U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 09-19-2018, 11:38 AM
 
Location: Posting from my space yacht.
6,965 posts, read 2,636,855 times
Reputation: 12947

Advertisements

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?

 
Old 09-19-2018, 12:14 PM
 
Location: Colorado Springs
19,329 posts, read 9,102,284 times
Reputation: 18653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pogue Mahone View Post
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.
 
Old 09-19-2018, 02:55 PM
 
Location: Posting from my space yacht.
6,965 posts, read 2,636,855 times
Reputation: 12947
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi View Post
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.
 
Old 09-19-2018, 03:06 PM
 
4,320 posts, read 6,524,355 times
Reputation: 12706
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pogue Mahone View Post
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.
 
Old 09-19-2018, 03:38 PM
 
Location: Central Washington
525 posts, read 182,428 times
Reputation: 937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian_M View Post
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.
 
Old 09-19-2018, 04:22 PM
 
6,895 posts, read 1,676,063 times
Reputation: 4922
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pogue Mahone View Post
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.
 
Old 09-19-2018, 09:31 PM
 
172 posts, read 55,732 times
Reputation: 521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pogue Mahone View Post
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?
What specifics are you referring to?

Who is "they"?

So you want to change the constitution?

Please write a more coherent post next time.
 
Old 09-19-2018, 09:31 PM
 
5,325 posts, read 1,647,651 times
Reputation: 5148
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.
 
Old 09-19-2018, 10:37 PM
 
5,885 posts, read 3,132,259 times
Reputation: 15444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pogue Mahone View Post
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 View Post
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?
 
Old 09-19-2018, 11:10 PM
 
Location: Texas
7,052 posts, read 2,560,750 times
Reputation: 14925
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.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top