Sarah Everard

[Tonge moor green jacket]

12 hours ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

"Serious unease" and "serious annoyance" seem concerningly vague and open to interpretation.

Absolutely. Too specific and clever cunts just look for loopholes- as was detailed in the piece.

Laws have to move with the times or become irrelevant. 

Irrespective of whether they are more open to interpretation, the police are still expected to apply the rules proportionately etc. The inspectorate may still find fault and courts may still decide an action was unlawful.

For me, it's common sense being written into law.

If you're standing outside a building, making a right royal racket with the intention of disrupting the lawful business of those inside then you run the risk.

If the same protest is elsewhere, away from those its aimed at, maybe in a large park for example, then perhaps the level of noise would be more tolerated, and maybe the language as those in the building may feel less uneasy because a harassing mob isn't outside. 

[Sweep]

1 hour ago, Spider said:

Just a quick reminder that the girl who was murdered and dumped in a forest was called Sarah Everard.

 

I think people have moved on now and don't care about her anymore (but like me, I'm sure most didn't really give much of a toss anyway) 

It's not just turned into a political point scoring exercise that will rumble on and on, perhaps footballers should start taking the knee for her or something

[Spider]

Anyway

I think it would be daft if the chief of the met police has to resign for doing her job.

#TeamDick

#NoDickOut

[MickyD]

2 hours ago, Spider said:

Anyway

I think it would be daft if the chief of the met police has to resign for doing her job.

#TeamDick

#NoDickOut

Get your Dicks out for the girls. Get your Dicks out for the girls.

[Lt. Aldo Raine]

2 hours ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Absolutely. Too specific and clever cunts just look for loopholes- as was detailed in the piece.

Laws have to move with the times or become irrelevant. 

Irrespective of whether they are more open to interpretation, the police are still expected to apply the rules proportionately etc. The inspectorate may still find fault and courts may still decide an action was unlawful.

For me, it's common sense being written into law.

If you're standing outside a building, making a right royal racket with the intention of disrupting the lawful business of those inside then you run the risk.

If the same protest is elsewhere, away from those its aimed at, maybe in a large park for example, then perhaps the level of noise would be more tolerated, and maybe the language as those in the building may feel less uneasy because a harassing mob isn't outside. 

And too vague and it's equally open to abuse. Clever cunts can find loopholes but they can also invent creative interpretations.

The bar has to be higher than "serious annoyance".

(But this is probably for another thread as the legislation was drafted before this)

[Tonge moor green jacket]

3 minutes ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

And too vague and it's equally open to abuse. Clever cunts can find loopholes but they can also invent creative interpretations.

The bar has to be higher than "serious annoyance".

(But this is probably for another thread as the legislation was drafted before this)

If it is abused, then the law can be used against the police. They have to be given some leave to make legitimate interpretation otherwise its meaningless.

As it happens, what we've seen over recent months and years is abuse by the some members of the public against civil society, and sufficient powers must be given to deal with it.

If some witless twat sits on top of a train, rather that preventing it going, the train should be allowed to leave. See how he likes it then.

[Lt. Aldo Raine]

1 minute ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

If it is abused, then the law can be used against the police. They have to be given some leave to make legitimate interpretation otherwise its meaningless.

As it happens, what we've seen over recent months and years is abuse by the some members of the public against civil society, and sufficient powers must be given to deal with it.

If some witless twat sits on top of a train, rather that preventing it going, the train should be allowed to leave. See how he likes it then.

They have to be given some leave to interpret but that leave has to be properly weighted against the risk of abuse. We wouldn't have needed the law to be so lax to prosecute the example you've given. 

[mickbrown]

Orwellian

[Ani]

Just been radio that of 55000 rape allegations less than 3% result in convictions. * 
Whilst an allegation is not proof of an offence it does seem an incredible drop off, given I assume we would all want rapists strung up it does seem wrong. 
 

 

* I think they were the figures, going to try and check. 

[Rudy]

1 minute ago, Ani said:

Just been radio that of 55000 rape allegations less than 3% result in convictions. * 
Whilst an allegation is not proof of an offence it does seem an incredible drop off, given I assume we would all want rapists strung up it does seem wrong. 
 

 

* I think they were the figures, going to try and check. 

This might open a can of worms and for the records IMO all rapists should be thrown into a volcano.

But you could get really drunk with a lass , neither of you consent, then the girl could argue she didn’t consent. I’ll speculate that’s there are loads of those cases and it’s very hard to prove either way.

I hope that reads right 

[Ani]

4 minutes ago, Rudy said:

This might open a can of worms and for the records IMO all rapists should be thrown into a volcano.

But you could get really drunk with a lass , neither of you consent, then the girl could argue she didn’t consent. I’ll speculate that’s there are loads of those cases and it’s very hard to prove either way.

I hope that reads right 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48095118
 

The numbers are actually which ones get to court, not the % convicted.

