We're considering closing this forum and would appreciate your thoughts, memories, comments etc, and especially any offers of help if you'd like the forum to stay running.
You may read the posts but if you wish to post yourself, then you need to register. This is simple and you just need a valid email address.
Register Here
We look forward to seeing you posting soon!
If you have already registered, but have forgotten your password, please click here to get it reset.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
i may be naive but how exactly do cases get convictions without evidence?
How do you expect to change peoples opinions if you assume people that use farcebook to brag.
That's because many DO, and it's thanks to them that evidence is gained against them for use in trials and appeals.
Yes you may have a relative who keeps in touch with family, but take a look on social networking sites and you will see that it is mostly I did this, and I just bought that.
Not an assumption. I may not be allowed on it, but friends and family DO investigate on my behalf and I see the printouts and screenshots for myself.
Rest assured I am not likely to ever want to sign up just to converse with your relative, but my one and only reason for wanting NOT to sign up is to avoid the multitude of neanderthals as described above.
The irony is amazing. No wonder nothing changes....
It may be the heat but type casting people is exactly what you're all supposed to be 'fighting' against riles me? My own sister said I should not bother with places like this because it sounds like a pretty weird rse about face place. That's because she is like most people in life, everything is black n white. Her husband even used to be a prison warden. How do you expect to change peoples opinions if you assume people that use farcebook to brag. What about people that use it to keep in touch with distant relatives? My 60 odd year old step mum uses it to keep in touch with her family in Ireland. I am sure she would love to know she is an attention seeker! lol
Last edited by Bigsister; 23 April 2011, 08:22 PM.
Unfortunately FB is used by sexual predators looking for easy game.
However I would say that millions of thoroughly decent people make use of it just to stay in touch with friends and family. And we had Chris Wittwer who decided to use it to "name and shame" people who have been charged and convicted of sexual offences regardless of guilt or innocence. I am hoping that he's been shut down - again. I have no doubt that he has been the cause of much vigilante action.
People who spend their life (he's on benefits!!!) pointing the finger at others usually have something serious to hide......................
The point is, FA's aside, once convicted you are a persona non grata in many many areas of normal life, FB being one of them. You just live life around them. Annoying I know, but then there's the other side of the coin. If you play the lottery (and win) your FA/accuser can now take you to court for a large percentage of whatever you've got. I take pleasure in knowing that as I now avoid the lottery, no one has any chance whatsoever of taking another penny off me.
Many people who use FB do so primarily to announce what they've got and what they are doing, as if to put one over on everyone else. Those are the types I despise and who I wouldn't waste a second on in real life.
The prime reason SOs are banned from FB is because of that one knobhead who met an underage girl on it and then met up with and murdered her. BUT there are better areas of life than facebook and you do have to realise that just because you like to do something doesn't mean you have to. There is nothing on Facebook that is desperately crucial to life. It is about people putting one over on the joneses, that's it's purpose.
Facebook is also an excellent tool one can make use of to help to prove innocence. Iit has been used at trial and appeal. Plus it helps people whose families are split all over the world to keep in touch with each other with photos, PM and instant chat.
Yes many people abuse it but then virtually anything can be abused.
LS I'm on FB - are you saying that I am a "scumbag braying about how good I am and what I've got?" And I'm not a tosser!! SMACK!!!
I think I know to whom you specifically refer though.......
The problem is that no one is prepared to accept that two such parties exist. As far as everyone's concerned, you're either a convicted (and therefore GUILTY) sex offender, or not one at all.
As a wrongly "convicted sex offender" I couldn't give a toss about Facebook, it's full of scumbags braying about how good they are and what they've got. Tossers. I despise them.
That's fine in your case then, but what about the people that do like to use it? I mean, everyones taste is different of course, which is what we need to accept if we are to accept that we shouldn't type cast people, should they not be able to use it anymore? It has annoyed me tbh.
