Quote:
Originally Posted by VO #23
If there was an error in law, the convicted can launch an appeal. It's not perfect by any means, but it is meant to provide some degree of judicial oversight.
Part of the problem with sexual assault crimes, including attempts, is that there often isn't any physical evidence and it becomes an issue of "he said-she said" with conflicting testimony at trial. A certain balance has to be struck here, which is very tricky: skew it too far in the favour of the accused, and you'll get rapists walking away from charges, and skew it too far in the favour of the complainant and you'll get wrongful convictions.
|
And it's not just that you're risking a rapist walking away from charges. Rapists seem to be some of the more likely criminals to repeat an offence (I don't have any stats on that, just a hunch based on stories in the media), so if you let a guilty man walk and he repeats with more evidence this time, it's going to be seen as your fault that you let this guy back on the streets. I think that based on that, the balance may be skewed a little more against the defendant than in other cases.