Noel Clarke

They do you are right, but there has to be a balance I'm afraid. I would and do always believe someone who makes allegations like that, as I am trained to do when dealing with sexual abuse disclosures.

 

but the answer is not to treat anyone unfairly.

 

Would you feel the same way if your son was falsely accused? Would you accept that his life is ruined because at least it readdresses the balance?


As for the OP, I agree with you in general, however when it's 20 allegations I think it's probably a different story.

 

Yes but the solution to that isn't to publicly convict anyone accused without so much as a trial.

If your son was falsely accused of rape would you be happy for him to 'unfairly get caught up in it' as 'that's a price that may have to be paid'?

 

You are right, to be fair. That's the big problem, and not just in the case of celebrities. If you're accused of rape(for example), you would be in court and at the very least a reporter from the Chronicle would be there reporting on it, even if a 3 line "story" stating the facts as spoken in court. Does there need a change in the law to protect the privacy of those accused until charged? Would that allow those that are guilty to go out and re-offend? ****** if I know the answer, and I don't envy those that have to make the decision...

 

Didnt Mathew Kelly have his tv career ruined through historical allegations of sexual abuse of young boys in the 70s that were proved to be false?

 

Yes, if it meant that the rate of prosecution and convictions went up. I'm constantly drumming the issue of consent into him so I sincerely hope he would never be in that situation.

 

In general I'd agree with you but when you look at it in more detail it's not as clear cut. 20 allegations but not all of the same thing. Not all of them sexual at all, some are of bullying. And then you have to remember that these aren't 20 people who have come forward themselves randomly, they are 20 people out of many that the guardian contacted specifically to ask them if they had experienced anything. When the survey or opinion poll has an agenda then there's a bias in the answers as the questions are undoubtedly leading (I forget the name of the bias) and people are more inclined to make a false statement when they are in a group.

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying he's innocent, I've absolutely no idea, and 20 accusations never looks good, my point is simply that there shouldn't be a trial by media

 

Wow. You would be happy to see your innocent son locked up for a rape he didn't commit just so that the conviction rate went up.

I am very rarely lost for words but can honestly say I'm utterly speechless

 

I think you are misunderstanding me. Of course I wouldn't be happy. However there is so much focus on false allegations which is a tiny proportion of cases as compared to the really low conviction rate, that's if it even gets to court. As I say , something needs to shift in a major way but no let's all focus on the small number of false allegations. I have daughters too.

 

I literally said 'would you be happy' and your reply was yes if it got the conviction rate up.

As I said I am astounded

 

Statistically it's way more likely that my daughters wouldn't get justice than my son is the point I'm making.

 

I know but that's not what I asked or what you answered

 

Well saying would you be happy is a weird thing to ask really. Of course no one should be happy about any of it.

 

Not sure how this helps in a false allegation?

 

There are false allegations where someone deliberately says something that is untrue and false allegations where they believe something to be true. Hopefully it helps avoid the latter.

 

So you’d accept people being wrongly convicted to increase the conviction rate for rape cases?

I mean yeah that’ll work.

Lock up innocent folk, make people feel safer. Whilst the rapist still walks the streets...

I get where you’re coming from Helen and as a father of daughters I really understand but you can’t possibly advocate shifting the focus to a point innocent people are convicted?

 

I don't think I'm making myself very clear as that's not what I'm saying. I am saying that women need to be believed which is how this whole post started. Locking the wrong people up obviously won't make things any safer but there seems to be more fixation on a tiny proportion of false allegations than on cases not getting to court. Turn it on its head, there will be a hell of a lot more sexual assaults if cases are never brought to trial and men think they can get away with it.

 

who remembers him in auf wiedersehen pet? of course the 1st 2 series are superb, the later series when he joined were quite poor by comparison

 

But nobody in this thread has said anything like that. The only person saying a fair trial isn't needed is you who has pretty clearly said that if innocent men are caught up in it it doesn't matter, that you'd be happy with your son to be wrongly convicted as it would mean the conviction rate went up and that trial by media is ok