3 ms·
Are you then suggesting that allegations suffice? That there is no need for "innocent until proven guilty" in the face of such allegations?
by jjgreen 3y ago
Are you then suggesting that allegations suffice? That there is no need for "innocent until proven guilty" in the face of such allegations?
- jwestbury 3y agoI think the point is that this is a particularly fraught area of discussion, and that the "best" approach may not be the one which is legally enshrined, because the legally enshrined approach is severely flawed in its ability to actually address sexual assault. Whether that means we should treat allegations as proof is a related but -- I think -- separate question.
- jjgreen 3y agoSome kind of extralegal response then?
- pjc50 3y agoThat standard is required for criminal sanctions, but it is not required for private parties to change who they freely associate with, who are free to take a more balance-of-probabilities approach. I'm free to say that he's probably a rapist, because I'm not a court of law and I have free speech. (The irony is that Brand spends all the time on his youtube channel making unsubstantiated and probably false allegations about all sorts of public figures such as Bill Gates)
- jjgreen 3y agoI'm free to say that he's probably a rapist, because I'm not a court of law and I have free speech. I really hope that you're not in the UK, if you are you've just exposed yourself to a libel suit which could cost you your house, and that obnoxious turd has enough money already.