , I do think the treatment of victims and people reporting these crimes seems to have improved vastly though I’m sure it can get better , the anonymity issue throws up such positive and negatives , naming the accused has proven vital so often and been the thing that nails powerful abusers ,, one thing I would suggest is the total banning of nda agreements in all areas which I believe would stop abusers carrying on abusing for years and getting away with stuff and perhaps not just in these types of cases 🤷🏻♂️ Edited September 21, 2023 by Archied YorkshireRam and Stive Pesley 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted September 21, 2023 Share Posted September 21, 2023 36 minutes ago, YorkshireRam said: neatly bringing us back to Brand, and when multiple victims recount similar testimonies- that's enough for me to assume guilty until proven innocent, in light of the flaws in proving culpability in a criminal sense. The girl in the US went to a rape crisis centre the next day and still has all the documentation to prove it. She also still has text messages from RB telling him that she didn't consent and he replied to apologise. Seems pretty open and shut to me. If anyone still insists on seeing a criminal conviction before they will admit Brand is monster then I don't know what to say YorkshireRam 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archied Posted September 21, 2023 Share Posted September 21, 2023 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said: The girl in the US went to a rape crisis centre the next day and still has all the documentation to prove it. She also still has text messages from RB telling him that she didn't consent and he replied to apologise. Seems pretty open and shut to me. If anyone still insists on seeing a criminal conviction before they will admit Brand is monster then I don't know what to say Did they show all of the above in the program? I remember only highlighted snippets If I was on a jury I’ve seen enough along with those messages to tell me I would find him guilty on them🤷🏻♂️ Edited September 21, 2023 by Archied Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram-Alf Posted September 21, 2023 Share Posted September 21, 2023 (edited) 2 hours ago, BaaLocks said: If he can deny his crimes I guess anyone can Plead not guilty and he'll get to go to court, Give his evidence and spoil the CPS and all...As they say...he just wants his day in court...and try another escape😁 Edited September 21, 2023 by The Last Post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxjam Posted September 21, 2023 Share Posted September 21, 2023 2 hours ago, BaaLocks said: If he can deny his crimes I guess anyone can I didn't escape M'lud, I was playing hide n seek with the guards 😛 Ram-Alf and Stive Pesley 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted September 21, 2023 Share Posted September 21, 2023 1 hour ago, Archied said: Did they show all of the above in the program? I remember only highlighted snippets If I was on a jury I’ve seen enough along with those messages to tell me I would find him guilty on them🤷🏻♂️ It's all directly from The Times article. The whole scenario is horrible. He rang and invited her over - when she got there, he was already on the job with another girl and asked her to join them. She freaked out and said no as this wasn't what she was expecting - tried to leave and he essentially took her by force. Says she didn't go to the police as she'd have to admit she entered the house through choice, with a reasonable expectation that they might have sex. You can see her logic - but the idea that he's only in the wrong if he's convicted of it in court is dubious to say the least. Wrong 'uns gonna wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malagaram Posted September 21, 2023 Share Posted September 21, 2023 19 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said: It's all directly from The Times article. The whole scenario is horrible. He rang and invited her over - when she got there, he was already on the job with another girl and asked her to join them. She freaked out and said no as this wasn't what she was expecting - tried to leave and he essentially took her by force. Says she didn't go to the police as she'd have to admit she entered the house through choice, with a reasonable expectation that they might have sex. You can see her logic - but the idea that he's only in the wrong if he's convicted of it in court is dubious to say the least. Wrong 'uns gonna wrong Off with his testicles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malagaram Posted September 21, 2023 Share Posted September 21, 2023 Just now, Malagaram said: Off with his testicles. Not surgical castration,just use 2 bricks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YorkshireRam Posted September 21, 2023 Share Posted September 21, 2023 1 hour ago, The Last Post said: He just wants his day in court...and try another escape😁 He's been watching too much Happy Valley 😂 Ram-Alf 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Normanton Lad Posted September 21, 2023 Share Posted September 21, 2023 40 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said: It's all directly from The Times article. The whole scenario is horrible. He rang and invited her over - when she got there, he was already on the job with another girl and asked her to join them. She freaked out and said no as this wasn't what she was expecting - tried to leave and he essentially took her by force. Says she didn't go to the police as she'd have to admit she entered the house through choice, with a reasonable expectation that they might have sex. You can see her logic - but the idea that he's only in the wrong if he's convicted of it in court