False rape accusation...who would you believe?

Silentcorner wrote: »

This happened because a Democrat was president, Biden has vowed to reverse due process for young men....

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/06/biden-vows-a-quick-end-to-devos-sexual-misconduct-rule-241715

Whatever you think of Trump, the Democrats are a joke...trying to keep the angry feminists on board by continuing to deny young men in college due process (something that is costing the colleges in class action suits) and simultaneously ignoring the serious accusations that Biden himself is facing....there is a good chance that Biden is so medicated he has no recollection that he is actually running in a presidential race!!

After all of the accused men were acquitted following the Belfast rape trial in 2018, a movement began across social media platforms and several news sites under the slogan #IBelieveHer. The premise was that the men’s celebrity had helped them, and the young complainant should be believed even though her accusations ranging from sexual assault to rape — a crime equated with murder in terms of gravity on our statute books — were dismissed by a jury.

The campaign to reverse the presumption of innocence, and treat all accused men as guilty until they could prove otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt, quickly spread beyond the Belfast case. The social justice warriors’ argument was that a sexual crime is so intrusive and stressful to report that no victim would ever get it wrong.

I didn’t see any great resurgence of the #IBelieveHer campaign last week when a middle-aged woman had her accusations of sexual assault against a prominent man thrown out of a Dublin court. Nobody stormed the District Court with placards, nobody waved knickers about, nobody piled on to social media demanding a retrial and lamenting the poor “victim’s” trauma. Even though the case was a high-profile one and the accused man was a public figure, there was a deafening silence from the mob. That’s probably because the complainant posed something of a challenge to the insistence that such women must be believed. Her evidence was found to be totally inconsistent.

.
.
.
It’s at this point that you’ve got to wonder whether the law has, in fact, been changed to the “I Believe Her” model— that the presumption of innocence has been reversed for sexual offences, and nobody’s thought to tell us. Fox was charged with sexual assault, one of the categories of sexual crime which does not afford anonymity to the accused. For 18 months, the 87-year-old, his wife and his family have lived with the appalling stigma of a sexual assault accusation. He has been out of work, his reputation has been trashed, and he has been forced to reveal humiliating details about the collapse of his libido following medical problems 11 years ago.

Until the case came to court last week, though, it seems there was little forensic examination of the extensive CCTV footage of the alleged incident. The woman claimed Fox put his hand on her groin for 30 seconds during the taking of the photograph. He had then “skulked away”, leaving her distressed. But the CCTV showed Fox’s two hands in view the entire time, apart from a three-second period after the picture had been taken. The two had apparently parted on pleasant terms, with the woman touching him in a friendly gesture. There was no evidence of anything untoward, the court held, and no sign the woman was upset. Far from “skulking away”, Fox had ambled back to his friends at a leisurely pace.
.
.
.
Sexual assault “victims” are just as capable of getting it wrong — in this case badly wrong — as any other class of accuser, and given the life-wrecking nature of the charge, their claims have to be treated with the same legal scepticism as any other. This does not appear to have happened in Fox’s case, and he was prosecuted on the word of an untruthful witness. Small wonder the social justice warriors ran for cover this time. #IBelieveHim.