to worry about the accused?

[WitchWay]

DLT for example. How is anything going to be proven? Are people jumping on a bandwagon or am I very wrong to even think that? I don't condone abuse - far from it - but surely they can't all have been sailing along in JS's wake - can they?

Nobody's attacked you for saying people should get a fair trial.

But I find some of your comments on this thread abhorrent - you don't understand why rape victims are granted anonymity, you feel sorry for the accused regardless of the legal protections they have and you concentrate your comments on false accusations, even though they make up only 2-3% of cases.

"Nobody has said the accused shouldn't get a fair trial.

When people attack me for suggesting no more than that the accused should get a fair trial, it seems abundantly clear that they disagree with me on that point."
Please C&P a post that does that. Thank you.

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2509253/Fran-Syvret-My-drunken-night-stand-led-accused-rape.html
So not just his life that affected but his families too. How can that be right?

He is just as much a victim as anyone else
life/i-will-never-recover-victim-of-false-1054593

Why would they not get a fair trial Suzanne?

I imagine it's pretty awful having a dh, db, ds or df who is a rapist too. But just because there wasn't enough evidence in court/The police persuaded the victim to drop the case/the victim was so scared of not being believed she didn't even go to the police you never know or know for certain that they are! There will be a hell of a lot of women out there living with rapists and never even know. That's a more pressing issue to me.

you don't understand why rape victims are granted anonymity

I didn't say that: I said I don't understand why rape victims are granted anonymity while alleged rapists are not granted anonymity.

you feel sorry for the accused

I didn't say that, either: I said I'm concerned that s/he should receive a fair trial.

you concentrate your comments on false accusations

That suggests that the vast majority of my comments have been to do with false accusations whereas, out of some 20 postings to this thread, the vast majority have contained no mention of false accusations.

I do wish people would read what I say rather than assume I support rapists simply because I'm in favour of justice for all - men and women.

This is what you said Suzanne

"So it's rather hard to see why alleged victims of sexual abuse are granted anonymity while alleged perpetrators are not."

I imagine it's pretty awful having a dh, db, ds or df who is a rapist too. But just because there wasn't enough evidence in court/The police persuaded the victim to drop the case/the victim was so scared of not being believed she didn't even go to the police you never know or know for certain that they are! There will be a hell of a lot of women out there living with rapists and never even know.

A very reasonable point and I don't disagree with a word of it.

That's a more pressing issue to me

Fine, and if you wish to start thread on that issue, please do so. It would be a fascinating and very lively thread, I'm sure.

This is what you said Suzanne

"So it's rather hard to see why alleged victims of sexual abuse are granted anonymity while alleged perpetrators are not."

Exactly - and it's very different from simply failing to understand why the alleged victim is granted anonymity.

Do you mean it is wrong the accused are not allowed to stay anon, and not that the victims are, as that is two completely different ways of looking at things. If so, you need to explain yourself better to avoid lots of "attacking" posts.

Granting the accused anonymity would certainly be an excellent way of reducing the level of convictions.............

Do you mean it is wrong the accused are not allowed to stay anon, and not that the victims are, as that is two completely different ways of looking at things.

I mean that both alleged victims and alleged perpetrators should have equality of anonymity - be that none, a bit, a lot, or total - whatever degree of anonymity one enjoys, the other should enjoy too.

If so, you need to explain yourself better to avoid lots of "attacking" posts.

I think I need to explain myself a lot better if I'm to avoid 'attacking' posts.

However, when it comes to dumbing down, there's only so far you can go before reaching bedrock.

Have to agree with suzanne and I think people are wilfully misunderstanding the point they are trying to make. Everyone is entitled to a fair trial regardless of their crime. Are these accused people going to get a fair trial considering that most people will be of the opinion that they have enough details to decide that they are already guilty? Probably not.

It's perfectly possible to be a feminist and still support the concept of "innocent until proven guilty" regardless of the media's stance.

Granting the accused anonymity would certainly be an excellent way of reducing the level of convictions

A fair point. Such anonymity would indeed prevent people from becoming aware of the trial and coming forward to say that the same (wo)man had assaulted them in similar circumstances.

But granting the alleged victim anonymity is an excellent way of increasing convictions of innocent persons as, for one thing, it prevents people coming forward to say they saw the alleged victim 100 miles away from the alleged crime scene at the time the crime is alleged to have been committed.

Agree with Suzanne on anonymity.

If the alleged victim of a crime is entitled to it then so should the accused.

Even if those who are accused falsely is a tiny percentage - for that tiny percentage it can completely ruin their lives and it's something that will forever be remembered and brought up by people who know them or the media, especially if they are in the spotlight.

The alleged victim will have been asked to provide any evidence to support their case- it would be pretty difficult to provide that if he or she was actually 100 miles away at the time of the alleged crime........

Surely one doesn't have to be very clever to figure out that in cases of sexual crimes, the accused not being given anonymity can be extremely important.

Because it allows other victims to come forward. Which is important.

This is quite important.

And not difficult to work out.

And important.

Did I make that fairly clear?

And the 3 % of men whose lives are ruined are...what? Unimportant? A necessary sacrifice?

I really don't think you can justify ruining innocent people's lives in the hope that it might flush out more evidence.

Why don't we pick 3% of the population at random, accuse of them of any crime they look 'the sort' for and see if we can solve more crimes?

Sounds ridiculous doesn't it?

But that is how the argument appears to be swinging.

Suzanne I only know about Scots law but whilst the accused is not obliged to give evidence or to lead his own witnesses the jury is entitled to take account of that. If the Crown has led a convincing case and the accused makes no attempt to rebut it the jury is entitled to wonder why not.

The thing about our justice system is that it doesn't work very well, but no one can come up with a way to make it better.

Rape is different from other crimes. If you have been robbed you'd report it regardless.

It seems to be true that some victims will only come forward if the perpetrator has already been accused. They don't want to be the only one. Anonymity would discourage those victims.

On the other hand if a number of victims come forward without knowing about each other from the media that would surely help the conviction rate. I think a jury would find it compelling if someone were accused of crimes in a number of different cities by people with no knowledge of each other.

Is the root problem there that people are ashamed of being rape victims?

It's a terribly intimate thing to have to discuss in court anyway, but if it were possible to remove the actual shame so that all rapes were reported then perhaps anonymity for the accused would actually help get a conviction.

Or not... Can anyone think of a better way to make it work?

I had a very uncomfortable experience with the hairy cornflake when I briefly met him (aged 15). Based on that encounter, I think he is probably guilty. Can't speak for the others.