This post was created in a lab to make 'believe women' sound bad.
Benjamin Mendy - Not guilty on re-trial | NOT a thread about MG
- Thread starter Chief123
- Start date
This post was created in a lab to make 'believe women' sound bad.
Going by basic probability*, it's not impossible. It's improbable/unlikely.
*What people do normally is look at general population stats and apply on an individual who doesn't fit the profile of the average person pulled from that general population. If you were to adjust for Mendy's profile those odds of him being falsely accused creep up higher.
Not to say that using rough probability estimates to gauge innocence/guilt from a distsnce is wise, barring exceptional evidence that swings the needle one way or another!
This is the dumbest thing I've heard on here in eons.
Ah, as a proxy for incompetent police/prosecutors and the needed rigor of the court system, let's arbitrarily believe one party of a certain gender, and that somehow is a net positive to society beyond that gender, because... vibes?
I take back what I said about the first part of your post, this part surpasses that part in dumbness
Yikes, bro. Yikes.
Innocent people do not get accused? I really hope you don’t have to experience something in life that shows you thats not true
This is a disastrous post, one of the worst I have ever seen in my time at Caf.
I mean, the post is still dumb as feck
But kudos for him coming out and admitting that's how he feels about it. Better than equivocating about how "not guilty is not really innocent so... *wink wink*"
But kudos for him coming out and admitting that's how he feels about it. Better than equivocating about how "not guilty is not really innocent so... *wink wink*"
John 8:7
This thread is exhibit #1 for why people below 18, nay, 21, should not be allowed to post on public forums.
"A teenager who accused Benjamin Mendy of raping her asked for his Manchester City team-mate Jack Grealish's phone number hours after she claims the assault took place, a court has heard."
"Jack Grealish is so sexy in person, he had been winking at you all night and saying how beautiful you were, but you did not sleep with him because you are not easy but you were invited out with them all next week."
"Honest to God. Peak of my life...The Dom has gone to my head. Don't you just love champagne when it's one thousand five hundred quid?"
All sent after the alledged attack. You don't think he's innocent of this one? Because he was accussed on it so can't be innocent according to your logic.
The idea innocent people don't get accussed is insanity, especially when you add in stupid levels of drink and drugs and everything else thats involved in messy nights out. Its why the whole area is so hard to police and convictions are so hard to get, presuming guilt on everyone found not guilty is a horrible way to approach things. Do you apply the same logic to all crimes?
The truth is and its uncomfortable to say there are so many grey area's where both parties and too shitfaced to consent or not consent or understand who consented, sometimes even they themselves don't know. Its tragic, as some clear rapists will walk away, some innocent dudes will do time and vice versa.
The one thing we do know is Mendy has problems that he probably needs a therapist to deal with and hopefully he will.
Shocking post. Has to be some sort of trolling attempt.
You need to read, or re-read, the CPS's statement on the Greenwood case. Tbh, this statement should be pinned to any discussion where the issue is likely to crop up because many forget, ignore, or misrepresent it, and it's clearly very important.
"A CPS spokesperson said: “We have a duty to keep cases under continuous review. In this case, a combination of the withdrawal of key witnesses and new material that came to light meant there was no longer a realistic prospect of conviction. In these circumstances, we are under a duty to stop the case.""
So the CPS did review the evidence and it indicated a conviction was highly unlikely - and it would have therefore been a waste of people's time and resources to have gone through the charade of a trial when the CPS already could tell a 'not guilty' verdict would have been practically inevitable.
The fact that unlike the Mendy case it wasn't even worthy of going to trial should actually tell you something, but somehow you still try and twist things in a different direction.
There's also 'new' evidence that was one of the reasons the case was dropped.
Just because we've seen/heard something doesn't mean that's all the evidence there is.
Oh FFS
The strangers do think he is guilty. Check the comments on Depay insta post. Also he had his pay terminated unfortunately
I hope this is not serious, in the history of jurisprudence all over the World, there were numerous cases in which innocent people were were found guilty, not only being accused. Some did many years of jail time until they were proven innocent.
Nah. I’m not jumping to defend Mendy, I don’t know the intimate details of the case but this post is mental.
A simple accusation isn’t enough to make somebody forever “non-innocent” - there are thousands upon thousands of false and fabricated accusations for all sorts of crimes every year.
“He deserved it for getting accused” - a simple accusation is all it takes for someone to lose their entire career, spend time in jail, and forever be seen as guilty? The feck is this attitude.
I accuse you of burglary. Tough shit, you’re done for now.
Most people don’t have his kind of money and would struggle to relate how one can be completely falsely accused. Look at Neymar. She even slapped the dude on hidden tape to incite him … lucky for him he ‘s street smart after previous incidents.
I fail to see the issue with pointing out the very real fact that "not guilty" does not, in fact, mean "innocent".
This has to be the dumbest thing I have ever seen written on this forum.
Mendy clearly has his own issues, his lifestyle was so wild, reading that guardian report, it was only a matter of time before this hedonistic kinda lifestyle put him in trouble.
however this does this not warrant accusing him falsely for an offense he never committed.
I hope he goes to therapy to get help,I wish him the best.
however this does this not warrant accusing him falsely for an offense he never committed.
I hope he goes to therapy to get help,I wish him the best.
It’s really not that simple. Anyone can get accused of anything, This is why we have the bloody court system and the good old “innocent until proven guilty” which you kinda inverted in your statement above the bolded part.
Everyone knows the issue of low conviction rates in those cases, but taking this for granted as in therefore everyone is guilty is just nonsensical. What if someone falsely accused you tomorrow of the same or similar thing? You would go to the court and win with no issues as you aren’t guilty, you could even counter sue to further prove your innocence and strike down on the scammer that wanted to ruin your life. Nonetheless, we should all just take you as guilty, after all innocent people don’t get accused. Sounds about right.
