Our thanks to a supporter for this piece published by the Telegraph.
For many years non-feminist perspectives on rape have been re-cast as ‘bias’, perfectly reasonable attitudes re-cast as ‘myths’. For the first time in the UK, jurors will be selected specifically to increase the prospect of conviction, and specifically the conviction of men. The ideologically-inspired Sexual Offences Act 2003 dictates that only men can be rapists.
There must surely already be a huge number of justifiably angry men in British prisons because of convictions following false rape allegations. This proposal – if implemented – will add considerably to their number.
This development is inextricably linked in with the ‘rape culture’ myth about which we protested in October, outside the CPS and in Parliament Square, in support of The Forgotten Man and The London Group – video here (15:05).
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 
Mr. Willmot, who is keen to take the blame for this “study”
(who also grins out at the fawning reader unctuously, as though expecting congratulations at having done something clever) said people with,
“certain personality traits such as egocentricity…”
Not at all like him then?
But there is MUCH more,
So
“Let’s Explore!”
“A windbreaking study”
(sorry, a typesetter’s error there.
It should read ‘a ball breaking study’)
” …found that people with certain personality traits were likely to hold preconceived predudices…”
Gentle reader, I AM one of those people with preconceived predudices.
Call me old fashioned if you like, but they go like this,
Predudice 1.
I believe that juries should
make up their own minds
without ‘vetting’, indoctrin
ation or coercion.
Predudice 2.
Mere allegation is not
enough.
Predudice 3.
In the absence of any other
evidence in a ‘he said, she said’ case, a not guilty
verdict should be returned.
Predudice 4.
Guilt should be PROVEN
beyond a reasonable doubt.
Quote:
“…The findings (of the ‘study’)
have led to ‘calls’ for American style vetting…”
What ‘calls’, and from whom, the author himself perhaps?
Quote:
“…jurors have to undergo basic psychological ‘testing’, before being selected…”
Translation; ‘to ensure they return the right
preordained verdict’.
Quote:
“…a researcher from The University of Huddersfield…”
Translates as; ‘a wanna be SJW’.
…”has used volunteers to
replicate genuine trial environmemts…”
Equals; ‘has used stooges to present a farce’.
Quote:
“…as well as actors to play the parts of defendant and victim…”
Translation; ‘actors’, people who pretend anything they’re told to.
(Pause to light a cigarette, take a slup of tea, and push up glasses!)
Quote:
“…he then used psychological testing to assess the views of randomly selected jurors…”
Translates as; ‘used made up nonsence to assess the views of preselected actors…’
(For ‘Actors’, see above)
Mr. Wilmott said “…now is the time to have a debate about…”
‘Debate’ translates as ; ‘tell you what you should think’.
Quote:
“…should be introduced into the UK, representing a seismic shift in the 1000 year legal tradition…”
Translation ; ‘representing the overturning of 1000 years of something approaching justice’
Mr. Wilmott said, “… if we can find a way of removing bias and predudice from the jury room surely that has got to be welcomed…”.
Translates as; ‘If we can find an
unjust way of criminalising men and twisting the facts, surely that had got to be welcomed’.
Mr. Wilmott has the distinction of immaculately trimmed and groomed eyebrows – suggesting, well, you decide.
– – – –
TradeMark mannerisms with acknowledgement to the respected ‘Feedom Alternative’, and entirely without his permission!
LikeLike
P.S.
“Iustitia, Justitia or Lady Justice (Latin: Iustitia, the Roman goddess of Justice, who is equivalent to the Greek goddess Themis) is an allegorical personification of the moral force in judicial systems. Her attributes are a blindfold, a balance and a sword.”
With thanks to Wikipedia of course.
Am I the only one who feels slight unease about the ENTHUSIASM with which the
“allegorical personification of the moral force in judicial systems” is ALWAYS female?
Perhaps there is an element of gynocentrism there?
And perhaps the law also wishes to avail itself of the appearance of ancient and abiding provenance.
The two would go together very conveniently for mutual benefit.
Then there is the issue also of ‘Justitia’ being blind…
This alone should surely rule out any tinkering with justice to favour one group of parties over another as the precurser article promotes and suggests.
Is that too naive?
I can hear the hollow laughter too you know!
LikeLike
University of Huddersfield???? No matter. For feminists such a ‘report’ will have the gravity of being handed down from the great sun goddess herself, if it supports their twaddle. That report author will no doubt get a nice pat on the head.
LikeLike
Nothing wrong with the Uni of Huddersfield, the legendary Philip Davies MP studied there.
LikeLike
Perhaps that’s why he turned out as he did….?!
LikeLike