Hmmmm. I would suggest, in the interest of balance that it might be worth reading the briefing paper prepared by Parity called "Men and Women in the criminal Justice System - Appraisal of Published Statistics" dated September 2013 which uses the published statistics to show a quite different picture.
It's the right of every individual surely.Really? (*shakes head*)
What he/she wrote literally goes against every conventional thing known about the reality of the criminal justice system in the West.
Read like pure nonsense borne out of a personal agenda.
To be fair, it isn't a research paper. It is a type of briefing paper which the author knew what he wanted it to say before it had ever been written. Not that that doesn't have a place, but definitive research it is not. It is one of the most ambiguous things I have read for a long time and has so many "ifs, might be's, could be viewed as" statements contained within, that it's only value is if it is used in conjunction with other works on the subject. It uses facts if they support the basic premise (men get treated much worse by the criminal justice system) and supposition and inference if they don't.Ah. I see. Any research that doesn't support "conventional knowledge" is "borne out of a personal agenda" and can be dismissed as "nonsense".
To be fair, it isn't a research paper. It is a type of briefing paper which the author knew what he wanted it to say before it had ever been written. Not that that doesn't have a place, but definitive research it is not. It is one of the most ambiguous things I have read for a long time and has so many "ifs, might be's, could be viewed as" statements contained within, that it's only value is if it is used in conjunction with other works on the subject. It uses facts if they support the basic premise (men get treated much worse by the criminal justice system) and supposition and inference if they don't.
It does pose some interesting questions no doubt and 'parity' has a long history of looking for answers to gender inequalities where the males 'have it worse' (both real and perceived) which is all to the good but their 'research' is about proving that, not necessarily about stating the facts.
I thought he was found not guilty of the blow job. He was found guilty of penetrating her with a finger.
You're right. But it shouldn't change anything if that's what he did.I thought he was found not guilty of the blow job. He was found guilty of penetrating her with a finger.
Absolutely.You're right. But it shouldn't change anything if that's what he did.
Jesus! LolA girl in work heard me and another bloke discussing this a couple of weeks back, she thought he'd done something to her with his Iphone when she'd heard he'd digitally penetrated her.....
I shit you not.
Too much information...Fair to say he wasn't picking her nose.