Honestly feck that guy, and feck memphis and all the players who liked that post. People don't like it when we say that rape is hard to prove but it is. When you constantly have a lot of sex parties preying on young girls and claiming there was consent, then 10 of them accuse you of rape, it's hardly a conspiracy. Now he hasn't been found guilty and won't be doing jail time, but he's no fecking victim.
I can see why you're still a newbie five years in.
Reading replies here and on internet in general, it seems like if you are innocent and get accused of something like this, then no matter what legal battle you fight, you will always be perceived as guilty. Have said that I do know how difficult it is to prove rape charges. So rape victim and innocent person who is accused, both are let down by our system and society.
I trust the red cafe to declare a not guilty verdict guilty. The moral arbiters of the universe.
Perhaps one of the worst posts I have read on this forum. I'd like to understand what is going through your mind if this is actually what you believe.
I'm biased as a City fan - of course I want to believe that my club's player did not do the things he was accused of, so my opinion is practically worthless.
I followed the case very closely, to the extent that I would say I've probably seen everything that was made publicly available about what happened in the courtroom, and I would encourage everyone who feels the need to state their verdict to do the same thing. But I'm still looking at it through partizan eyes.
It's like the ending of Life of Pi. There are two possible answers and they are both absolutely terrible.
I followed the case very closely, to the extent that I would say I've probably seen everything that was made publicly available about what happened in the courtroom, and I would encourage everyone who feels the need to state their verdict to do the same thing. But I'm still looking at it through partizan eyes.
It's like the ending of Life of Pi. There are two possible answers and they are both absolutely terrible.
Have nothing to say about the case but I wonder how players like Mendy etc would fare getting back into top level football. I assume he was still playing every day whether it was a few kick ups or a bit of wally?
You don't lose your touch or your striking ability of a football ever imo (Well I haven't, I like to think) but just fitness, stamina, focus, practice of things like headers and using your weaker foot must all fall behind standards.
You don't lose your touch or your striking ability of a football ever imo (Well I haven't, I like to think) but just fitness, stamina, focus, practice of things like headers and using your weaker foot must all fall behind standards.
It's a factual statement.
It's also useless.
Very rarely is it mentioned after an acquittal in a case not involving rape/sexual assault. In the vast majority of cases involving other crimes, an acquittal is accepted as proof of "innocence" as far as the (idiotic) court of public opinion is concerned.
When it's mentioned in regards to sexual assault cases, the usually useless fact of "not guilty is not innocence" is mentioned. And when it is mentioned, mostly, it's not to inform people in an abstract sense of this fact. It's mostly mentioned by people who
1. Don't want the acquittal (the result of a trial by jury, cross-examination, introduction of testimony and evidence) to be taken into consideration by others when determining possibility of guilt of the defendant found not guilty
2. Believe that regardless of the proceedings of the trial, the defendant is guilty, for several reasons (stats on rape, believe women, defendant looks/acts guilty, etc)
It's not a neutral saying when said in these situations, and it's a sly way of couching how one actually feels. Which is why, despite that idiotic car crash of a post, the honesty has to be saluted.
Now if this doesn't apply to you and you have an urge to just let people know in the abstract that "not guilty is not innocent", and you do this for discussions on all crime from rape to jaywalking ("he was declared not guilty but that doesn't mean he didn't cross the street on red!!!"), then obviously this post doesn't apply to you
Wow!! Just wow! So according to you no woman is capable of lying or being deceitful and all women are the most honest and honorable of all of humanity. If that were the case then there would be no jails for women at all since they are all honorable and honest.
Wasnt there a woman about three or four months ago that made up all sorts of false accusations against guys and even beat herself with a hammer.
It's not neutral to say he is cast iron innocent, the victims should face charges, this is sick and can happen to any innocent man. Etc. Etc.
There is painfully little neutrality in any of the discussion.
At least one viewpoint is correct from a legal standpoint and isn't based off a misunderstanding of the UKs system.
And, if it were so useless, it simply wouldn't be the chosen language for so many legal frameworks, despite your say so, I'm afraid.
That’s not even close to what the poster said though.
Ignoring that, the UK legal system is based on the maxim of “innocent until proven guilty” this idea was founded and agreed upon over many years by some very smart and experienced people.
As others have pointed out “innocent people don’t get accused” and “he deserves it for being accused” are some of the dumbest arguments ever concocted.
The irony in proclaiming ‘Alhamdulillah’ after a court course where he detailed a hedonist lifestyle.
Have a good, long think now. What is it about rape cases that sets them apart from a lot of others? Could it be the fact that there's a sizable crowd of people ready to use verdicts like this one to discredit rape victims and/or scaremonger about lying women ruining the lives of (often famous) men through false rape accusations? In addition to ignorant people who just read "not guilty" and think "innocent" and start calling for the accusers to be punished? Yeah, that might be it. And because of that, some (like a me, and I'd wager most others who've done the same in this thread) feel a need to point out that no, "not guilty" does not necessarily mean the accused was innocent (or that the accusers are liars).
But you do you.
The conviction rate for rape, when it leads to a court, is actually very high. It was around 75% in 2021 in England, and it has been over 50% for the last 15 years.
And yes, it might well have been a conspiracy. Bragging that you fecked X, or texting that it was the best night of your life, to then later claim it was rape…I mean, you never know 100% for sure, but if doesn’t look very rapey.
Question for the mods but how come this thread is allowed but not the Greenwood one?
It's exactly what he said, as confirmed in his very own reply to me.
And, as far as I can see, were made by exactly one person.
This was closed during the trial and only opened on the verdict. I'd imagine my discussion is ok since charges were dropped