'Just because they're cleared, doesn't mean it's made up': Britain's top prosecutor sparks controversy by saying many men acquitted in rape cases are not falsely accused

RapeMatters · 2017-10-10T17:19:52+00:00

I mean, in point of fact, it's true. A person acquitted a crime did not necessarily not commit it in point of fact.

It just wasn't proven they did it.

That being said, our approach to such people probably should be to presume they didn't do it unless we have specific personal knowledge of evidence to the contrary.

GryphonFeathers · 2017-10-10T17:38:09+00:00

This is technically true. Not enough evidence to prove the accused is guilty isn't evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the accusation was false.

Consilio_et_Animis · 2017-10-10T21:21:06+00:00

"When we did some research we looked at more than 5,500 cases and found only a very, very small minority where we thought there was a false or malicious allegation."

Really? Who was the "we" who did this "research"? And what magical crystal ball do you have that enables you to identify if someone is telling the truth or not?

Strange that when your "research" folks looked at this CCTV, that clearly proved a rape was impossible, you still proceeded with a prosecution:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3435317/Tried-sex-crime-brushed-past-film-star-rush-hour.html

factsenrageyou · 2017-10-10T19:39:49+00:00

"You are ALWAYS guilty of ANY accusation a vagina owner throws your way, MALE! Now, just WHERE have all those good men gone?" - A frighteningly large portion of Western Women these days.

BetterBadIdeas · 2017-10-10T19:58:11+00:00

She's not wrong but the only reason to point out that someone found not guilty was not, in fact, proven innocent, is to insinuate that the party found not guilty should still in some sense be treated as guilty purely for having been accused.

Ted8367 · 2017-10-10T22:23:18+00:00

Ms Saunders said: ... 'When we did some research we looked at more than 5,500 cases and found only a very, very small minority where we thought there was a false or malicious allegation.

So much for her "research".

IronJohnMRA · 2017-10-10T22:46:40+00:00

'Just because they're cleared, doesn't mean it's made up'

Now that bothers me. It's almost as if she's saying that even though men are cleared, they were really guilty all along, and must have done something harmful. Or that they simply got away with it.

KR_Blade · 2017-10-10T17:31:08+00:00

ill say this is both a argument that can go both ways, on one side, its true that some real rapists go free but on the other side, its also trying to say that false rape accusations are false and they are always telling the truth.

2017-10-10T19:30:14+00:00

Don't worry Alison your failed and malicious rape cases will ensure the system "works" far more reliably than if you hadn't tampered with the video evidence against(for?) Mark Pearson amongst other atrocities.

Pathfinder24 · 2017-10-10T18:44:31+00:00

Similarly, just because they're guilty doesn't mean they did it.

Welcome to the imperfect world.

furchfur · 2017-10-10T18:36:40+00:00

Given that it cannot be tested either one way or the other and given the law must be equitable, One could start with a presumption that 50% of all allegations are false. Or 50% of all allegations are true.

ifelsedowhile · 2017-10-10T19:48:09+00:00

technically she's right: if their faces weren't plastered all over the place that'd be great too.

ThePigmanAgain · 2017-10-11T00:01:41+00:00

And just because they are convicted doesn't mean they actually did it.

BlueOrange22 · 2017-10-10T18:41:20+00:00

Of course, this will be true until a foolproof lie detector test is invented. This doesn't change the issue of allegations that are, recognizing one doesn't mean you can't recognize the other.

craschnet · 2017-10-10T20:54:05+00:00

Under the fucking law they are.

arkyleslyfox · 2017-10-12T03:49:27+00:00

So what happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?

Comments