StarGateWars Forums

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28163593

How he only get 5 years? and could be out in 3

tell you what pisses me of about this case, that there is people coming forward after he has been convicted ! what if he'd got of it because of lack of evidence, what **Filtered** use is it coming forward now, can't have affected them that gravely if they don't want to see him face any consequences

Guild wrote:tell you what pisses me of about this case, that there is people coming forward after he has been convicted ! what if he'd got of it because of lack of evidence, what **Filtered** use is it coming forward now, can't have affected them that gravely if they don't want to see him face any consequences

I don't understand why it's taken some long for Rolf and for Saville, tbh, if I was gangbanged by those fools. I'd have told my Mum

Field Marshall wrote:

Guild wrote:tell you what pisses me of about this case, that there is people coming forward after he has been convicted ! what if he'd got of it because of lack of evidence, what **Filtered** use is it coming forward now, can't have affected them that gravely if they don't want to see him face any consequences

I don't understand why it's taken some long for Rolf and for Saville, tbh, if I was gangbanged by those fools. I'd have told my Mum

Got to wonder if they are just doing it for compensation, if they at all get it.

~Dä Vinci~ wrote:

Field Marshall wrote:

Guild wrote:tell you what pisses me of about this case, that there is people coming forward after he has been convicted ! what if he'd got of it because of lack of evidence, what **Filtered** use is it coming forward now, can't have affected them that gravely if they don't want to see him face any consequences

I don't understand why it's taken some long for Rolf and for Saville, tbh, if I was gangbanged by those fools. I'd have told my Mum

Got to wonder if they are just doing it for compensation, if they at all get it.

There's a lot of controversy over repressed memories. I read an article awhile back stating how physiologists could quite easily implant repressed memories in a person and make them believe it happened (even so, some researches believe repressed memories don't actually exist because traumatization of that kind is never repressed).
Anyway, I know little about evidence that existed, but I find basing a case on memories formed 20 odd years ago is a bit far fetched irregardless of what did/could have happened.

he did admit to some stuff so was kinda clear he did something. 5 years is a joke should be 20 at least and should have his bits removed

~Dä Vinci~ wrote:

Field Marshall wrote:

Guild wrote:tell you what pisses me of about this case, that there is people coming forward after he has been convicted ! what if he'd got of it because of lack of evidence, what **Filtered** use is it coming forward now, can't have affected them that gravely if they don't want to see him face any consequences

I don't understand why it's taken some long for Rolf and for Saville, tbh, if I was gangbanged by those fools. I'd have told my Mum

Got to wonder if they are just doing it for compensation, if they at all get it.

Shame is a huge reason people stay quiet in these cases. Also, majority of sexual assault cases tend to do everything they can to discredit the character of the victim. What they were wearing. What they said. Why they didn't scream for help. Why did they only come forward later.

There is so much victim shaming in these cases that the victims would rather try to move on with their lives than be publicly shamed for something that happened to them, and to have people label them as the aggressor of the matter. Only once their attacker has been proven to have done such an act do they feel safe in coming forward, because instead of the victim then being put on trial, the fact that the attacker has been previously convicted prevents some of those victim-blaming accusations.

Psyko wrote:

~Dä Vinci~ wrote:

Field Marshall wrote:

Guild wrote:tell you what pisses me of about this case, that there is people coming forward after he has been convicted ! what if he'd got of it because of lack of evidence, what **Filtered** use is it coming forward now, can't have affected them that gravely if they don't want to see him face any consequences

I don't understand why it's taken some long for Rolf and for Saville, tbh, if I was gangbanged by those fools. I'd have told my Mum

Got to wonder if they are just doing it for compensation, if they at all get it.

Shame is a huge reason people stay quiet in these cases. Also, majority of sexual assault cases tend to do everything they can to discredit the character of the victim. What they were wearing. What they said. Why they didn't scream for help. Why did they only come forward later.

There is so much victim shaming in these cases that the victims would rather try to move on with their lives than be publicly shamed for something that happened to them, and to have people label them as the aggressor of the matter. Only once their attacker has been proven to have done such an act do they feel safe in coming forward, because instead of the victim then being put on trial, the fact that the attacker has been previously convicted prevents some of those victim-blaming accusations.

Isn't the whole reason of name suppression for that? I can't say how long the concept has been around for, but I would assume the anonymity clause has been around for awhile, even so there are many ways to submit crimes anonymously. Not sure about the rest of the world but we have 'Crime Stoppers'.