Celebrity Scandals

[El Segundo]

20 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

Why do you keep saying there is no evidence when there is a tonne of damning evidence? Is this critical thinking on display right now?

I was responding to the quote that questioned why there should need to be hard evidence required for rape convictions, not about this case. 

[ml1dch]

1 minute ago, Seat68 said:

In 2022 it was less than 1%. If you Google rape conviction rates UK that will give you the government's scorecards. It's been stated a number of times about the low conviction rates. 

It's fine though, that just means that 99% of women are liars. The law says so.

[Demitri_C]

Just now, Seat68 said:

In 2022 it was less than 1%. If you Google rape conviction rates UK that will give you the government's scorecards. It's been stated a number of times about the low conviction rates. 

Yeah but no one provided the date i wanted to read it and see what the reasons why it was so low.

In brands case its very difficult as it happened so long ago

I mean i think i read that one of the victims complained and got a legal letter sent back. I hopw she still has this as this will strongly back up her claims

[Demitri_C]

5 minutes ago, leemond2008 said:

I think this is where you are going wrong @Demitri_C the argument is that this won't be going to to a court hearing as it stands at the moment, I believe that more people will come forward and he will end up being charged with "something" at least, but what people are saying is that this investigation, regardless of a court case or not has showed him to be a word removed of the highest order.

People are thinking that you are saying that he should just be able to carry on with his day to day life as if nothing has happened until he is charged and that people shouldn't think any less of him until/if he is convicted, I know that isn't what you are getting at but I think the whole "he needs an actual conviction" is where people think that you are not believing the women that have come forward so far.

That's what I'm getting anyways.

I'm dipping out of this thread for a bit now, its going round in circles. 

I see your point lee. Certain posters are getting in a huff when its so un necessary.  We are having a debate from different spectrums, then your seeing some foolish comments calling others scum when they dont even know them personally. Play ground stuff.

My final bit on this as im drained as like you going round in circles. If brands done it i hope he goes down for a very long time. This is a very high profile case so i expect if  (and hope) it goes to the police this will not become another 1÷ statistic and they get justice for the victims.

Im ducking out too of here 

[Rugeley Villa]

32 minutes ago, Jareth said:

He’s knocking off 16 year olds as part of a hobby. Of course he’ll push it and go younger if he can. 

Not necessarily 

[desensitized43]

The difficulty I have is that while the accusers have the right to go to the police and for what are very valid and understandable reasons to seek justice they’ve chosen not to do so. What instead has happened is that Brand has been named in the media and is being judged in the court of public opinion. He’s not been afforded the anonymity his accusers have and his career is now probably over. That’s not justice. I don’t think channel 4 should have aired this (at least not with the Brands name) unless the women were willing to go to the police first. I hope that we now see some kind of police investigation of this but it feels the wrong way round to me.

Fwiw I do believe their accusations. I’ve never liked brand and his kind of disgusting, unfunny and pretty disrespectful routines about sex and treatment of women. I definitely think he’s “the type” who wouldn’t take no for an answer.

He’s also a massive idiot who’s definitely not as intelligent as he thinks and we’re all told he is, as evidenced by his ridiculous social media conspiracy theorists nonesense.

[Mandy Lifeboats]

4 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

It's fine though, that just means that 99% of women are liars. The law says so.

No.  The laws says that someone is guilty if their crime can be proven beyond reasonable doubt.  Guilty people get away with it.  But that's better than innocent people spending a decade in jail. 

Sadly rape is very difficult to prosecute.  It requires the protection to prove that an event took place AND that one party did not agree to it.  There are rarely witnesses to the act itself let alone whether parties agree to the act. 

But just because a offence is difficult to prove doesn't mean it should be ignored. The Police try to prosecute. They fail most of the time.  I'd rather they tried to prosecute 1000 cases with a 1% success rate than 100 cases at a 9% success rate. 

 

[DCJonah]

25 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Ok found some data about the rapes as i was generally asking and its 2 in 100

So yeah it is just under 2% thats mental

Do you think attitudes like yours and others in here contribute to it? 

[DCJonah]

45 minutes ago, El Segundo said:

So if someone randomly accused you of rape tomorrow, but had no evidence, you'd happily support a conviction for yourself based purely on the accusation? 

This isn't a he said/she said incident. 

It's multiple women showing a pattern of behaviour. 

[StefanAVFC]

42 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

You say Greenwood is vermin despite accusations being just that. Accusations. He wasn’t charged with anything which is your deciding factor on whether Brand did anything wrong or not. Whats the difference between the 2 cases in your view?

 

powerful men - check 

strong evidence - check 

lack or charges - check 

publicly accused - check 

@Demitri_C thoughts? 
 

28 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Ok found some data about the rapes as i was generally asking and its 2 in 100

So yeah it is just under 2% thats mental

and that’s mostly non-public figures. If you add in very rich very influential people and the chances are even lower. As we saw with Greenwood

[ml1dch]

6 minutes ago, Mandy Lifeboats said:

No.  The laws says that someone is guilty if their crime can be proven beyond reasonable doubt.  Guilty people get away with it.  But that's better than innocent people spending a decade in jail. 

Sadly rape is very difficult to prosecute.  It requires the protection to prove that an event took place AND that one party did not agree to it.  There are rarely witnesses to the act itself let alone whether parties agree to the act. 

But just because a offence is difficult to prove doesn't mean it should be ignored. The Police try to prosecute. They fail most of the time.  I'd rather they tried to prosecute 1000 cases with a 1% success rate than 100 cases at a 9% success rate. 

 

Yes, I know. I appreciate this thread is full of people saying terrible things that any normal person wouldn't take seriously, but I feel that you may have read a level of sincerity into my post that it didn't deserve. 

Edited September 17, 2023 by ml1dch

[StefanAVFC]

10 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

I see your point lee. Certain posters are getting in a huff when its so un necessary.  We are having a debate from different spectrums, then your seeing some foolish comments calling others scum when they dont even know them personally. Play ground stuff.

My final bit on this as im drained as like you going round in circles. If brands done it i hope he goes down for a very long time. This is a very high profile case so i expect if  (and hope) it goes to the police this will not become another 1÷ statistic and they get justice for the victims.

Im ducking out too of here 

And if it doesn’t go to the police because no one pressed charges he’s done nothing wrong right?

[El Segundo]

21 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

Nobody wants him tried based on an accusation FFS. There is evidence he’s committed crimes, based on both the Times article and the documentary. But it’s looking like women won’t press charges. This could be for a number of reasons, mostly likely low conviction rate, status of the accused, ability of the accused to lawyer up and put it down immediately. 
 

So what are the options?

Say it’s all a hit piece and he did nothing wrong because he isn’t charged? 
 

or look at the evidence, which despite our critical thinker star pupil’s best efforts in this thread, does exist, and make our own judgements on his guilt? 

But that's pretty much what you are doing and have done.  You've clearly decided that multiple accusations with no evidence are true because there is one accusation that does have some evidence -  albeit I assume you haven't seen that evidence and been able to verify it or not.  Not only is that one piece of evidence convincing to you, it actually constitutes a "Ton of damning evidence" against Brand.  

There could be multiple reasons why the Women aren't willing to press charges - the ones you've mentioned but another possibility is that the at least some of the accusations are groundless, or that they refer to bad behaviour rather than law-breaking.   

The ad hominem dig is a classic response to anyone who disagrees with the "party line".  Predictable I suppose.

[El Segundo]

4 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

This isn't a he said/she said incident. 

It's multiple women showing a pattern of behaviour. 

I wasn't referring to the Brand case in that response.  

[StefanAVFC]

3 minutes ago, El Segundo said:

But that's pretty much what you are doing and have done.  You've clearly decided that multiple accusations with no evidence are true because there is one accusation that does have some evidence -  albeit I assume you haven't seen that evidence and been able to verify it or not.  Not only is that one piece of evidence convincing to you, it actually constitutes a "Ton of damning evidence" against Brand.  

There could be multiple reasons why the Women aren't willing to press charges - the ones you've mentioned but another possibility is that the at least some of the accusations are groundless, or that they refer to bad behaviour rather than law-breaking.   

The ad hominem dig is a classic response to anyone who disagrees with the "party line".  Predictable I suppose.

You know you’re doing exactly the same right? Only you think the evidence isn’t damning and therefore he isn’t guilty? 

Yet you’re the critical thinker and the rest of us aren’t. 
 

you’ll also find that comments aimed at Foreveryoung are mostly about his posting style, and lack of any argument rather than any ad hominem. And Dem didn’t answer direct questions on multiple occasions. 

[Mandy Lifeboats]

7 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

Yes, I know. I appreciate this thread is full of people saying terrible things that any normal person wouldn't take seriously, but I feel that you may have read a level of sincerity into my post that it didn't deserve. 

Ah.......I see. 

Sorry I didn't pick up on that. 

[El Segundo]

2 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

You know you’re doing exactly the same right? Only you think the evidence isn’t damning and therefore he isn’t guilty? 

Yet you’re the critical thinker and the rest of us aren’t. 
 

you’ll also find that comments aimed at Foreveryoung are mostly about his posting style, and lack of any argument rather than any ad hominem. And Dem didn’t answer direct questions on multiple occasions. 

Really?  Ok show me the post or posts where I've said he's not guilty.  Show me the post or posts where I've said only I am the critical thinker and no-one else is.    

[bobzy]

57 minutes ago, El Segundo said:

So if someone randomly accused you of rape tomorrow, but had no evidence, you'd happily support a conviction for yourself based purely on the accusation? 

There’s a difference between “no evidence” and the seeming hard evidence people appear to want; like some sort of rape sex tape that they can go “aye, he did it” to.

[bobzy]

55 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Does anyone know anyone thats been falsely accused of rape? I do and it almost ruined this persons life. He lost his job, his marriage fell apart ans hw almost took his own life. The woman got a couple months for perjury and was out.

Don’t know anyone unfortunate enough to go through that ordeal - truly horrific. I can’t understand why anyone would want to make up a rape accusation.

Sadly, though, I know plenty of women who have gone through various degrees of sexual assault. Zero convictions across the board, for what it’s worth. 

[StefanAVFC]

7 minutes ago, El Segundo said:

Really?  Ok show me the post or posts where I've said he's not guilty.  Show me the post or posts where I've said only I am the critical thinker and no-one else is.    

Show me the post where I said he's guilty?