is dubious to say the least. Wrong 'uns gonna wrong How do you know this is true? The credence the pitchfork carriers on here give to articles in the papers is shocking. If you have ever read an article about someone or something you know very well then you find that the article is usually full of errors and lies. You should assume that all the other articles are just as inaccurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaaLocks Posted September 21, 2023 Share Posted September 21, 2023 1 hour ago, maxjam said: I didn't escape M'lud, I was playing hide n seek with the guards 😛 Maybe he'll sue the BBC for not saying he was 'allegedly' on the run. To the point of discussion earlier in the thread, it's so hard to see how we stop this sort of time wasting and obviously unhelpful playing around with the system without then - at the very same time - blocking opportunity for those real cases cited earlier to be fairly considered. No easy answers, as said earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted September 21, 2023 Share Posted September 21, 2023 23 minutes ago, Normanton Lad said: How do you know this is true? The credence the pitchfork carriers on here give to articles in the papers is shocking. If you have ever read an article about someone or something you know very well then you find that the article is usually full of errors and lies. You should assume that all the other articles are just as inaccurate. Seriously? We should assume that every new article we read is untrue? Easier to just not read the news at all then. What would be the point Anyway - don't let me stop you defending rapists. It's a good look for you Jubbs 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archied Posted September 21, 2023 Share Posted September 21, 2023 1 hour ago, Stive Pesley said: It's all directly from The Times article. The whole scenario is horrible. He rang and invited her over - when she got there, he was already on the job with another girl and asked her to join them. She freaked out and said no as this wasn't what she was expecting - tried to leave and he essentially took her by force. Says she didn't go to the police as she'd have to admit she entered the house through choice, with a reasonable expectation that they might have sex. You can see her logic - but the idea that he's only in the wrong if he's convicted of it in court is dubious to say the least. Wrong 'uns gonna wrong Saw the channel 4 dispatches program but not seen the written article , I don’t think they showed all of those text exchanges but I may be wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archied Posted September 21, 2023 Share Posted September 21, 2023 29 minutes ago, Normanton Lad said: How do you know this is true? The credence the pitchfork carriers on here give to articles in the papers is shocking. If you have ever read an article about someone or something you know very well then you find that the article is usually full of errors and lies. You should assume that all the other articles are just as inaccurate. Pretty damming texts , I would think the times would be very unlikely to publish them and in very serious trouble if they couldn’t prove they were genuine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jubbs Posted September 21, 2023 Share Posted September 21, 2023 52 minutes ago, Normanton Lad said: How do you know this is true? The credence the pitchfork carriers on here give to articles in the papers is shocking. If you have ever read an article about someone or something you know very well then you find that the article is usually full of errors and lies. You should assume that all the other articles are just as inaccurate. So for a story like this, you think that they can just write an article with all these accusations without proof? My word. Stive Pesley 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted September 21, 2023 Share Posted September 21, 2023 39 minutes ago, Archied said: Pretty damming texts , I would think the times would be very unlikely to publish them and in very serious trouble if they couldn’t prove they were genuine Yup - The article says that they went to multiple sources to verify the authenticity of the texts to make sure they were 100% sent from RB's phone at the time. Given the content - can you imagine any journalist publishing those texts if they weren't 100% cast iron sure they were genuine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Normanton Lad Posted September 21, 2023 Share Posted September 21, 2023 1 hour ago, Stive Pesley said: Seriously? We should assume that every new article we read is untrue? Easier to just not read the news at all then. What would be the point Anyway - don't let me stop you defending rapists. It's a good look for you Every few weeks someone becomes a victim of a Big Brother type "two minutes of hate". There is no real evidence against many of these public hate victims. Look at the newspaper headlines from 10, 20 or 30 years ago and ask yourself if these things turned out to be true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YorkshireRam Posted September 21, 2023 Share Posted September 21, 2023 4 minutes ago, Normanton Lad said: Every few weeks someone becomes a victim of a Big Brother type "two minutes of hate". There is no real evidence against many of these public hate victims. Look at the newspaper headlines from 10, 20 or 30 years ago and ask yourself if these things turned out to be true. Except with Brand there is substantial evidence, it's literally been posted on this page of the thread... At this point, what are you actually on about? Stive Pesley and Jubbs 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account.
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now