Oxford Union president rape allegations - alumni open letter

there is a distinction, unfortunately

You cannot get round that, either

I most certainly do care about mud flung at women. Are you talking about Annabel Karmel/ I have already mentioned her.
I care equally about both. Neither is more important. There is no distinction.

don't you?

should all the people who signed that petition have written individually to politely ask?
or called to his office door?

that would be way worse

You asked. He refused.
He didnt get charged. Business as normal.

I dont call a petition politely asking.

please, you don't seem particularly to care about the 'mud' flung at women, only at men.

Why is that?

for all those saying Mud Sticks - well, it need not

It does. You cannot get around that.

bullying?

really?

basically, he's being asked to do the decent thing

not forced
not harangued
not hung drawn & quartered

he'd be back now in his former position, seeing as how no charges were brought, only now people would see he's a decent guy

for all those saying Mud Sticks - well, it need not. If you could trust the legal system to put rapists in jail, instead of just 2%, there'd be an easy riposte to any mudslinging wouldn't there?

It was a public (student) position - elected by the public (well, the students), so those same students telling them that they felt he should step down does seem appropriate, rather than bullying.

'conveniently overlooked'?!

It's in the darn thread title!

please - no, it's not bullying.

It was a petition designed to show him what people thought - the people who cared about the institution he was leading. That is a totally normal way to proceed.

Please,

Yes, that has been conveniently overlooked.

Larry, if you want to be accurate, you compared this thread to The Crucible. I'm fairly sure I know what that implies. But, if you prefer, you compared people to witch hunters. Do you imagine that is less insulting?

If anything, it is more so.

My bias is, and has always been, in favour of women and of decent men. I firmly believe men are human. You should consider why you are so keen to argue against this position.

The op linked to a petition calling for him to step aside. That is more than him "offering" to step aside. That is haranguing him. That is trying to bully him.

I'm a bit tired of the 'weary voice of reason' posts too.

tobiasfunke - totally agree.

I've been following this and have skim read the thread- so apologies if I am repeating it but in the workplace if anyone is accused of anything- gross misconduct in work or a criminal matter outside the workplace they are usually automatically suspended. This is as a good thing for all as it doesn't infer guilt in that it happens automatically and it takes any decision making out of the hands of both parties. This is what should've happened here. The Oxford Union would be wise to write some sort of clause into their rules to avoid this sort of thing happening again.

Lrd,

Your bias is so obvious! I compared some on this thread to witch hunters, not witches. Slight difference.

I disagree.

Where on this thread has someone said that to be accused is as good as to be guilty?!

I feel you are letting your obvious emotion cloud your judgement and, dare I say, you are perhaps reading the posts in a rather biased light based on your own anger and attitude towards the women posting here - whom you characterise as 'witches'.

That many guilty go free... iPhone.

Lrd,

They are not in the least bit similar. On this thread, for many people, to be accused is to be as good ad guilty. In real life, it is a lot more nuanced.

I can only report in detail on one rape case (I was a juror). I cannot give details of juror deliberations but the rapist was convicted despite the rape being 20 years ago and the only real evidence being oral and circumstantial. Initially the victim had been badly treated by the police but once the sapphire unit became involved, she was clearly well supported. On the downside, the accused's rather intimidating brothers were in the visitors' boxes and the accused was in court. She was harshly questioned but so was the accused given a very limited iq and being illiterate. On the whole, though, a mixed jury in every sense gave credence to her powerful oral evidence. This does not, to me, indicate a legal or cultural system overly weighed in one direction. Of course, it is anecdote and I have no idea what other people's experienced have been.

As for me, if I hear someone accused, generallyy first thought is why make it up. Then I would rely on the police and courts. Of course, I appreciate that's my guilty go free. But this is our legal system and I think that if I don't know the protagonists, it is the best we can do and those not declared guilty deserve to be treated as innocent.

Imo, it's innocent until proven guilty, which should include the victim too. We can manage it for other crimes, but because it's rape, the victim is suddenly making it up If I was accused of a crime which made my colleagues uncomfortable and feel unsafe around me, then I'd want to step aside because I would want them to feel safe in their own workplace. For financial reasons, I don't think I could just do that, though, out of respect for their very understandable feelings, I think I would if I could.

I've tried following this thread. If we presume innocent til proven guilty I'm not sure why he or any person should step aside.

Stepping aside, implies would come back. I'm guessing that isn't actually possible or at least unlikely . Which group would take them back? An accusation taints. I'm not sure anyone deserves that either tbh.