You wouldn’t say that if men’s right accounts posted stats about false accusations if a rape victim got her justice.
It’s apparently not insensitive when the receiver is a muscular black man.
What if he is really innocent (on top of being not guilty) and he sees that he will always be judged and becomes so sensitive to all the accusations that he kills himself?
I think the likelihood of that is so remote that we’re better off worrying about some of the barriers women face in society when it comes to reporting sexual violence.
@Trion what does Mendy’s race have anything to do with this? Versus is, I’m assuming, a non-government organization that’s calling on footballers to use their platforms in a specific way. It’s not a big deal.
They are advising footballers in aftermath of their reaction of Mendy verdict. They are not being generic, they are being very specific which is to stop supporting Mendy’s verdict.
They can, I just think it’s a ridiculous request what was posted above.
It’s very controversial to say anyone has to use their platform in a way that someone else tells them to rather than how they’d choose to.
I know this is just how they say it in America but he didn’t beat anything, the charges against him were simply never proven and then, yes he is innocent given the absolute fundamental principle of ‘innocent until proven guilty’.
The Instagram post was unnecessary and he should 100% be able to be supported by his friends and colleagues. I have nothing to say about bellerin liking it.
I’m not saying footballers have to listen. It would be controversial if the French government was telling footballers to post messages of support for Mendy but this is a private organization trying to convince other private individuals to change their posting behavior.
@Starboy That’s just a turn of phrase in the US. I don’t know where it comes from. And, no, he’s not innocent, he was found not guilty. The verdict sheet the jury gets doesn’t have a line for “guilty” and a line for “innocent”, it’s “not guilty” and “guilty”.
I don’t think it’s a big deal if his friends are supporting him but there is a real danger of people extrapolating a single verdict in this case and then using it as a lens to view other accusations or rape or sexual assault, or presume all women are schemers just itching to file reports against men. It’s just not true. We don’t even have good statistics on rape and sexual assault because of how many go unreported so the idea that there’s a bigger danger of a false accusation is just laughable.
Which is still controversial, especially when you’re framing things as that statement is, thay them supporting their friend is harmful for society and the “correct” thing to do is do what they say.
I also think saying “it’s just a turn of phrase” in reference to the “beating the charges” comment is again disingenuous on your part. As a lawyer, you know very well that phrasing matters and yours carried a clear implication of judgement, as other posts you’ve made as regards Mendy.
I’m curious given how wedded you are to playing down the significance of a “not guilty” verdict, at what point is someone cleared of accusations in your eyes? Or is someone who is accused forever tainted in your view?
Sorry bud I know your lawyer hat is on but I’m not having this.
Every man, woman, child, whatever is walking around innocent. They can either go through life remaining innocent or be accused of a crime. Until the very fucking point they are proven guilty, they remain innocent.
How can you decide he’s not innocent when that was the basis of his life before these accusations? The accusations were NOT proven and therefore his status cannot change just because you’re aware someone can get a not guilty even when they have committed a crime.
The onus is on them to prove he is not innocent, otherwise that’s what he is. Now you can have an opinion on whether you think ‘fuck me he’s got away with one massively there’ of course, we probably all do about mason greenwood tbh, but unfortunately even that twat has to be deemed innocent.
Imagine someone falsely accused you, you got the not guilty but everyone called you that name anyway and kept saying nah mate you’re not innocent you’re just ‘not guilty’…?
In all fairness, you’ve just told them how they should be using their platform. You’ve got an opinion on what they should be saying on theirs just like they’ve got one on what footballers are saying on theirs. We’ve pretty much all got opinions on what others say in public and the potential implications of what is said.
Nerd
I was saying it’s a turn of phrase in response to @Starboy saying that Mendy didn’t beat anything. It’s just an expression in the US. It doesn’t mean he was found innocent, it means he was found not guilty.
I’m not playing down the significance of a not guilty verdict at all. It’s a big deal he was found not guilty. He must have had great attorneys. You would have thought the CPS had a really strong case to go to trial against a famous footballer but it sounds like they brought a case that probably shouldn’t have been tried. I don’t know how politics plays a role in CPS decisions or if it does the same way that a local District Attorney or State’s Attorney would weigh up trying a high profile case in an election year. I’m not sure if we’re able to read transcripts of the Mendy case for free but I’d love to read it to see just how bad the prosecution’s case was.
I don’t think that someone being accused is forever tainted, that’s a bit harsh for my world view. As far as I’m concerned, he’s cleared of the accusations as of the minute the jury handed in their verdict. It doesn’t change the fact that he’s going to have to live with the fact he was charged. The whole situation sucks but I think it’s a big waste of time to use him as some example that we can apply to all the other accusations of rape or sexual assault.
I’m not sure how else to say this, but he was found not guilty by the jury. Juries don’t find people innocent. You can’t get some sort of declaratory judgement in criminal court saying that the person accused didn’t do what they’re accused of. It’s just not how the criminal system is set up. Mendy is more than able to walk around saying he’s innocent and if I were his attorney I’d sure as shit be saying that too because he’s maintained his innocence and is using the not guilty verdict as proof that he didn’t actually do these things when that’s not what a not guilty verdict actually means. It’s the same reason why OJ Simpson was found not guilty in criminal court and then sued in civil court for the double homicide. He wasn’t able to use a not guilty finding in criminal court as a bar to a civil suit because being found not guilty is not the same as being found innocent.
Like I said this is all the lawyer hat.
Mendy started the situation as innocent and nothing has changed that, it doesn’t get anymore straight forward than that.
If only.
Except legally he’s not guilty because the only thing the jury decided is that the prosecution failed to meet its burden. I understand it sounds like semantic nonsense though. Again, if I were his attorney I’d sure as shit be saying something like “my client maintained his innocence throughout this process and has been vindicated with this verdict” or something like that.
The world of public opinion the mere accusation means guilt and if you beat the accusation it just means you got away with it.
Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit
But the wording of that statement isn’t going to make Mendy and his family feel any better because it leaves an element of doubt.
There are certain people who will be reeling out “there’s no smoke without fire” line and couldn’t care less that Mendy is the real victim here.
They certainly won’t be chasing after the person responsible for ruining his career, who’s walked away and will remain anonymous, while Mendy has his name dragged through the mud.
7 different women. Not just 1.
You’re saying 7 different women all lied. They all went through the absolute gruelling process of a rape investigation and trial. And that 7 different women will then say “ah that was fun, let’s go again”?
Yeah fuck off.
If you turn it around, and put those 7 women on trial, do you think a jury would be able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they lied? Not a chance. And quite frankly some of the comments/references to these women are disgusting.
“Not guilty” doesn’t mean they all lied.