Honesty's got to be stamped out

[LS]

On the BBC website today, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-11597027, a plod force has been criticised for not taking a rape allegation seriously enough.

Might I suggest the OIC involved may actually have taken it entirely seriously and done the appropriate thing.

Secondly, the accused was a "known Sex Offender." So what?? As many of us know, you can go on the Register and still be innocent.
Clearly the BBC don't let the facts get in the way of a good story.....


It was the headline which makes me laugh - Police Rape Investigation "inept." MOST rape investigations here are inept.

[Rights Fighter]

I saw that earlier when I read the news and thought the same thing. The thing is the media wouldn't dare air that opinion as it wouldn't sell the papers.

[friday]

the thing that made me laugh was that she was subject to hostile cross examining and had her credibility questioned when she was a witness in a different case. don't all witness have this? if she had been a victim-witness she would certainly have been subject to this type of cross examination.

while it is true that not everyone on the register is guilty i would hazard a guess that the vast majority are (working on the basis the number of false rape claims are similar to other crimes; roughly 8%) so it would seem stupid not to follow through on all claims but to especially take note of cases where it seems a convicted sex offender may be reoffending.

saying that i think the issue is particularly difficult when it is an accusation of rape of a child. this is for two reasons: firstly harming children provokes extreme emotive responses and secondly the evidence may not be as concrete due to the time lapse between alleged rape and reporting. not knowing the facts i don't see how anyone other than those with the facts can really say if it was handled appropriately. you would expect the police to interview both the alleged victim and alleged rapist but beyond that it really depends on what has been said (e.g. if a victim can describe a distinctive mark in an area normally covered by underwear and the rapist denies the victim ever seeing them naked then it doesn't look so good for the rapist but if they just have a name and a date and the accused has a water tight alibi such as living abroad for a year and has proof....).

i think it is easy to feel you understand the system just by reading the papers but when you actually become part of the system you start to see it in a completely different light.

[LS]

i think it is easy to feel you understand the system just by reading the papers but when you actually become part of the system you start to see it in a completely different light.

Well, I had an extremely up-close-and-personal encounter with The System. All I can say is it's a pity it doesn't look as wrinkled and nasty from the outside as it clearly is, then more would see it for what it is.

In fact, I understand the system PERFECTLY well from the kicking it gave me.

[Rights Fighter]

the thing that made me laugh was that she was subject to hostile cross examining and had her credibility questioned when she was a witness in a different case. don't all witness have this? if she had been a victim-witness she would certainly have been subject to this type of cross examination.

while it is true that not everyone on the register is guilty i would hazard a guess that the vast majority are (working on the basis the number of false rape claims are similar to other crimes; roughly 8%) so it would seem stupid not to follow through on all claims but to especially take note of cases where it seems a convicted sex offender may be reoffending.

saying that i think the issue is particularly difficult when it is an accusation of rape of a child. this is for two reasons: firstly harming children provokes extreme emotive responses and secondly the evidence may not be as concrete due to the time lapse between alleged rape and reporting. not knowing the facts i don't see how anyone other than those with the facts can really say if it was handled appropriately. you would expect the police to interview both the alleged victim and alleged rapist but beyond that it really depends on what has been said (e.g. if a victim can describe a distinctive mark in an area normally covered by underwear and the rapist denies the victim ever seeing them naked then it doesn't look so good for the rapist but if they just have a name and a date and the accused has a water tight alibi such as living abroad for a year and has proof....).

i think it is easy to feel you understand the system just by reading the papers but when you actually become part of the system you start to see it in a completely different light.

Friday, I have to say that I really do admire you for your ability to separate the dreadful things that have happened to you and yet you still can support those who say they are falsely accused of sexual offences.

For one so young, you display a huge level of maturity.

I thought that needed to be said. Well done

[friday]

thank you rights fighter

[Saffron]

I agree with RF. Thank you Friday! Hearing your balanced views is a breath of fresh air.