I've been reading online over the last day or two about the case of a high profile American Football coach who is accused of sexually assaulting several young boys in a coaching programme he was involved with, including accusations of rape. Rape, in particular, is a crime I find especially horrifying, rape of anyone, irrespective of age or gender, but particularly the rape of a boy, but, that being said, I have no idea whether the man is guilty or not - if he is, then he undoubtedly deserves to be punished - and I'm pretty certain those opining about the case have no more idea about his guilt or innocence than I do. What concerns me in this case is its illustration of a trend, in this country, as well as the US, of the presumption of guilt of the suspects in such cases, and others which invoke public 'revulsion' - the 'all Muslims are terrorists' meme springs to mind - rather than the suspect's traditional right of the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. It isn't a new phenomenon, and one particular case, which happened around 15 years ago, in the area we used to live in prior to moving to Cornwall springs to mind. A local secondary school teacher was charged with sexually assaulting a 13 year old girl pupil of his after she made an allegation against him. There was local press coverage, with the predictable spin of child 'victims' needing to be protected from the 'evil predators' n their midst. Except that the 'victim' in this instance wasn't the person everyone assumed. 10 months later, after his name, career and reputation had been dragged through the dirt, the man was exonerated when the girl admitted to having fabricated the story to 'get back' at the teacher after he'd disciplined her for bad behaviour in class.
So, yes, punish the guilty, whether they be child rapists, terrorists or the 'white collar' criminals defrauding the 99%, but let's make sure they are guilty before assassinating their characters.
Love & best wishes to all
Sammy B
Well said.
ReplyDeletePeace <3
Jay
Hello Jay
ReplyDeleteIt's easier to kneejerk than think for most people, it seems. I doubt my contribution will make the slightest difference, but I thought it needed saying, anyway.
Love & best wishes
Sammy B
Seems there was an eyewitness to the alledged rape of a 10 year-old boy, and the witness reported it to the higher ups.
ReplyDeleteEven the appearance of impropriety should not have been tolerated; the administration is complicit for not reporting it to the police.
I hope the bastard is prosecuted and sued for everything he owns.
:-(
-Andy
BTW, the head coach, Joe Paterno., and the University president were fired last night.
ReplyDeletePeace <3
Jay
Grand Jury testimony:
ReplyDeletehttp://cbschicago.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/sandusky-grand-jury-presentment.pdf
-Andy
Hello Andy and Jay
ReplyDeleteAs I said in the post, I have no qualms about the guilty being punished to the full extent of the law, particularly when rape is involved, and this might well be an 'open and shut' case. The general point I was making is, I think, still valid, though - suspects, whatever they are charged with, should have the right to presumption of innocence and the right of due process, rather than summary trial and judgment by the (often ill-informed) court of media and 'public opinion'. If those rights are diluted, lynch law, in my opinion, isn't too many steps away.
Love & best wishes
Sammy B
Just a little codicil to my earlier comment, because I don't want to seem inconsistent - when I referred to punishment to the full extent of the law, that absolutely excludes the death penalty, to which I remain implacably opposed, in any circumstances.
ReplyDeleteLove & best wishes to all
Sammy B