Quite right; and remember the Sex Offenders Course got dropped when experts discovered it had no effect on prisoners mainly because the vast majority were innocent in the first place and the really guilty only learned ways of getting turned on.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50967100

JK2006 wrote:
............because the vast majority were innocent in the first place

So you believe that significantly more than 50% of convicted sex offenders are actually innocent of the crimes that the legal system investigated and found them guilty.

I can believe there are lots of wrongly accused and can also believe that some found guilty were innocent but to say the vast majority of convicted sex offenders are innocent is both ridiculous and ludicrous.

May be ridiculous and ludicrous; I would agree had I not been through the past 20 years and met dozens of wrongly convicted men in and out of prison.

Actually I think it's probably your grasp of statistics that's at fault. You may have been told (and believed) dozens of prisoners but that was likely to have been from a population of 1,000s's that had access to you directly or indirectly. You stated that the VAST MAJORITY OF CONVICTED SEX OFFENDERS ARE INNOCENT.

Vast majority means a number much higher than 50% of ALL CONVICTED SEX OFFENDERS are innocent. I stand my assertion that is both ridiculous and ludicrous

And you are entitled to think that; I found that police exaggerate to make sure they get a conviction; then so do the Prosecution in putting forward a "stronger" case; even more gets coloured by media wanting a better story. I met murderers doing life who I'm sure told the truth when they described a tragic accident to me. It is the way of the British judicial system.

Sex offenders?
Sex abuse?

What about every guy who has had sex with a female and never gave her a knee trembler?

What do we call those? Is that not a form of abuse when they only think of their own enjoyment?
I expect you'll find som of them pointing at others for using and abusing women though eh?



Society can be largely uneducated, sometimes it isn't their fault, sometimes it is.

50 Shades of Grey isn't education either.

I'm not disagreeing that some people who have been found guilty of sex crimes were innoncent.

What I do disagree strongly about is the claim that THE VAST MAJORITY of convicted sex offenders are innocent. The correct use of language matters if you are demanding the truth from others.

Who is making that claim Blue Boy?

With current laws a lot of what is deemed as sexual abuse is done so by default.
The severity ranges from serious to misdemeanours.

The law isn't always right in its approach or judgement. Justice can be a joke.

Take for instance driving offences.

Parking on double yellows deemed as dangerous and incur a financial penalty.
Driving without indicating ( which has caused countless accidents) isn't taken seriously. I was told by police I complained about silly things. Like they take serious complaints properly? No. They have more Wrigleys than chewing gum.
A significant amount of accidents are not reported and drivers are at liberty to settle without involving insurance companies.
True stats on crashes are not known.
No police officer or sergeant can tell me any different.

I see idiot drivers on a daily basis who are speeding past schools. It's bad enough without substance abuse.

These are the sort that go around complaining about nonces too (with their own questionable sexual activity in their youth). Like they themselves are a living embodiment of an upstanding citizen. Sometimes we only have to look at your social media profiles to see who you look up to.

Tut tut.

There are people who are abused in sick ways, but the likes of wasters are in no position to complain about that.
Two wrongs never make a right.

Take the truth on the chin like you expect others to.

Bookworm wrote:
Who is making that claim Blue Boy?


JK has claimed that more than 50% of all the people who have been convicted of a sex crime were actually innocent. There are miscarriages of justice with all forms of crime but no matter how bad you consider the UK courts it is hard to take anyone seriously who is claiming that the UK legal system makes that number of mistakes.

Unfortunately just like politicians some people think that by making a statement often enough it will somehow will make it become true. Donald Trump is the most high profile example of this approach but unfortunately others seem to be copying his example.

Nope I genuinely believe it; not all are innocent of every aspect but the vast majority are innocent of their convictions which have been exaggerated or inflated or invented for the benefit of getting a conviction. A major example is people convicted of sex with a 15 year old when in reality they were 16. Not easy to disprove.

Prime example I would suggest; Rolf Harris who, I suspect, had an affair with his daughter's friend when she was 18 but did NOT abuse her when she was 13. I know nothing, I hasten to add, but that is my suspicion. Mirror that a thousand times for a hundred reasons and you get a picture of the False Allegations Industry.

This is my view on a wider scale.

I believe if we take into account the sex abuse cases both convicted and not ( people like JK have a right to complain about those who got off easy) you can argue over stats until you are blue in the face ( or bluer,in your case Blue Boy) 😋 but whether people commit sexual abuse or not we are all capable ( and guilty?) of abuse of some kind. Most humans who have lived have likely commited some form of it.

Sexual abuse seems to be the only crime which is put under the spotlight.

There are suicides which are actually murder.
If only they would start applying the same shock horror (rightly) to those situations, I might start taking the law seriously.

I have absolute zero respect for the justice system in this country. If it had a conscience, it would do too.
I drew a line under and said 'fuck it' a long time ago.

I see no changes on the horizon...