If BELIEVE THE VICTIM has no place in courts, then it has no place in society at all. We need to scrutinise the accuser before we can believe the victim.

maluminse · 2017-12-03T01:31:20+00:00

Spot on. Great to see logic and rationale return to court proceedings.

"She said the assumption that sexual-assault complainants tell the truth imposes a presumption of guilt on the accused."

Many courts now allow accusations and convictions in other cases in the guilt phase of a trial. This goes against 1000's of years of law against doing that.

Mein_Tarnaccount · 2017-12-03T10:29:18+00:00

Justice isn't about believing the victim. It's about finding out who the victim is.

William__F0ster · 2017-12-03T11:55:14+00:00

From the article (my italics):

... a judge has found three Toronto male police officers not guilty ...

Justice Molloy wrote [that] the assumption that sexual-assault complainants tell the truth imposes a presumption of guilt on the accused.

And:

Kim Stanton, legal director of the Women's Legal Education and Action Fund, said Justice Molloy's ruling is the latest evidence that the criminal-justice system is failing victims of sexual assault.

"It's just so obvious over the last while that what we have isn't working," she said in an interview. "The difficulty with a decision like this is a chilling effect it has on survivors, because it does appear very difficult to get a conviction."

Surely making that comment on that case means that Stanton must be sailing very close to a charge of libel or slander?

If the officers are not guilty then there are no victims and no survivors - unless of course Stanton considers the men to have been guilty before the trial began on the basis of the accusation alone in which case she is proving the point made by Molloy that:

.... the assumption that sexual-assault complainants tell the truth imposes a presumption of guilt on the accused.

I am not naive enough to think that miscarriages of justice never occur - of course they do, and the trial of OJ Simpson in the '90s has still to be one of the most widely publicised examples of that. And there certainly have been past miscarriages of justice involving women in situations of domestic violence.

But the thing about miscarriages of justice is that they work both ways - the miscarriages don't apply exclusively to complainants (i.e. victims), but also - and perhaps just as often? - to the defendants.

Even Stanton herself is reported to have said that:

the presumption of innocence and the criminal-law standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt [are] "necessary protections."

Although how sincere that statement is as opposed to something she knows she needs to be seen to be saying while her group, the Women's Legal Education and Action Fund are working on: "a three-year project to find other models that might work better than the current criminal-law approach" is debatable.

SINWillett · 2017-12-03T16:41:45+00:00

I feel the better outlook is, believe the victim in the extent of providing protection, but don't punish anyone without evidence.

pixelies · 2017-12-03T10:29:00+00:00

No. You don't need to scrutinize the accuser. You need to scrutinize the EVIDENCE.

2017-12-04T18:59:57+00:00

Frankly the idea that court of public opinion is in any way acceptable within a civilized society is the problem.

If a man is accused of wrongdoing let the court decide his guilt or innocence. If the accusations are not of a violation of law, then it is no other man's business.

DirtyPantySommelier · 2017-12-03T02:13:53+00:00

Depends what, exactly, someone is claiming.

If someone claims that they had sex and they didn't consent, you can believe that without question. They aren't making any assertions that apply to anyone other than themselves.

If someone claims that they were raped, this carries a claim about another person. That additional assertion is what must be scrutinized.

Feminist rape culture doesn't not foster that sort of careful approach, which is why it is generally ineffective in understanding or addressing sexual violence.

Title	If BELIEVE THE VICTIM has no place in courts, then it has no place in society at all. We need to scrutinise the accuser before we can believe the victim.
Author	Jasperlight
Upvotes	95
Comments	15
Date	December 3, 2017 1:05 AM UTC (8 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/7h6o0e/if_believe_the_victim_has_no_place_in_courts_then/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/if-believe-the-victim-has-no-place-in-courts-then.910030 https://theredarchive.com/post/910030

Comments