TrufleShufle
Registered User
- Aug 31, 2012
- 8,362
- 13,809
I'm speculating so hard right now and ain't nothing anyone can do about it.
Of course. Because women never ever levy false accusations against men with means, right? Right?!?!
Allegation of this nature are serious. VERY serious. But our justice system is built around the idea that an individual is innocent until proven guilty. No one has been charged, no evidence released, how can anyone possibly have been proven guilty? You can't just change the rules simply because your entirely subjective opinion is that they MUST be guilty.
This feeling only comes up when comes to certain cases.Of course. Because women never ever levy false accusations against men with means, right? Right?!?!
Allegation of this nature are serious. VERY serious. But our justice system is built around the idea that an individual is innocent until proven guilty. No one has been charged, no evidence released, how can anyone possibly have been proven guilty? You can't just change the rules simply because your entirely subjective opinion is that they MUST be guilty.
Of course. Because women never ever levy false accusations against men with means, right? Right?!?!
Allegation of this nature are serious. VERY serious. But our justice system is built around the idea that an individual is innocent until proven guilty. No one has been charged, no evidence released, how can anyone possibly have been proven guilty? You can't just change the rules simply because your entirely subjective opinion is that they MUST be guilty.
Had any accused even been named before someone jumped in with "innocent until proven guilty"?Of course. Because women never ever levy false accusations against men with means, right? Right?!?!
Allegation of this nature are serious. VERY serious. But our justice system is built around the idea that an individual is innocent until proven guilty. No one has been charged, no evidence released, how can anyone possibly have been proven guilty? You can't just change the rules simply because your entirely subjective opinion is that they MUST be guilty.
The ratio of men who get away with sexual assault to women who lie about it is so exponentially skewed toward the former (faux pas!)that this perspective almost assuredly has nothing to do with "justice" and everything to do with ignorance.Of course. Because women never ever levy false accusations against men with means, right? Right?!?!
Allegation of this nature are serious. VERY serious. But our justice system is built around the idea that an individual is innocent until proven guilty. No one has been charged, no evidence released, how can anyone possibly have been proven guilty? You can't just change the rules simply because your entirely subjective opinion is that they MUST be guilty.
I love when I finally get to an area with no cell service so that I can speculate without @Bear of Bad News stopping meI'm speculating so hard right now and ain't nothing anyone can do about it.
I love when I finally get to an area with no cell service so that I can speculate without @Bear of Bad News stopping me
You mean to tell me star teenage athletes who are old they’re kings for years do horrible things??
We need to stop idolizing young athletes. They turn out to be, for a large part, horrible people until they mature.
Not the same but ok lol.You're completely dishonest. Keep the same energy you had about OJ and Diddy.
I don't care what the ratio is. Punishing someone for a crime they haven't been found guilty of just because of their gender or occupation is collective punishment. That's not justice.The ratio of men who get away with sexual assault to women who lie about it is so exponentially skewed toward the former (faux pas!)that this perspective almost assuredly has nothing to do with "justice" and everything to do with ignorance.
I think it's weird how willing you are to fight for the person who is almost always guilty and gets away with it rather than the person who is almost never lying and does not get justice.I don't care what the ratio is. Punishing someone for a crime they haven't been found guilty of just because of their gender or occupation is collective punishment. That's not justice.
Blackstone's ratio - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Does the accused need to be named to know what's going to happen to him? We have a rather high profile case from just a little while ago that gives us a rather reliable roadmap to what happens next. I don't think we need to wait to see if the punishment starts before the conviction when we already know that's how it's going down.Had any accused even been named before someone jumped in with "innocent until proven guilty"?
Kind of. That's how it is.Does the accused need to be named to know what's going to happen to him? We have a rather high profile case from just a little while ago that gives us a rather reliable roadmap to what happens next. I don't think we need to wait to see if the punishment starts before the conviction when we already know that's how it's going down.
I don't care about guilt at this point. A determination of guilt is a long way off. I care about the rights of everyone involved, not just the accuser's. I've seen enough lives ruined by false accusations eventually proven false that I refuse to jump to any conclusions, especially in emotionally-charged situations.I think it's weird how willing you are to fight for the person who is almost always guilty and gets away with it rather than the person who is almost never lying and does not get justice.
The justice system has mens' backs, they don't really need your help perpetuating the myth too.
First thing you've said that's accurate.I don't care about guilt at this point.
Not guilty ≠ innocent.I don't care what the ratio is. Punishing someone for a crime they haven't been found guilty of just because of their gender or occupation is collective punishment. That's not justice.
"It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
Blackstone's ratio - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
So you've already determined that the as-yet unnamed perpetrators are not innocent, even though they may eventually be found not guilty? What evidence have you considered to come to this conclusion?Not guilty ≠ innocent.