Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/pe...-a6714756.html
    A threat is shown yet none in

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/pe...ml#commentsDiv
    None in there

    Why is that?

    So essentially someone's word is enough for you to believe them that criminal activity has taken place, I hope you never get jury duty.
    A person's word is enough to make me believe that, on the balance of probabilities, someone has committed criminal activity against them. It is not enough to make me believe beyond reasonable doubt that a specific individual has done so (the criminal standard) - accordingly, were this a court case, I would bring a not guilty verdict.

    Let me ask you this - what kind of freak would share the specifics of rape threats made towards them?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    I think shes absolitely right.

    By the youtuber implying that not wanting to rape her is somehow an insult hes effectively saying that rape threats should be treated as compliments.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Look at the whole context including what he was replying to
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    A person's word is enough to make me believe that, on the balance of probabilities, someone has committed criminal activity against them. It is not enough to make me believe beyond reasonable doubt that a specific individual has done so (the criminal standard) - accordingly, were this a court case, I would bring a not guilty verdict.

    Let me ask you this - what kind of freak would share the specifics of rape threats made towards them?
    https://twitter.com/tubeanalyst/stat...60056226283521

    She has done it before so why hasn't she this time? Do you not find the fact that she did it before and not now suspicious?

    Also she talks about notifications which are mentions likes and retweets not dm's
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    The provider of blood plasma to the Health service next to be privatised it seems.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Was it you I was talking to in another thread regarding the EU and NI? If so could you confirm and if you can be bothered link the thread soi can post a quote on the matter in a more appropriate location, if not I'll just post it here.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    https://twitter.com/tubeanalyst/stat...60056226283521

    She has done it before so why hasn't she this time? Do you not find the fact that she did it before and not now suspicious?

    Also she talks about notifications which are mentions likes and retweets not dm's
    No, not at all suspicious. Not even close.

    I already mentioned that such tweets are likely to be deleted.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    No, not at all suspicious. Not even close.

    I already mentioned that such tweets are likely to be deleted.
    So basically she showed no evidence this time unlike last time, and then the only evidence available to prove either side is insufficient, it seems like you won't change your mind she made a claim she should provide evidence to show it is true.
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Was it you I was talking to in another thread regarding the EU and NI? If so could you confirm and if you can be bothered link the thread soi can post a quote on the matter in a more appropriate location, if not I'll just post it here.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Yup it was. Give me a sec.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    So basically she showed no evidence this time unlike last time, and then the only evidence available to prove either side is insufficient, it seems like you won't change your mind she made a claim she should provide evidence to show it is true.
    If she wants people to be certain she is telling the truth, aye. However, it is clear that the balance of probabilities is in her favour. People generally tell the truth about these things, especially people whose careers could be ruined by lying, which would be provable, and there is no good reason to think she is lying. I'd say I'm 90% confident she's telling the truh.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    If she wants people to be certain she is telling the truth, aye. However, it is clear that the balance of probabilities is in her favour. People generally tell the truth about these things, especially people whose careers could be ruined by lying, which would be provable, and there is no good reason to think she is lying. I'd say I'm 90% confident she's telling the truh.
    How can it be proven she is lying when you reject evidence?
    She has provided no evidence, the newspapers have provided no evidence, I have but you reject my evidence as insufficient.

    Look at the articles themselves there is no evidence provided at all.
    Do you not see what she gains from this when she is campaigning to restrict speech making people believe she has received threats helps her point.
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    MSG
    Tagged anyway, but here's the link

    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...5#post65333075

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    Look at the whole context including what he was replying to
    I think the wider issue has to be that with reporting rates of rape low and often hard to prove, as a general rule, we should believe victims when they state they've been raped.

    Identifying the rapist obviously needs scrutiny.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    Tagged anyway, but here's the link

    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...5#post65333075

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I've left the other thread unread so the notification will be there when I get home, CBA writing it out on my tablet when I can do it so much faster with a keyboard when I get home.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    How can it be proven she is lying when you reject evidence?
    She has provided no evidence, the newspapers have provided no evidence, I have but you reject my evidence as insufficient.

    Look at the articles themselves there is no evidence provided at all.
    Do you not see what she gains from this when she is campaigning to restrict speech making people believe she has received threats helps her point.
    How on earth is she campaigning to restrict speech?

    But furthermore, if you think you've provided evidence which is worth a damn, you need to take a long, hard look at your reasoning process. Maybe it's enough to reduce my confidence from 91% to 90%, but it's not really anything meaningful.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    I think the wider issue has to be that with reporting rates of rape low and often hard to prove, as a general rule, we should believe victims when they state they've been raped.

    Identifying the rapist obviously needs scrutiny.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    She isn't claiming she was raped, she is claiming she has been threatened, I and many others have followed it and got blocked when I asked for evidence, her words contradict what she is saying about getting 600 rape threats surely it is easy enough for her to prove the threats she did so last time.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    How on earth is she campaigning to restrict speech?

    But furthermore, if you think you've provided evidence which is worth a damn, you need to take a long, hard look at your reasoning process. Maybe it's enough to reduce my confidence from 91% to 90%, but it's not really anything meaningful.
    Because it is impossible to completely disprove your argument on why you believe her is like why people believe in god it is impossible to disprove when you dismiss the available evidence.

    You are asking me to disprove something existing that is virtually impossible.

    She says she wants free speech but
    Punishing people for certain speech means no free speech.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    She says she wants free speech but
    Punishing people for certain speech means no free speech.
    No, it doesn't.

    Does copyright mean no free speech?
    How about criminalising incitement to murder?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    No, it doesn't.

    Does copyright mean no free speech?
    How about criminalising incitement to murder?

    Incitement is a different thing it is like being a getaway driver.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    Incitement is a different thing it is like being a getaway driver.
    Nevertheless, outlawing incitement is a limitation on the absolute freedom of speech you seem to advocate.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Nevertheless, outlawing incitement is a limitation on the absolute freedom of speech you seem to advocate.
    There is a difference between being part of a crime than saying we need freedom of speech.

    Also going back to you wanting me to disprove the threats what evidence would be necessary?
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    There is a difference between being part of a crime than saying we need freedom of speech.

    Also going back to you wanting me to disprove the threats what evidence would be necessary?
    I admit it's very tough to disprove, hence my lack of certainty.
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 15, 2016
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.