Is a man accused of rape guilty until proven innocent?

Again ihave typed and deleted about 3 stupid facetious comments because i find this so pointless, circular and frustrating

how does everyone manage to keep to calm and patient

meh i quit

no one has suggested changing the burden of proof

other posters are accusing people of wanting to change the burden of proof

note the subtle difference

tenet of criminal justice is innocent until proven guilty.cant change that or pick and chose to suit your particular preferences

are you seriously suggesting applying such flawed logic to all crimes

so homicide change the burden of proof and assume guilt.what about potential miscarriages of justice

the same rule of law to other crimes should be applied - if that means that police should ivestigate further than they currently do - then so be it - but the law should remain

too

I'm going to bed now to watch american cop shows that will no doubt involve the characters visiting lots of strip clubs.

Really need to break that habit. Bring back columbo I say.

I keep coming back to the idea that there is no appetite for change.

It;s too expensive
And where is the real cost to society of all this rape. Some miserable women - so what.
And if we did get really good at prosecuting this, there'd never be time for anything else

I think that lip service is paid but really no-one wants to know.

Plus as a society it is easier to pretend there's no problem and victims are lying/it's all a misunderstanding as that's so much easier for everyone to process.

I see threads and TV progs about SA and the rape epidemic, which is obviously truely appalling. But I wonder what the scale of the problem in the UK really is, and why aren't people starting threads / making programs about that? I think that it's easier for people to see it as something that happens to other people/in other countries and so on.

I totally sypathise with the POV that at the moment women seem to be assumed to be consenting unless it can be proved otherwise, why is that really? When in fact most women do not go around gagging for it the whole time and ready and willing to drop their knickers for groups of strange men, no matter what some peoples sexual fantasies might say.

I mean, that 8yo who was attacked recently by those 2 boys, I saw someone on TV say that she "probably enjoyed it". This was after the verdict. That case and the reporting around it showed very clearly where the sympathies of the press and public lie in rape cases. Everyone was desperate for them to be found not guilty/to have the case thrown out/to assume that the girl was an active willing consenting participant. Even after the boys were found guilty of attempted rape that approach continued. Headlines said "those poor boys" and barely even mentioned the victim.

The burden of proof thing is difficult

Until a few decades ago some women were unable to withhold consent in law (wives, maybe prostitutes?)

Then they said that these women could be raped, but the defence people still used peoples preconceptions to put women in the category of "not rapeable" by basically trying to show that they were promiscuous or immora in some other way

Then the law was changed so that defence lawyers were not able to scrutinise the victims past as a matter of course. As I understand it though, they can still apply to the judge to include this and there was an article someone linked to with some lawyers and they said that they always applied to be able to do this as a matter of course

There are also directions that are supposed to be given by the judge to the jury to try and dispel rape myths eg a woman agreeing to have a drink with a man does not automatically mean she consents to sex

However

Time and time again, juries judge that women were consenting in the most bizarre of circumstances, their private lives are still picked apart etc. It still stands that if the defence people can show the jury one or more of the myths about women "asking for it" then they will find not guilty.

There is also this huge issue of rape being prosecuted badly, the police not gathering evidence/not taking complaints seriously and so on.

I don't think the burden of proof needs to change, I think teh police and CPS need to buck their ideas up and much work needs to be done to break down rape myths in the minds of the public and juries.

I think that's what i think anyway, teh burden of proof thing is something that I have only just started thinking about on this thread.

Oh weren't you talking about anonimity? Sorry that's what I was talking about and assumed (incorrectly) that we were talking about the same thing! Sorry about that.

Clearly innocent until proven guilty is the only thing that makes any sense, as everyone has agreed on this thread (the OP was stirring).

Every man is some mother's son

let's not try or convict anyone ever again

result!

no not at all - would you want the law - and the burden of proof changed then?

custardo

I do not imagine it would be any worse than if he were accused of murder, child sex offences, torturing animals, violently abusing elderly people.

Do you?

Think the OP's long gone tbh

op do you have a son? can you imagine if your son was accused of rape ?