Russell Brand

[Stirlingsays]

On the jury I served on this year, the victim went to the police a week (not 17 years) after the incident, but her friend had encouraged her to go to a SARC within 24 hours of the incident.

The defendant had never denied there was intercourse but the SARC logged injuries that added gravitas to her claim. It wasn't the only factor but it definitely helped her account.

The accused was found guilty by the way, a verdict that's quite often hard to get in this type of case.

If there were injuries and thus physical evidence it should most definitely be recorded officially.

Still not comforrtable with the idea that all of a sudden not making a complaint at the time is regarded as of no consequence.

In my opinion it is extremely important and unless we are talking about under age or geniunely vulnerable people in situations where there is the threat of violence......then I can see how this system can be abused and allow for innocent men's lives to be destroyed out of spite or other insane behaviour.

Incentive structures create opportunities for both good and not so good people.

 

[eaglesdare]

What like let them get away with their crimes you mean? Big fat no from me.
Although Russell Banned has recently found Jesus and hoping to be forgiven for his heinous crimes, we now all know he would analy rape Mary if he got the chance.

If a crime is committed then it should be reported straight away not 20 years later when a journalist is comming looking for a story.

I am still of the opinion if a certain amount of time has passed then it should be civil court cases like brands especially for a he said she said format.

And don't forget he was found innocent of the other rape accusations. Should those women be punished?

 

[matthau]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2119081040182726700