Someone said :
That's exactly my point! Only something 7% of rape cases actually get a conviction. Does that mean that 93% of the defendants are actually innocent? I'm doubtful of that. So where do we draw the line? Name the 7%? what does that achieve? It's the actual innocent people I feel sorry for, but the only difference between the guilty convicted and not convicted is evidence. So to name the convicted seems a bit redundant and to name the accused seems unfair as there are actual false cases
I know. That's the horrible reality of rape.
There's only usually 2 witnesses and, I assume, usually alcohol and other chems involved, blurring, or purporting to blur, consent.
But the Prime Directive of criminal law remains there for a very good reason.
Just because 1 innocent life was wrecked, doesnt mean another has to be, as a by product of the search for justice.