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.
Well, in the current political-climate, I would remain-silent and insist my lawyer is present before answering any questions with regards to any allegations of sexual-misconduct.
What's weird is...more and more of my friends are going nuts about this outcome. I thought the whole #MeToo movement was...about giving a victims an opportunity come forward. In the case of Ford, she was given a chance to come forward and put the now Supreme Court Judge to trail.
There had been quite a few MeToo situations where the courts did judge Bill Cosby and Weinstein guilty, however, not EVERY single of the accused will wind up guilty obviously. They ALL can't be winners, right?
But...I thought the whole purpose of the movement was to have women come forward, have their say, and put bring them on board for an appropriate hearing/process. Sometimes the outcomes will not be a "Guilty" verdict every time right?
Funny thing, I have women friends that posted praises, welcoming Kavanagh to the Supreme Court. That they were glad he was proven innocent.
In actuality, people are more concerned about THEIR side winning, than what really matters. But that's an entirely diff. convo. altogether.
Well, I think that is always the story, the situation of not realizing that a trial can have multiple outcomes.
As I often say, for many many years, if we know they are guilty, then why bother having a trial in the first place? (because that is the way we do things and we don't know they are guilty).
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?
A sex crime is just like any other physical assault. You have to prove it happened, you can’t just assert it. So no, no special treatment for sex crimes. Nobody gets to be automatically “believed”. Due process and presumption of innocence is correct. Many sex crimes can often be avoided by choosing rational behaviors. Don’t drink to excess, watch where you go, watch how you dress, watch how you comport yourself, make yourself able to physically defend yourself from assault, etc. Physical self-defense should be taught in grade school and maintained in middle and high school. Delete dodgeball or basketball, introduce karate and judo. Sex crimes would be unheard of if physical defense capabilities were prevalent in the citizenry.
A sex crime is just like any other physical assault. You have to prove it happened, you can’t just assert it. So no, no special treatment for sex crimes. Nobody gets to be automatically “believed”. Due process and presumption of innocence is correct. Many sex crimes can often be avoided by choosing rational behaviors. Don’t drink to excess, watch where you go, watch how you dress, watch how you comport yourself, make yourself able to physically defend yourself from assault, etc. Physical self-defense should be taught in grade school and maintained in middle and high school. Delete dodgeball or basketball, introduce karate and judo. Sex crimes would be unheard of if physical defense capabilities were prevalent in the citizenry.
Agreed but they will paint this as "victim blaming".
A sex crime is just like any other physical assault. You have to prove it happened, you can’t just assert it. So no, no special treatment for sex crimes. Nobody gets to be automatically “believed”. Due process and presumption of innocence is correct. Many sex crimes can often be avoided by choosing rational behaviors. Don’t drink to excess, watch where you go, watch how you dress, watch how you comport yourself, make yourself able to physically defend yourself from assault, etc. Physical self-defense should be taught in grade school and maintained in middle and high school. Delete dodgeball or basketball, introduce karate and judo. Sex crimes would be unheard of if physical defense capabilities were prevalent in the citizenry.
Having done extensive unarmed combat and ballet, let me just say that cross training is very important in being proficient in one's prowess.
Ie, "There is my goal but a group of men in various positions are in my way. How do I get from here to there, how do I get past them?".
People accused of sex crimes are already presumed guilty. The jury is not thinking "that man is innocent, unless they prove him guilty." They assume "He must have done something, or he wouldn't be on trial".
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.
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.
Seriously, dude?