Sexual Harassment And More

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

Back on topic......that's not the way it works,though,jaycee. It's never up to the accused to prove their innocence. It's up to the accusers to prove guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt. That's not happening,here,because time (in this case 40 years) has clouded memories,evidence has been lost (if there ever was any in the first place) and trial is taking place by allegations and innuendo in the media.

---

The statute of limitations in many cases would keep these from being taken to court. We need to make sure that our kids do not live in fear of talking, this is the only way these people will stop getting away with what they are doing. Sure, it is hard to trust someone when the accused is a trusted professional and the accuser is an unknown but this is how so many of these people get away with it. The issues within the Catholic church are prime examples of what can happen when people speak up and do it on mass, things can and will change even though charges may not be possible.

The right to say no and the obligation to respect the word no should be chapter 1 of any sex ed class for children. Unfortunately you'd be hard pressed to find that language anywhere in the sex ed program.

And you know this how? The new sex ed program is ALL about respect for others, and their choices. No means no has been around for years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

The statute of limitations in many cases would keep these from being taken to court. We need to make sure that our kids do not live in fear of talking, this is the only way these people will stop getting away with what they are doing. Sure, it is hard to trust someone when the accused is a trusted professional and the accuser is an unknown but this is how so many of these people get away with it. The issues within the Catholic church are prime examples of what can happen when people speak up and do it on mass, things can and will change even though charges may not be possible.

---

I'm well aware of the "statue of limitations" in US law. That,in and of itself,has stopped criminal and civil prosecutions which is unfortunate. It's a wonder that section of US law hasn't been repealed. Without doubt,some terrible criminals are still walking the streets to continue their activities,unabated,or at least,until,they're finally caught. It also doesn't stop victims from fear of being sued into silence. We must avoid,at all costs,taking complainants accusations at face value which seems to be what's happening,now. There needs to be system of checks and balances to prevent accusations from being used against someone simply to exact revenge for some real or imagined slight or as a political tool to discredit an opponent. That's where a very vigorous libel and/or defamation law suit comes in and I can't understand if all these allegations are false,why they haven't been launched. I sure know that if I was accused of something like this,I'd go after them with a vengence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

I'm well aware of the "statue of limitations" in US law. That,in and of itself,has stopped criminal and civil prosecutions which is unfortunate. It's a wonder that section of US law hasn't been repealed. Without doubt,some terrible criminals are still walking the streets to continue their activities,unabated,or at least,until,they're finally caught. It also doesn't stop victims from fear of being sued into silence. We must avoid,at all costs,taking complainants accusations at face value which seems to be what's happening,now. There needs to be system of checks and balances to prevent accusations from being used against someone simply to exact revenge for some real or imagined slight or as a political tool to discredit an opponent. That's where a very vigorous libel and/or defamation law suit comes in and I can't understand if all these allegations are false,why they haven't been launched. I sure know that if I was accused of something like this,I'd go after them with a vengence.

---

A civil trial would prove as difficult as a criminal complaint, to a degree. If a criminal complaint can’t be proven due to the time element, a civil hearing would have the same issues.
The difference would be that evidence in a civil trial does not have to meet the same “beyond reasonable doubt” requirements. Ask OJ !!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishermccann

And you know this how? The new sex ed program is ALL about respect for others, and their choices. No means no has been around for years.

---

Just my opinion from what I've read in the curriculum. You're right, there's lots of talk of respect for others and their choices. but little to none on respecting the word no.
Given that its a sex ed course, I think it should have a place in there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onelessarrow

Just my opinion from what I've read in the curriculum. You're right, there's lots of talk of respect for others and their choices. but little to none on respecting the word no.
Given that its a sex ed course, I think it should have a place in there.

---

This needs to be done at the home from day one, if we want for the schools to teach our kids how to respect others we will have a really poor generation. Make sure your sons and daughters know boundaries and know that nobody is allowed to cross them without their ok, not a teacher, not a friend, not a parent or step parent, nobody.

Let's stop blaming those who are assaulted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

I am not the only one, I am just done sitting back and reading the crap.

---

No Kidding, I can relate.LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

I'm well aware of the "statue of limitations" in US law. That,in and of itself,has stopped criminal and civil prosecutions which is unfortunate. It's a wonder that section of US law hasn't been repealed. Without doubt,some terrible criminals are still walking the streets to continue their activities,unabated,or at least,until,they're finally caught. It also doesn't stop victims from fear of being sued into silence. We must avoid,at all costs,taking complainants accusations at face value which seems to be what's happening,now. There needs to be system of checks and balances to prevent accusations from being used against someone simply to exact revenge for some real or imagined slight or as a political tool to discredit an opponent. That's where a very vigorous libel and/or defamation law suit comes in and I can't understand if all these allegations are false,why they haven't been launched. I sure know that if I was accused of something like this,I'd go after them with a vengence.

---

Well said. I believe in innocent until PROVEN guilty. The media has a tremendous effect on all that. Imagine being raked over the coals publicly like some of these guys and you are actually innocent? Just watched the Scott Peterson documentary again. Not saying he was innocent, but he was done before he ever hit the court room.

I hate to cloud the issue here. But some radio stations are reporting the ladies that are accusing Moore of assault, are receiving financial compensation for coming forward and doing it at this moment. If that was true, it casts even more doubt on their stories. If it turns out to be a politically motivated attempt to hurt Moore, it well back fire on the ladies. If is true they get what they deserve, and I say bury them deep.

Because not only have they damaged a man's reputation, but it will make it even harder for anyone to believe the next person that says they were assaulted or harrassed.