Plans to give anonymity to men accused of rape have been dramatically scaled back.Ah.
Two weeks ago, the coalition pledged to give men the same protection as their accusers, whose identities are never revealed.
But yesterday David Cameron indicated the accused would be named if prosecutors brought charges.
Well, that's disappointing, if expected from the new boss who really isn't much better than the old boss, but at least this will ensure that the most egregious cases will...not be char...
Yeah. Right.
As DumbJon points out, Harriet Harman's position on this is:
"...nothing more than the legal codification of the belief that there's no smoke without fire."Nice justice system we used to have, eh..?
I want to agree with you on this because if the victim is allowed anonymity then so should the accused. I am reluctant to because of Harman the Horrible's other assertion that knowing the identity of the accused allows other victims/witnesses to step forward.
ReplyDeleteHow say you JuliaM?
Typical!
ReplyDeleteAntisthenes.
Hi, just an observation. If there are other victims or whitnesses, maybe they should have come forward already. If someone is a victim of, or whitness to a rape, I would think the first thing they would do is come forward, regardless of weather or not they know who did it.
I mean, if someone burgles your house, you dont wait until they have been caught before you report it.....
JM, I'm glad you admitted you love saying "I told you so" because anything else would not be true :-)
ReplyDeleteAnti, I don't think that's relevant. Either you were a victim of a serious crime and you reported it, or else you weren't. If men are named, then this is as likely to attract malicious accusations as flush out real ones.
Some say that if people accused of rape were publicy named then more victims might come forward and say that they were attacked too. True. The original case would then be delayed whilst the extra cases were investigated. However this already happens before anyone is even named as a suspect when the modus operandi or other factors about the rape is publicised and victims recognise their attackers methods being similar.
ReplyDeleteCriminals do get multiple offences taken account, but this is when the police already know about them or if the criminal admits to them. They are then included in the trial.
Some say that if people convicted of rape were publicy named then more victims might come forward and say that they were attacked too. True. Their case would be investigated and and a new trail brought against the rapist. Anonymity until convicted does not stop this from happening.
Note that when criminals are put on trial, any crimes that they have committed in the past are not put before the jury. That is because everyone has the right to be tried for the case they have been arrested for, not because they were a naughty person in the past.
Removing anonymity to rape accused should not make any difference to the numbers who could come forward as victims after the criminal is in jail.
AntiS...
ReplyDelete".......Harman the Horrible's other assertion that knowing the identity of the accused allows other victims/witnesses to step forward."
So, there has never been a female falsely 'crying wolf' more-than-once?
Lets have full & transparent publicity or anonymity for both parties.
"I am reluctant to because of Harman the Horrible's other assertion that knowing the identity of the accused allows other victims/witnesses to step forward.
ReplyDeleteHow say you JuliaM?"
I say the same as the others here. I can't feel comfortable knowing that the price of this is men dragged through the courts by vindictive or mad women.
"M, I'm glad you admitted you love saying "I told you so" because anything else would not be true :-)"
I cannot tell a lie... ;)
"Lets have full & transparent publicity or anonymity for both parties."
Anything less would not be equal. You'd think an ex-Equalities Minister would know that...