two sentences:
1. I believe your allegation
2. I take your allegation seriously
with the first you are judge and jury and have no proof, the second is an unbiased response, I prefer the second as everyone is innocent until proven otherwise
No point in becoming entrenched.
Why would you always want to be "right"?
Originally Posted by velvet donkey:
No point in becoming entrenched.
Why would you always want to be "right"?
From my point of view, it's not a case of always wanting to be right. I just want victims of sexual assault to feel that they will be believed. These crimes are already the most under reported of all crimes and notoriously hard to prove.
Whether you call it 'taking it seriously', or 'believing', the victims have to feel that they won't be judged a liar. Presumption of innocence is needed for both parties.
I hear ya Blizz and agree.
Just find it odd it's all showbizz when we can find what we can on the net 
Originally Posted by velvet donkey:
I hear ya Blizz and agree.
Just find it odd it's all showbizz when we can find what we can on the net
Indeed.
Originally Posted by machel:
two sentences:
1. I believe your allegation
2. I take your allegation seriously
with the first you are judge and jury and have no proof, the second is an unbiased response, I prefer the second as everyone is innocent until proven otherwise
anything other than the second is unfair to innocent people being accused
Originally Posted by Blizz'ard:
Originally Posted by velvet donkey:
No point in becoming entrenched.
Why would you always want to be "right"?
From my point of view, it's not a case of always wanting to be right. I just want victims of sexual assault to feel that they will be believed. These crimes are already the most under reported of all crimes and notoriously hard to prove.
Whether you call it 'taking it seriously', or 'believing', the victims have to feel that they won't be judged a liar. Presumption of innocence is needed for both parties.
Hear hear, which is what has happened so frequently in the past and very sadly still seems to be happening to an extent now
Originally Posted by Supes:
Originally Posted by Blizz'ard:
Originally Posted by velvet donkey:
No point in becoming entrenched.
Why would you always want to be "right"?
From my point of view, it's not a case of always wanting to be right. I just want victims of sexual assault to feel that they will be believed. These crimes are already the most under reported of all crimes and notoriously hard to prove.
Whether you call it 'taking it seriously', or 'believing', the victims have to feel that they won't be judged a liar. Presumption of innocence is needed for both parties.
Hear hear, which is what has happened so frequently in the past and very sadly still seems to be happening to an extent now
But there have been "victims" that have come forward in the past that have been lying, sadly you can't always believe anyone that comes forward, it's a sad state of affairs but true.
Originally Posted by velvet donkey:
Accused should have anomytity till it goes..
Yes of course, but all celebs (even the evil Max Clifford) should be innocent to proven guilty.
But I still dont believe a word Clifford says. 
I see there's another one being investigated, a much loved comedian in his 70`s according to the sunday mirror
Originally Posted by Aimee:
I see there's another one being investigated, a much loved comedian in his 70`s according to the sunday mirror
and the name being put about is one shocker!!
Originally Posted by Saint:
Don;t do that - spill
Another household TV name is being investigated over sex abuse allegations by Jimmy Savile police.
A case file has been opened on a much-loved comedian.
Sources say police are in the process of preparing to interview him under caution.
Allegations of historic sexual abuse have been made against the TV favourite, who denies the claims.
Police yesterday refused to confirm who the much-loved comedian was.
The Sunday Mirror knows the identity of the man, now in his 70s, but we have decided not to name him.
Think peckham
Originally Posted by Saint:
Stoppitt - you know i'm a bit dim
your not a 'fool'
Don;t come that flattery with me chicken - i love it 
He's not a comedian 
thats if I'm backing the right horse 
On a more serious note - if proven to be false allegations - i hope the accusers get jailed
David Icke forum interesting read ,over three thousand posts on the Savile case .
Well why not - wasting police time. Perjury.
Possibly perverting the course of justice.
False accusers need to be punished
Originally Posted by Saint:
On a more serious note - if proven to be false allegations - i hope the accusers get jailed
If the case goes to trial and a not guilty verdict comes back then the accused goes free.The accuser is not on trial, we don't jail the accuser/victim of crimes.
As far as i'm concerned if it is proven that a person has lied to a court and lied in statements to the Police - its an offence and should be punished
Originally Posted by Saint:
As far as i'm concerned if it is proven that a person has lied to a court and lied in statements to the Police - its an offence and should be punished
Yes I can see your point but jailed?
Why not - its a vile thing to lie and destroy someone's life, career, reputation, no?
Originally Posted by Sprout:
Originally Posted by Saint:
As far as i'm concerned if it is proven that a person has lied to a court and lied in statements to the Police - its an offence and should be punished
Yes I can see your point but jailed?
For the damage they do to real abuse victims (not to mention the damage caused to the accused person) of course they should be jailed.
Originally Posted by Saint:
On a more serious note - if proven to be false allegations - i hope the accusers get jailed
and that is going to help thousands of abused adults and children come forward, how
Why let them do that and go free??!!
They stigmatise all accusers and the people they accuse
Originally Posted by Dame_Ann_Average:
Originally Posted by Saint:
On a more serious note - if proven to be false allegations - i hope the accusers get jailed
and that is going to help thousands of abused adults and children come forward, how
If they are genuine then why wouldn't it help them? anyway if someone wastes police time I would have thought thats a crime in itself.
That's why no-one should be named before the swinging gavel.