As I said allegations will include some that are simply wrong but to think out of 55k allegations only 3k are getting to court surely seems out of balance ?

I get rape, quite rightly needs to proved beyond doubt but I imagine a lot of victims feel very let down by the system. 
 

That link talks about CPS working to close the gap between allegations and court cases, at the moment going the other way. I know you did not mean that way Rudy but explaining it as 'birds getting pissed and regretting it is too simple' IMO 

[Cheese]

11 minutes ago, Rudy said:

This might open a can of worms and for the records IMO all rapists should be thrown into a volcano.

But you could get really drunk with a lass , neither of you consent, then the girl could argue she didn’t consent. I’ll speculate that’s there are loads of those cases and it’s very hard to prove either way.

I hope that reads right 

You could get really drunk and murder someone. "I was drunk" is no excuse. 

[Ani]

22 minutes ago, Cheese said:

You could get really drunk and murder someone. "I was drunk" is no excuse. 

No....but...the issue of consent is not normally an issue in murder trials. 

[London Wanderer]

1 minute ago, Ani said:

No....but...the issue of consent is not normally an issue in murder trials. 

Cheese always asks consent before he murders someone. Proper gentleman. 

[Ani]

1 minute ago, London Wanderer said:

Cheese always asks consent before he murders someone. Proper gentleman. 

😁😂

No but Rudy was not saying a bloke gets pissed and goes out and rapes someone, he was talking about a couple 'getting it on' and then there being a different recollection of the facts. 

[Rudy]

9 minutes ago, Ani said:

😁😂

No but Rudy was not saying a bloke gets pissed and goes out and rapes someone, he was talking about a couple 'getting it on' and then there being a different recollection of the facts. 

Haha exactly 

She consented 

No I didnt

Errr case dismissed 

It’s shit but so hard to prove 

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, London Wanderer said:

Cheese always asks consent before he murders someone. Proper gentleman. 

Rape, yes, murder,no

[Spider]

There's loads of videos on Twitter of women teaching each other how to stab men in the bollocks with a bunch of keys.

And to think that's normally a tenner extra.

 

[bolton_blondie]

1 hour ago, Rudy said:

This might open a can of worms and for the records IMO all rapists should be thrown into a volcano.

But you could get really drunk with a lass , neither of you consent, then the girl could argue she didn’t consent. I’ll speculate that’s there are loads of those cases and it’s very hard to prove either way.

I hope that reads right 

Why on earth would you claim rape if you where both hammered? We all make mistakes waking up next to some right states, but saying that is more than a bit twatty. 

[Rudy]

1 minute ago, bolton_blondie said:

Why on earth would you claim rape if you where both hammered? We all make mistakes waking up next to some right states, but saying that is more than a bit twatty. 

I know we just call that a Tuesday 

[bolton_blondie]

1 minute ago, Rudy said:

I know we just call that a Tuesday 

Oi sunshine, you want driving between pubs when they open still? I'm gonna be the sober one, you'll be the one with Rohypnol in your Guinness 😉

[Tonge moor green jacket]

2 minutes ago, bolton_blondie said:

Why on earth would you claim rape if you where both hammered? We all make mistakes waking up next to some right states, but saying that is more than a bit twatty. 

There have been a number of rape cases, which were covered by the news, whereby a chap has been dragged to hell and back on the premise of false allegations. Ruinous for a life and a lot of rebuilding required afterwards. 

Don't understand why they happen, maybe a girl is embarrassed by her actions the night before and seeks to mask it by claiming rape, I dont know. 

One thing is for sure, as claimed at the time, false allegations just make it more difficult for the genuine victims. 

If someone makes a false allegations, they should get the same sentence as a guilty rapist.

[bolton_blondie]

Just now, Tonge moor green jacket said:

There have been a number of rape cases, which were covered by the news, whereby a chap has been dragged to hell and back on the premise of false allegations. Ruinous for a life and a lot of rebuilding required afterwards. 

Don't understand why they happen, maybe a girl is embarrassed by her actions the night before and seeks to mask it by claiming rape, I dont know. 

One thing is for sure, as claimed at the time, false allegations just make it more difficult for the genuine victims. 

If someone makes a false allegations, they should get the same sentence as a guilty rapist.

Women who cry rape when it wasn't need throwing into Styal. Knobheads. 

[Escobarp]

18 minutes ago, bolton_blondie said:

Women who cry rape when it wasn't need throwing into Styal. Knobheads. 

What about women who want to play rape with their fellas or someone else’s fella? Bit weird or acceptable? Asking for a fellow poster 

[Tonge moor green jacket]

24 minutes ago, bolton_blondie said:

Women who cry rape when it wasn't need throwing into Styal. Knobheads. 

I agree.

There is clearly a problem when drunken states etc etc lead to poor recollections and accusations later. That's for the cps and courts to determine, but false accusations are a scurge within the system.