Really bothered by a couple of things 20yo DS1 has said

[QuestionsorComments]

He's a nice young man, or so I thought. Good manners, kind to grandparents, reasonably pleasant to share a house with, seems to treat his girlfriend well, has a junior management post at work and seems to have a reputation for being firm but fair...

Anyway two things:

-GF is away on a 6 week course. On the first night one of the men was sent home for secually harassing a fellow student (yay!). But DS1's (and his GF's) response was "he didn't do anything, just made her feel uncomfortable"

-DS1 has just done jury service, although they didn't get to return a verdict because the case was abandoned due to someone testing positive, so will now be heard by another trudge and jury. It was DV case and he said on hearing the victim's evidence he believed her, but once she was questioned by the defence lawyer there were inconsistencies so he couldn't believe anything. They didn't hear all the evidence or reach a conclusion, but he ses to have decided she must have been lying because the lawyer was able to trip her up. I've tried to explain that in times if great stress, you light not remember every detail but that doesn't necessarily mean you're lying... I do wonder whether someone barely out of their teens is suitable to sit on a jury...

I'm really bothered about the man I've raised. I wouldn't have expected this at all. I don't think for a minute he'd be those people, but his acceptance of it it shocking.

[SarahAndQuack]

There is some really interesting and useful research into the effects of trauma on memory, which suggests that it is absolutely normal for people who've suffered trauma to have false memories or inconsistencies in their memories. Martin Conway's work comes to mind. One thing that stuck with me was the point that all of us remember events in 'slices' - we sort of compress things down. We don't bother retaining every single detail, so for example if you have guests to dinner, you don't remember that John was wearing a blue shirt. Maybe blue is John's favourite colour, so if someone asks you 'hey, you remember that dinner party where John wore that nice blue shirt?' you will likely reconstruct an image in your mind's eye of John wearing a blue shirt, on that night.

If it then turns out there's a photo and John is wearing a red shirt, it's not because you lied, it's because your memory is efficient.

I think the major fault here isn't your DS, though, it's the legal process. It shouldn't be possible to cast doubt on someone's veracity like this IMO, but it's often still done.

[Champagneforeveryone]

His response to the male being sent home is somewhat mitigated as his GF seems to agree. I'd be far more worried if she was saying how awful it was and he was dismissing it.

As far as jury service, I do think that very few young people have the life experience to understand what a traumatic experience can do to you, let alone having to relive it in a courtroom (I work in a similar role and I'm certain 17yo DS would be like a fish out of water on jury service, despite the things he's heard me speak about)

I think it's fine to challenge it as you have done, but technically he is speaking the truth when he says it's hard to believe the victim as her story does not tally up.

[itsgettingweird]

Jury service - you are told you can only consist if there isn't reasonable doubt. So he's expressing what he saw was a lawyers questioning casting that reasonable doubt.
You have no idea that if they'd heard the whole case he would have been certain or not - neither is he.

I feel for the woman who had to go through again.

With regards the course. He's basing his opinion on what his Gf has said. I doubt he's minimising it as such. The version he was told was a minimising version.

I say this as someone who's suffered sexual assault.

The best thing you can do and have done is have an adult conversation with him about his views. At such a young age he may not be seeing a bigger picture that experience gives you. Doesn't make him a bad person.

[KurtWilde]

As PP have said, the fact his GF agreed would be enough for me to think he wasn't being dismissive simply because she's a woman.

As for the jury duty, he was privy to everything that went on in court and you were not. I think many of us - male and female - would start to doubt someone's story if they were so easy to trip up. Unfortunately that's how guilty people get away with things and innocent people feel let down by the justice system.

Neither of these examples you've given here would make me worry about the young man I'd raised tbh, he's just navigating his way into adulthood. You may not always agree with his opinions as he gets older, but he is entitled to them. I don't see that as a reflection on how he's been raised.

[MrsPsmalls]

Dramatic nonsense from you. You have no insight into either of these things as you weren't present at either.

[SarahAndQuack]

@MrsPsmalls

Dramatic nonsense from you. You have no insight into either of these things as you weren't present at either.

That's pretty harsh!

Why mightn't the OP have insight into these things that doesn't come from attending either, but from her wider experience?

[gsaoej]

In his defence, he probably does not understand exactly how uncomfortable the victim of the sexual harassment was made to feel. If you substitute uncomfortable for terrorised and unsafe then it’s more representative of how a woman feels to be on the receiving end of this behaviour. And if you then put him in the position of the man, would ds have done what the man did? Probably not and that should show him how inappropriate it was.

With the DV - again in his defence he has f all life experience and presumably didn’t grow up in a DV environment. Perhaps he just applied schoolboy logic to the situation and figured that inconsistency = lies.

[gsaoej]

And yes I don’t think a 20yo really belongs on a DV jury.

[QuestionsorComments]

I'm not being dramatic, I'm just giving things some thought.

[NotAnotherPushyMum]

He seems to have considered the court case evidence more carefully than you have. Your assumption that she must be believed (because she’s a woman or because she’s a victim?) means that you shouldn’t be the one sitting on a jury, not your son.

