Comment

Comment by erikpukinskis

I respect your opinion but I disagree strongly with your claim that this is “medieval”.

Courts have the power to truly end people’s lives. Because of this power they must have the highest standard of proof: innocent until proven guilty.

However, many crimes are very difficult to prove, which means courts mostly can do nothing about things like rape, harassment, etc.

That’s a good thing on some level, we don’t want to put innocent people in jail.

But if we leave it at that, and simply disbelieve all stories not proven by courts, then the vast majority of victims of crime will be totally left without support.

That’s why personal policies like “believe women” exist… not because they are more true than “believe the courts” but because both policies are flawed and so together they provide better coverage of innocent people than either policy could alone. For the innocent victims who haven’t been protected by the law, the “believe women” community has their back. For innocent victims who have been falsely accused the “believe the courts” community has their back.

I believe this diversity of belief is essential.

And so, I support you being a “believe the courts” person. But I would like you to consider that this leaves you in a position where you can’t support a large number of victims of crime. And therefore that’s a job other people, with a different attitude to the courts, must step in and do.

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton