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.

[KurtWilde]

Honestly I think you're looking for something where there's nothing.

[maddy68]

He's right though it's guilty beyond reasonable doubt. That's the basis of a fair trial

[BabyInTheJungle]

I can see where you are coming from but he is only 20. At 20 I thought I was a bastion of righteousness, I thought that porn was a cool, fun thing, I thought that strip joints empowered women, I thought that private schools were the work of the devil, I thought that you had to be totally nuts to be on antidepressants, I could go on for ages. All sorts of stuff I don't think now. I had the basic nuts and bolts of who I was going to be but really was still forming. Your DS might be the same. He'll grow and learn.

If he had been the boy sent home for committing the sexual assault, or the one on trial for the DV then yes I'd be wringing my hands. But he's not.

[SarahAndQuack]

But 'reasonable doubt' does not mean 'there were inconsistencies in the witness's testimony and therefore she can't be trusted'. Why do people keep mentioning reasonable doubt?

I've got to wonder whether, had the case gone further, this would have been raised for the jurors?

[itsgettingweird]

Inconsistencies can lead to reasonable doubt. That's the defences job. To cast that reasonable doubt in the jurors minds. The prosecutions job is to remove that doubt by counteracting it.

This is what happens when you have Joe public making the decisions rather than trained jurors who do this job for a living.

[QuestionsorComments]

@itsgettingweird

Inconsistencies can lead to reasonable doubt. That's the defences job. To cast that reasonable doubt in the jurors minds. The prosecutions job is to remove that doubt by counteracting it.

This is what happens when you have Joe public making the decisions rather than trained jurors who do this job for a living.

Where do they have professional jurors?

[itsgettingweird]

You don't

I just think if you want the system to be fairer and more streamlined that's what should happen!

No 2 juries may make the same decision if they watched or listened to the same case. Age, economics, experience etc bias will always set in. It's human nature!

[SarahAndQuack]

@itsgettingweird

Inconsistencies can lead to reasonable doubt. That's the defences job. To cast that reasonable doubt in the jurors minds. The prosecutions job is to remove that doubt by counteracting it.

This is what happens when you have Joe public making the decisions rather than trained jurors who do this job for a living.

Inconsistencies absolutely can lead to reasonable doubt, but a lot of people on this thread are commenting as if inconsistencies constitute reasonable doubt. To me, that says that people don't understand much about trauma and memory, or about gendered bias in this sort of situation, and those things are very much relevant here. I do get why the OP is concerned. It's such a huge stereotype that a woman who's been subjected to violence will have a hyper-correct memory of details, and she will be able to tell her story repeatedly without ever varying her account. We now know that's extremely unlikely to be the case, not because women lie, but because of what trauma does to memory, and because of how memory works in general. I'm with the OP in being concerned that this isn't more widely recognised.

[onewednesdayindecember]

@KurtWilde

Honestly I think you're looking for something where there's nothing.

Agree with this

[WeAreTheHeroes]

Having done jury service relatively recently, I can tell you that the term "reasonable doubt" is no longer used. Juries are directed by the judge that they must be "sure" a defendant did the thing they are charged with in order to find them guilty. They also receive direction from the judge as to what they need to weigh up to help them reach a decision.

[Iamblossom]

I wouldn 't write him off just yet. I clearly remember deliberately voicing opinions that were the polar opposite of my parent's just to get a rise. Immature but I was young so....

In a related point, you may have brought him up to know what your beliefs are but it took you this long to arrive at those views presumably and he will need that amount of time to also form his own. IME young adults/late teens don't see the nuances to a situation in order to understand it from all sides, that takes experience and living in this world a bit longer!

[Iamblossom]

@BabyInTheJungle

I can see where you are coming from but he is only 20. At 20 I thought I was a bastion of righteousness, I thought that porn was a cool, fun thing, I thought that strip joints empowered women, I thought that private schools were the work of the devil, I thought that you had to be totally nuts to be on antidepressants, I could go on for ages. All sorts of stuff I don't think now. I had the basic nuts and bolts of who I was going to be but really was still forming. Your DS might be the same. He'll grow and learn.

If he had been the boy sent home for committing the sexual assault, or the one on trial for the DV then yes I'd be wringing my hands. But he's not.

Yes this, my post was basically repeating you @BabyInTheJungle

[Littlepaws18]

I think he is voicing an opinion which lacks insight because he (and his girlfriend) probably lack life experience. My attitude at 21 is completely different at 40 because of these factors and life events. He will change over time.

[taybert]

It just sounds like immaturity. I cringe at the way I was when I was 20. I’d been brought up well, was intelligent and articulate and had a good head on my shoulders, but I was still immature. I just didn’t have the life experience to make complex, nuanced judgements about situations outside the experiences I did have. I was pretty simplistic. I wasn’t a bad person, I was just young. Nearly 20 years later and I’ve had seen and experienced so much more, I barely recognise myself and some of the opinions I had. It’s possible that in another 20 years I’ll be saying the same thing again…

[Theblacksheepandme]

I absolutely don't think you're being dramatic. I also think the below advice is good. I wish there were more Mothers like you that pick up on things there sons say.

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.