An outbreak of common sense?

[Simon]

Just heard that the new government, is planning to go back to the 70's and provide men accused of rape with the same protection as their alleged victims.
I've always thought this strange that someone accused of something can be so easily identified when so many of these cases come to nothing.
If they are guilty, string the ba5tards up, but until that time why should they be subjected to media "trial"
I'm thinking of several cases where the "victim" has admitted she made it all up, it has ruined the poor sod accused for life.
(no personal experience here you understand, just a personal hatred of mine)

Simon

 

[Terry Oxandale]

I agree, especially in light of the 'apparent" zeal prosecutors have. A local situation here is the second trial for murder, against a second, previously un-indicted suspect. I have to ask then, why was the first fellow dragged through court (and acquited) only to now have sights set on a new suspect. I can just about guarantee you, if a conviction occured in the first trial, there would be no second trial, and a fight against any appeals by the "perpetrator". So who really is the murderer? Who's getting screwed by our prosecutors beside the public?

 

[Cliff Beer]

Here in the US you're innocent until proven guilty (and have exhausted your appeal options)....except with rape accusations in which case it seems to work in reverse. Lesson for men: don't hang those kind of women who might be inclined to make crazy accusations!

 

[Garry]

Guys, in this country you will be found guilty unless you can afford the best legal representation that all of your money can buy. The DA's (District Attorneys to all of you elsewhere) have the power of Grand Jury in which the defendent cannot have legal representation, but the DA can use any evidence, spurious or not, to get an inditement. That still leaves a trial by jury for the defendent, but if you don't have the money, you will be assigned a hack of a lawyer from the Public Defenders office. Guess which side usually wins. Court rooms are not for justice, they are like football games in which the best team wins, the one with unlimited funds. The strange thing about governments is that they just print more money when they need it, but the defendent will spend huge amounts of hard earned cash if they are to have a chance. The sad truth is that many defendents will win the case, but be bankrupt when the trial is over.
I don't have a great love of the "justice system" as it operates today.
Garry