The problem is that no one is prepared to accept that two such parties exist. As far as everyone's concerned, you're either a convicted (and therefore GUILTY) sex offender, or not one at all.
As a wrongly "convicted sex offender" I couldn't give a toss about Facebook, it's full of scumbags braying about how good they are and what they've got. Tossers. I despise them.
I cant get my head around it either at the moment to be honest. I almost feel guilty, because it's not even all about my brother at the moment now, since joining here I have looked into false allegations, & even read Kevin Callans book in 3 days (I know, not sexual related but still miscarriage of justice) Am waiting for The murder of Billi-jo book, Error of judgement, & My fathers watch by Patrick Maguire to arrive. Google them if you are interested.
I think so far it may be down to juries?
Jo public are an extremely fickle bunch. I am livid today when someone on my facebook signed a petition for registered sex offenders to be banned from using facebook. I mean, what the heck??
What about the innocent convicted that end up on that register using it? Ok none of us want genuine sex offenders prowling facebook, but there is no seperation from those & the innocently convicted by lazy jurys, so surely it shouldn't happen until someone can seperate the 2?!
It shouldn't make you depressed, but it should make you more aware of how it is. Most of us were brought up to believe the police are the last defence to stop false claims reaching a court. It used to be that they would be the ones who would see sense and investigate claims to see if they were true or not.
The reality is that they now regard ALL allegations as true and just collect enough evidence to get them to court.
It's a whole lot more depressive to find what you've been brought up to believe is just wrong.
i came on here looking for advice and now this scaremongering has worried me immensely. Judging by these comments my son is already convicted. My sister is a policewoman. I trust her. I have to trust the system. But if the system is always corrupt from top to bottom, then what's the point of fighting??
After my recent experiences in the last six years involving dozens of police officers,,,THERE IS NOT A SINGLE SERVING POLICE OFFICER I WOULD TRUST TODAY due to the corruption, dishonesty & prejudice I have personally encountered & observed from multiple officers I can name & identify
BUT... desertokid there is EVERY point in fighting...for what is right!
Just DO NOT trust even for the slightst ANY police officer!
Spot on!! You are so right. It is only when someone has been put through the system that the horrible realisation and reality hits.
It is high time that the public stopped having this insular blind faith in the justice system.
That's probably how it came to be corrupt in the first place, we the public let it.
yes i understand that there are people on this site that have been wrongly accused and sent down but how? my experience of the system has been that to get a conviction you would basically need a police officer watching.
even with injuries which were documented by child protection, a witness who i had not previously known who saw me after the rape (and thus confirmed my distress directly after the incident) and a report from a nurse who saw the injuries and encouraged me to report it he still got away with it. for now at least (it was a hung jury so awaiting retrial).
so how do people with only one persons word against the other get convicted?
i have just been involved in a historical sexual abuse trial and i could not believe what happened.to answer your question,the jury decides,the public outcry over lenient sentences leads the authorities to collude to gain a conviction.in these cases its the accusers word against the defendant and the authorities know that they are guaranteed a conviction.juries are not prepared to listen to the defendants side,and the few that are are persuaded otherwise by fellow jurors to get home quicker.yes i also believed in justice but no longer and i for one am appalled.
mouse makes some really good points, not the least being that the accused must set out their own defence. The solicitor (and barrister, should the matter get that far) will then have something to work with. In this age of reductions in legal aid it is not realistic to expect the solicitor to do investigative work (as to the whys and wherefores of the accusation) as well as fronting the defence, they will probably have several other clients on the go, whilst the accused has only the one.
As is frequently mentioned the police are only investigating on behalf of the accuser, OTOH if anything detrimental to the accuser can be dug up (mental health issues, family problems, previous accusations, any promiscuity) it is well worth passing this on to the OIC. None of it may be admissable in court but it could well influence the CPS in their decision as whether or not to prosecute. As mentioned, the perception of the jury is pivotal, and so the relative merits of the accuser and accused as witnesses will be a factor in their considerations.
Leave a comment: