Wednesday, 1 July 2015

Sexual offence law overhaul to remove the presumption of innocence

Under the changes to sexual offence laws: (archived 1 Jul 2015 07:36:44 UTC from
  • An alleged offender must have a "reasonable" belief that a victim had consented. The new definition means the defendant must detail the steps they have taken to find out whether the victim has consented.

    Note: They have no defined standard here for innocence. They have to present what they have and hope it is enough. Do you record all your sexual activity? Is it signed? Are there witnesses to the signing? What about blood tests - she might have been drinking - can you prove she wasn’t? If she was, her consent is invalid. You just should have known.
  • Removal of a time limitation that prevented prosecution for some child sex offences committed before 1991

    It’s retrospective. You kept all your records of what happened thirty years ago, didn’t you? Remember: no physical evidence of a crime is required. If a woman says “give me thirty grand or I’ll say you raped me”... you better have that thirty K!

    "an offender must prove that if they believed a victim was consenting, that belief was not unreasonable". How? Will video recordings and witnesses be required? Some sort of contract? All this is is a license to accuse any man of rape, without a defense.. and I guarantee you no women will be convicted.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please try to avoid logical fallacies!