Our thanks to db for this.
If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.
We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.
Our YouTube channel is here.
Justice for Men & Boys 
Not for the first time (fortunately, the removal of juries has been kicked into touch, for now). But excess weighting to unproveable female ‘evidence’ from the plaintiff, while hiding proveable evidence that could exonerate the accused is still with us.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c977d35l7mjo
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-59151540
There’s a depressingly obvious pattern evident. As soon as women gain controlling influence in politics and jurisprudence, they will engineer legislation designed to disadvantage men, and won’t attempt to be fair (or even seek truth).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exactly. The Westminster Parliament has also written into an Act the requirement to protect the complainant’s privacy, but not of course the defendant’s right not to be incarcerated by a kangaroo court. The complainant may indeed be embarrassed by their sexual shenanigans be revealed but that’s hardly the same as being imprisoned for years for something you haven’t done! Now fading few may remember that there was a series of scandals that came to a head in 2018. The Ministry of Justice, Criminal Bar Association even the BBC in a Documentary shared evidence that about 25% of convictions may be “unsound” in sexual assault cases. Because both the Police and CPS were concealing evidence from the Courts (and therefore the defence) or holding it back to the last minute. In fact it was a CPS Barrister who really blew the whistle on this. In the years following the number of convictions went down by…. you guessed it 25%! This reduction was seized upon by the feminist lobby and the very thing that had been making a quarter of convictions “unsound” was reintroduced by law in this Parliament. Hiding evidence from smart phones and social media that contradicted the complainant’s account became law rather than bad practice by Police and CPS. Thus it is reasonable to assume that currently 25% of convictions currently in England and Wales are “unsound” because by statute relevant but potentially embarrassing evidence is being deliberately concealed to increase the convictions.
It really is a remarkable example of the different value we give to the sexes. Protect women from embarrassment and wrongfully imprison hundreds of men. You can’t imagine any circumstance where we’d countenance wrongfully imprisoning women to save the blushes of men. Yet this is precisely what is happening. Sadly few of the men in the past, or now, will get to have appeals because the Judiciary are very sensitive to how it would undermine the system to see hundreds of successful appeals, hence it is long and expensive and very uncertain. So many men are in gaol or live on sex offenders registers to preserve the fiction of justice.
LikeLiked by 1 person
One of the proponents for denying men the right to present exculpatory evidence said
“Anybody that’s gone through the police investigation and who gets to court and gets a conviction should absolutely have earned the right to be believed.”
Oddly, I completely agree. ANYBODY in that position has deserved the right to be believed. Including the accused. Being charged, being in court, does not equal being guilty. Not for the accuser; not for the accused.
LikeLiked by 1 person