More nonsense from Special Snowflake. The end of the piece, in which the woman (not Ched Evans) is inevitably the victim, is this:
It is important to acknowledge that Ched Evans has been found not-guilty. But there is nothing to celebrate here.
I’m sick to death of the feminist narrative – used by SS (a FemiNazi) in her piece – that few rape allegations are false. For us to know how many are false would require women who make false allegations to be truthful and own up, when they have no incentive to do so. Indeed their incentive is to stick with their story, regardless of the damage done to men.
If everyone who read this gave us just £1 – or even better, £1 monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.
Justice for Men & Boys 
The jury took two hours to return a 12-0 ‘not guilty’ verdict.
I wonder how the Crown Prosecution Service measures success? As the newly en-Nobeled His Bobness said:
“There’s no success like a failure
And a failure’s no success at all”
LikeLike
Actually its a “master class” in how Justice was perverted by undermining a defendants rights to a fair trial. As a result this verdict confirms that Mr. Evans was gaoled and served a sentence when in fact innocent.
LikeLike
“I’m sick to death of the feminist narrative”.
Me too. Just look at the number of women’s groups that are up in arms about this verdict. “How so last century it is”, “how unsafe they now feel”, ” how women ‘survivors’ have a right to be believed”.
They basically couldn’t give a toss for any sort of balanced justice ( a rare commodity nowadays). Their howls of protest illustrates why these groups need to be refused access to public money.
LikeLike
I have sympathy for the woman who has been named and hounded. That is not acceptable( especially when it impact others around her), But if she has truly made a false accusation( regardless of what the jury thinks), then she would need to accept the legal consequences of this. There is a reason why people are demanding anonymity in these cases until a guilty verdict.
i am more inclined to point the finger at the CPS( and of course Alison Suanders) for her epic failure to manage the due process( and trial by politics rather than by justice) and by doing so undermining the law. All this on top of the corruption scandal involving the CPS( and suanders of course) and the met police. The CPS has a serious integrity problem. lady justice is not blind. Suanders has managed to undermine the genuine victims of rape by playing these “target” games with peoples lives
this case is not the only one ( remember mark pearson?, the agricultural college students?).
laura bates- well what can you say about a person who cannot even get her facts straight( or back them up) even when provided the evidence by others. her article( and it ain’t journalism) is very poorly put together or thought out such as
“If you knew that lawyers could bring past sexual partners into court to shame you with your most private personal encounters, would you come forward? Can you even imagine having to answer such a question in a different type of trial? “But the robbery victim had once donated money to charity, your honour…””
should that have been
“But the robbery victim had once stolen money from a charity, your honour…””
…. so what will the outcome of this be?
a common sense approach for anonymity in such cases plus prosecution for false accusations plus a structural reform of the CPS( including the removal of targets, suanders and the name of the decision maker on these cases made public)
more howling of how unfair the system is.
I’m guessing the ostrich approach of answer number 2
LikeLike
Reblogged this on World4Justice : NOW! Lobby Forum..
LikeLike