[QuestionsorComments]

I'm not saying she should be believed, but that small inconsistencies , brought out by someone whose job it is to cause doubt, don't necessarily mean she was lying. Obviously there's a much bigger body of evidence to be considered.

[JesusInTheCabbageVan]

@NotAnotherPushyMum

He seems to have considered the court case evidence more carefully than you have. Your assumption that she must be believed (because she’s a woman or because she’s a victim?) means that you shouldn’t be the one sitting on a jury, not your son.

Where has OP said she thinks the victim must be believed? Read the OP again.

[Sn0tnose]

I don’t think you’re being at all unreasonable. I’d have some concerns too.

GF is away on a 6 week course. On the first night one of the men was sent home for secually harassing a fellow student (yay!). But DS1's (and his GF's) response was "he didn't do anything, just made her feel uncomfortable" The fact that his girlfriend has minimised whatever happened is irrelevant. How many threads have you seen talking about VAWG where women rush to say namalt? Or where they talk about some terrible woman who made up lies about their male friend, who they know for a fact would never assault a woman? I’d be inclined to ask him how far sexual harassment is allowed to go before the harasser is held to account? Is it ok if the victim is only made to feel uncomfortable? How would he have felt if the victim had been his girlfriend? Or how he would feel if he was being made to feel uncomfortable by a man who was bigger and stronger than him?

There’s a stand up comedian named Daniel Sloss who does a serious bit at the end of his routines. He has a routine called X where he talks about men needing to call this shit out wherever they see it. Perhaps it might make him think if he watches it?

[TheYearOfSmallThings]

Dramatic nonsense from you.

I agree with this. His opinions are not exactly the same as yours but they are not outrageous, and you do not need to be 100% in agreement on every point for him to be a good person.

[NeverChange]

"He did do anything,just made her feel uncomfortable"

If you take sentence on it's own. He is, albeit clumsily, that it wasn't at the more horrific end of sexual assault, rape etc. It doesn't mean he is in favour of sexual harassment. If there's more to the conversation, then I can see your concern.

Regarding his view of the DV case, I would probably take the same view. While I may think something happened and believe the testimony, if I had any doubts then I am bound to find the defendant not guilty. The beyond reasonable doubt bit gets a lot of people off but if you aren't certain, you can't find them guilty. It's very different to on the balance of probability, you think they probably did it.

[BringYourOwnBoris]

Don't think he is meant to share details of jury service. Esp as the case is ongoing/ about to be retrialled.
Why don't you call him out on his views? I have 2 DS's in their early 20s and they would absolutely expect me to challenge them.

[QuestionsorComments]

@BringYourOwnBoris

Don't think he is meant to share details of jury service. Esp as the case is ongoing/ about to be retrialled.
Why don't you call him out on his views? I have 2 DS's in their early 20s and they would absolutely expect me to challenge them.

Yes I have talked about it with him. Yes he is allowed to talk about it now it's over. If it had gone to conclusion he's not allowed to talk about the deliberations

[HollowTalk]

Perhaps he could look at how hard it is for women to get a case like that to court? It's really important that he looks at the wider picture.

I would watch "Unbelievable" with him - it's on Netflix. It's about young women who've been raped and who have to deal with the male police officers who are investigating it. I watched it with my son when he was around your son's age and he started all the "Oh well, you can't necessarily believe..." until the twist in the drama when the two women police officers took over the investigation. His jaw literally dropped.

[HollowTalk]

And I agree - he's too young for jury service if he doesn't know the value of a good barrister.

[QuestionsorComments]

@HollowTalk

And I agree - he's too young for jury service if he doesn't know the value of a good barrister.

He didn't volunteer

[QuestionsorComments]

@HollowTalk

Perhaps he could look at how hard it is for women to get a case like that to court? It's really important that he looks at the wider picture.

I would watch "Unbelievable" with him - it's on Netflix. It's about young women who've been raped and who have to deal with the male police officers who are investigating it. I watched it with my son when he was around your son's age and he started all the "Oh well, you can't necessarily believe..." until the twist in the drama when the two women police officers took over the investigation. His jaw literally dropped.

Yes I did talk to him about how unusual it is for a DV case to actually reach court.

[itsgettingweird]

@QuestionsorComments

I'm not saying she should be believed, but that small inconsistencies , brought out by someone whose job it is to cause doubt, don't necessarily mean she was lying. Obviously there's a much bigger body of evidence to be considered.

Well yes. A body of evidence that wasn't heard as the case was adjourned.

He will know he can convict only where there isn't reasonable doubt.

What he heard cast reasonable doubt.

It doesn't matter that he heard evidence that was designed to do that only. He never had to make the final decision. It's fine to cast comment on what you see and hear.

[LondonQueen]

@MrsPsmalls

Dramatic nonsense from you. You have no insight into either of these things as you weren't present at either.

This. You're being a little over the top OP, you wasn't present at either of these events for a start.

[user1493494961]

Agree with pp, you're being dramatic.

[QuestionsorComments]

There's no drama, I just thought it was worth taking about