Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Pretty much your line on Ronaldo, iirc. * Yes, of course, there's one starting point when it comes to any kind of crime, to assume innocence. But then we also know that rape is massively underreported and underprosecuted, so another starting point is to believe victims (and to be aware that malicious/false accusations of rape are so rare as to be just about irrelevant. Pretty much an ideological construct from 'mens's rights' activists, yuk). That means that the vast majority of accusations will, statistically, be accurate and truthful. That in turn doesn't mean that you can apply those stats to all specific cases and simply say case x 'must be true'. There's got to be a combination of due process and information in the public domain that should lead you to a reasonable judgement about that case. And here we've got the recording and social media post, plus the police and CPS thinking there was a reasonable chance of conviction. And, for what it's worth, yes, Ronaldo was never prosecuted, but what I know about the case (the second rape accusation against him), including 'the questionnaire', I'm happy to make my own judgement.
Edit: * Actually, that was a bit snidey on my part, a lot of fans just didn't want to know about the accusations against Ronaldo. However, it's worth mentioning the case given that United bought him back knowing all that background and then managed to get, spectacularly, on the wrong side of this case as well.
A lot of this isn't correct. To suggest that false accusations of rape are a mens rights construct is beyond ridiculous, particularly in the wake of the release of Andy Malkinson who's just done 17 years for a rape he didn't commit. False rape claims do get made for various reasons. As far as the police and CPS believing they had a reasonable chance of conviction is concerned, no store should be set on that at all.
People who are brought to trial on the same beliefs are frequently acquitted.
Last edited: