Guilty until proven innocent

[MKR&*42]

I cannot believe our legal system, how completely ******* backwards and moronic.

Men accused of date rape will need to convince police that a woman consented to sex as part of a major change in the way sex offences are investigated.

The Director of Public Prosecutions said it was time for the legal system to move beyond the concept of “no means no” to recognise situations where women may have been unable to give consent.Alison Saunders said rape victims should no longer be “blamed” by society if they are too drunk to consent to sex, or if they simply freeze and say nothing because they are terrified of their attacker.

Instead, police and prosecutors must now put a greater onus on rape suspects to demonstrate how the complainant had consented “with full capacity and freedom to do so”.
Campaigners described the move as “a huge step forward” in ensuring fewer rapists escape justice.

New guidance will be issued to all police forces and prosecutors as part of a “toolkit” to move rape investigations into the 21st century.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...ape-rules.html

I cannot express how angry I am at this. All I can say is, congrat u ******* lations on creating a legal system where any male accused of rape is now instantly guilty until he can prove his innocence!

Also the red bold, sorry if you're drunk and you consent... you still consent. If you're drunk and don't consent, that's a different matter.

[-:Undertaker:-]

The increasingly Europeanisation of our justice and legal system where our politicians are throwing away what made Britain, the Empire and her Commonwealth a beacon of freedom and liberty across the world, including on the continent.

But we keep voting for the people doing this. From ID cards, to absurd airport security, to random stops and searches to where you can smoke.

[Chippiewill]

This is police force guidance, not a change in laws etc. This is more a change in how they internally handle these sorts of things. You still cannot be prosecuted without evidence. The change is that a woman doesn't have to say no (To make it rape) she has to not say yes (Which makes more sense really). But in terms of burden of proof, the woman still has to prove that she didn't say yes.

The increasingly Europeanisation of our justice and legal system where our politicians are throwing away what made Britain, the Empire and her Commonwealth a beacon of freedom and liberty across the world, including on the continent.

But we keep voting for the people doing this. From ID cards, to absurd airport security, to random stops and searches to where you can smoke.

Dan this has jack all to do with Europe, get the **** out of this thread if you're too lazy to discuss the issue at hand.

[-:Undertaker:-]

This is police force guidance, not a change in laws etc. This is more a change in how they internally handle these sorts of things. You still cannot be prosecuted without evidence. The change is that a woman doesn't have to say no (To make it rape) she has to not say yes (Which makes more sense really). But in terms of burden of proof, the woman still has to prove that she didn't say yes.

Essentially this is turning it into her word vs his (which is usually the case in many rape cases) and there's no doubt now that this is another loophole for the bloke to have to jump through to prove the woman wrong. I've heard stories myself from a friend of a friend who was accused of rape by some crazy ***** and as shown with the high profile sex abuse cases, there's plenty of them about.

Dan this has jack all to do with Europe, get the **** out of this thread if you're too lazy to discuss the issue at hand.

I didn't say this issue was directly related to Europe, this is an issue of our politicians own making. I made a general comment though, like you would in an essay, how our ancient rights and legal traditions are being suffocated with European-style law either directly from Europe as with the European Arrest Warrant (which is another act that has punched innocent until proven guilty in the stomach) or not directly and home-grown like this latest one with rape.

So don't miscontrue what I meant for brownie points.

[FlyingJesus]

We don't have ancient rights and legal traditions, our history is one of "I'm richer than you so I'm legally right" until very recently and you can't pretend otherwise.

Anyway on topic, who else is not surprised at all at the wording of "men must prove" and the wonderful replacing of the word "women" with "rape victims"? If they're going to change how rape is dealt with and attempt to stop victims from feeling like they can't get help, maybe they should start with not erasing the experiences of 50% of the population and make it actually an equal crime for a woman to rape a man.

[sexpot]

/r/TumblrInAction will probably be full of threads about this

[Lewis]

This is ridiculous, why on earth should someone be guilty if they cannot prove themselves innocent?

We don't have ancient rights and legal traditions, our history is one of "I'm richer than you so I'm legally right" until very recently and you can't pretend otherwise.

Anyway on topic, who else is not surprised at all at the wording of "men must prove" and the wonderful replacing of the word "women" with "rape victims"? If they're going to change how rape is dealt with and attempt to stop victims from feeling like they can't get help, maybe they should start with not erasing the experiences of 50% of the population and make it actually an equal crime for a woman to rape a man.

I agree, how obvious a comment like that would be made. Any two genders that are different or the same can rape another, simple.

[-:Undertaker:-]

We don't have ancient rights and legal traditions, our history is one of "I'm richer than you so I'm legally right" until very recently and you can't pretend otherwise.

Wow, could you be more wrong? From the curtailing of the powers of the King by the barons to the replacement of the aristocracy by the merchant and middle classes not even mentioning the triumph of a sovereign parliament over the King - as well as the Commons over the Lords: all mostly done peacefully unlike on the continent. There's no denying this country has been one of the most free countries in the world and it's developed over a thousand years, so don't pretend otherwise and tarnish the history of this country. You only have to look around the world even today at which countries are the most peaceful, protectful of liberties and business friendly: it's all in the Anglosphere countries. We do have ancient rights and we do have legal traditions. Check our basic laws.

Common law/English liberty is our most prized and ancient posessions and are what make this country so great: more so than any buildings, wars or monarchs which is why they should be protected at all costs against sinister witches and ghouls like Theresa May, Tony Blair and Jacqui Smith.

[The Don]

@-:Undertaker:-; Just stop. This has literally nothing to do with Europe. Everyone knows you dislike the EU but let's keep those discussions to the actual relevant threads rather than derailing an extremely important issue such as the deterioration of our legal system.

On topic, this is disgraceful even if it is just a guideline for police to follow and not part of any official legislation. Whilst the victims should be treated with as much care and support as possible the accused should also benefit from the same treatment. Assumed guilt is a terrible precedence.

[-:Undertaker:-]

@-:Undertaker:-; Just stop. This has literally nothing to do with Europe. Everyone knows you dislike the EU but let's keep those discussions to the actual relevant threads rather than derailing an extremely important issue such as the deterioration of our legal system.

Again don't lecture me because I didn't even mention the EU. I know you're all dying to scream "OMG ITS NOT EU DAN" whenever I say something related to Europe or with Euro in the word or phrase, but hold your horses becauses the Europeanisation of law // European Union & ECJ or ECHR.

Two different things. Do you get it? Can I make it any clearer before somebody else tries to misunderstand it too?