myosotis
Proud Member
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2009
- Messages
- 4,224
- Points
- 48
terrell;4301787 said:Vanessa Engle on Carl Beech: 'I didn’t want to tell the story of a liar at the expense of genuine victims'
I have a problem with this comment. A story should be about the TRUTH no matter what side it falls on. If someone is PROVEN IN COURT OF LAW (NOT public opinion/bias/media) to be an abuser, that story has a right to be told; however, if someone is clearly telling lies about abuse in order to frame/falsely accuse someone, that story needs to be told as well. Is it fair for an INNOCENT man/woman to be falsely accuse and not be able to call out the liars and to defend him/herself? I think NOT. So an INNOCENT person should continue to be falsely accused and the lie to be believe all because someone does not hope it make real victims in other cases from coming forward? That is stupid. That is why people/society need to stop judging cases in a general fashion. LET ALL CASES STAND ON THEIR OWN MERIT unless the case has been proven and then you want to compare two PROVEN guilty cases or two PROVEN innocent cases AFTER the COURT OF law has done its job. If people do this, there will be no need for anyone to fear. I can judge as case and the person and evidence show him/her guilty; and in the same moment, I can see someone else who is innocent and someone who is lying about abuse.
Exactly so. There seems to be a 'feeling' that it is 'unfair' to victims to investigate their stories. However, if you lost something but said it had been stolen, you would expect the insurance co. to investigate for evidence of theft. If you fell over, but claimed someone hit you in order to claim criminal compensation for injuries, you'd have to show some evidence.
I can't think of any other crime where a victim doesn't have to prove their case, or at least have their story properly investigated. I don't at all see why sexual offences should be any different.