Search results

I think you'll find he's being sarcastic, and suggesting it is wrong for the CPS to continue to pursue a case after the appeal because they believe someone they believe raped a woman, and that they believe they have the evidence to secure a conviction against.

In your hypothetical, the friend is drinking the tea themselves, you're not involved in the tea drinking. Step back and let them do whatever they want to themselves.

Just because someone is a judge, doesn't mean they don't have outdated ideas of sexual politics, or aren't part of the problem with rape culture and victim blaming. http://www.itv.com/news/2013-08-07/judge/...

You're not naive. You know, I'm sure, how frequently in rape cases women's sexual history is brought up to muddy the waters and make her seem 'easy' and draw doubt that she would ever say no to sex, or that she led him on or whatever. The argument itself would help continue the denial of the...

Call me a cynic, but that article makes it sound like they've basically got a bunch of people to slut shame her, as if her having sex with different men every weekend means she doesn't have a right to expect to not be taken advantage of when in a vulnerable state, and that some damaging...

No they didn't (probably). They had two points to judge: That she consented or That it was reasonable for the defendants to believe she had consented Given this, they very well could have concluded that she did not consent to either defendant, because she was in no condition to do so. They...

Because they had to decide if the defendants had, or it was reasonable that they believed they had, consent. The jury decided that either Macdonald had, or it was reasonable for him to have believed he had consent on the basis that she met him in town and agreed to go back to the hotel with...

Then Larus should be clearer, "threads like these" encapsulate the whole thread, not the latest post. Yes, I also understand when the conditional tense is in one line, it doesn't automatically follow through to all following paragraphs, especially when the following paragraph appears to be...

No, I saw it as a separate point. There appears to be no link between that first line and the rest of his post. And? "Threads like these" are responded to with the information at hand. When the "pious" and "holier than thou" comments that Larus refers to were made, they were based on the...

Criticising someone who is convicted of rape makes us pious? Criticising someone who admits to abandoning his brother at a police station so he can lie to a porter to gain access to someone else's hotel room to have sex with a drunk woman - without her consent in the eyes of the law - makes us...

So, on another page not the one that is actually relevant? I have given my interpretation - It is legal guidance meaning it is a suggestion for the judges to follow, not absolute, as is made clear on the actual page about murder sentencing page - judges do not have to follow the guidance, but...

No it doesn't. I've just re-read down to the tenth chapter and have yet to see that line. I have seen: All offenders convicted of murder need to have a minimum term set. This is the minimum time that the offender will serve before being eligible for parole. - the first line The provisions...

No it's not. Because of Anthony Anderson, the home secretary has been stripped of that power as there were too many political consequences, and in 2003, the criminal justice act came in and granted judges that power in accordance with a set of guidelines, while the judge can ignore the...

But they are not all given life imprisonment. Minimum terms have to be given, unless the seriousness of the offence is considered exceptionally high. So right off the bat there are different standards of punishment. Then the minimum term is decided using one of four starting points for...

This is going off in a tangent... But that is a contradiction. Not all murders are "punished in the same manner". Yet you deign to make your own judgement on murder regardless. Treating the guy who dies after a single self-defence punch the same way as someone who viciously tortures and kills...

There is no we. I speak for myself. For me, we shouldn't sign a convicted rapist just because he might get a few goals. It takes more than a denial to wipe the conviction. My position on who we should and shouldn't deal with will change with each case, depending on the offence, the victim, the...

Absolutely not. There should be no dealing with him before any change in his status as a convicted rapist. According to this article from the 10th of March, Ched is resigned to no playing until at least 2016/17, and even then isn't convinced he'd be able to get back into football.

No. In a later post I was clearer than when I wrote that: it's become a lazy argument to undermine the popular majority decision and/or make themselves the victim. The people in the press are just being lazy with their arguments in an attempt to make the popular opinion less valid.

I think you're confused. The "I" is the person who is making the claim of mob rule, not the mob itself (i.e. when someone disagrees with the majority, they call it mob rule in an attempt to undermine it and/or to make themselves the victim). My post is about what I think 'mob rule' means, not...

According to wikipedia: Ochlocracy (Greek: ὀχλοκρατία, okhlokratía; Latin: ochlocratia) or mob rule is the rule of government by mob or a mass of people, or the intimidation of legitimate authorities. As a pejorative for majoritarianism, it is akin to the Latin phrase mobile vulgus meaning "the...