Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
These sorts of crimes are often he said/she said situations where it's hard to really prove if anything actually happened. Because of this they are notoriously difficult to prosecute, and guilty perpetrators are often set free. It's been said that it's better to let a thousand guilty people go free than let one innocent person be punished, but that leaves a lot of victims without justice in sex related crimes. Should the presumption of innocence apply to sex crimes, or in the interests of justice for victims should the onus be placed on the alleged perpetrator to prove their innocence?
These sorts of crimes are often he said/she said situations where it's hard to really prove if anything actually happened. Because of this they are notoriously difficult to prosecute, and guilty perpetrators are often set free. It's been said that it's better to let a thousand guilty people go free than let one innocent person be punished, but that leaves a lot of victims without justice in sex related crimes. Should the presumption of innocence apply to sex crimes, or in the interests of justice for victims should the onus be placed on the alleged perpetrator to prove their innocence?
You wouldn't suggest that if you were the innocent person being accused.
Well naturally the accused doesn't get to decide, that's the accuser's job.
With the massive number of False accusations, hell no.
I do think that Falsely accusing someone of a sex crime is so heinous that the individual should be shot on sight though. And falsely Insinuating a sex crime be punishable by life in prison without the chance of parole. But that's just my own, pie-in-the-sky, opinion.
With the massive number of False accusations, hell no.
I do think that Falsely accusing someone of a sex crime is so heinous that the individual should be shot on sight though. And falsely Insinuating a sex crime be punishable by life in prison without the chance of parole. But that's just my own, pie-in-the-sky, opinion.
Absolutely. Or at the very least, get the same sentence the person they falsely accused would have received, and pay that person's defense expenses. An attempt to destroy a person's life shouldn't be taken as lightly as it is.
These sorts of crimes are often he said/she said situations where it's hard to really prove if anything actually happened. Because of this they are notoriously difficult to prosecute, and guilty perpetrators are often set free. It's been said that it's better to let a thousand guilty people go free than let one innocent person be punished, but that leaves a lot of victims without justice in sex related crimes. Should the presumption of innocence apply to sex crimes, or in the interests of justice for victims should the onus be placed on the alleged perpetrator to prove their innocence?
Well, murder is MUCH MUCH more heinous than any sex crime, but I still would never support such a thing, even for mass murderers.
These sorts of crimes are often he said/she said situations where it's hard to really prove if anything actually happened. Because of this they are notoriously difficult to prosecute, and guilty perpetrators are often set free. It's been said that it's better to let a thousand guilty people go free than let one innocent person be punished, but that leaves a lot of victims without justice in sex related crimes. Should the presumption of innocence apply to sex crimes, or in the interests of justice for victims should the onus be placed on the alleged perpetrator to prove their innocence?
Why is it any more heinous than any other crime against persons?
The presumption of innocence is the basis of a polite society. If you want to return to the law of the jungle, move to the jungle. This is a civilized advanced society. We're better than presumptions of guilt. This isn't a communist nation where that crap flies.
These sorts of crimes are often he said/she said situations where it's hard to really prove if anything actually happened. Because of this they are notoriously difficult to prosecute, and guilty perpetrators are often set free. It's been said that it's better to let a thousand guilty people go free than let one innocent person be punished, but that leaves a lot of victims without justice in sex related crimes. Should the presumption of innocence apply to sex crimes, or in the interests of justice for victims should the onus be placed on the alleged perpetrator to prove their innocence?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pogue Mahone
Well naturally the accused doesn't get to decide, that's the accuser's job.
Words fail me at the utter ignorance of history behind such a concept. We have our current legal concept precisely because of the abuses of such a system. Shall we burn them at the stake or drown them as well?
There are an increasing number of sex crimes where there is video evidence and that's really, really, really hard to dispute.
Sure, I think people who are accused of sex crimes are innocent until proven guilty. But again, it's hard to dispute what's on camera or video. Perverts love to film what they're doing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.