[ShepherdsDog]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/ ... nipeg.html

$1:

A teacher at Fort Richmond Collegiate in Winnipeg has been charged with sexual exploitation of a former student.
____________________________

Lussier noted the charges, which involve a male student who went to the school between 2006 and 2008, have not been proven in court.

Doesn't matter now, even if the teacher is exonerated. Her career has been destroyed because there has been an accusation.

[jeff744]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/story/2012/01/30/mb-sexual-exploitation-teacher-student-winnipeg.html

$1:

A teacher at Fort Richmond Collegiate in Winnipeg has been charged with sexual exploitation of a former student.
____________________________

Lussier noted the charges, which involve a male student who went to the school between 2006 and 2008, have not been proven in court.

Doesn't matter now, even if the teacher is exonerated. Her career has been destroyed because there has been an accusation.

Yup, which is why we need some kind of protection system for people in these kinds of careers so that their name is not published until found guilty. If innocent it is never published, any new company that breaks the rule gets to ensure that person never needs to work a day in their life again.

[2Cdo]

jeff744 jeff744:

Yup, which is why we need some kind of protection system for people in these kinds of careers so that their name is not published until found guilty. If innocent it is never published, any new company that breaks the rule gets to ensure that person never needs to work a day in their life again.

I've been saying that for years. Once found guilty we can splash their names and photos on TV and in the papers.

The problem is the names get published on page one of the papers when charged, but if found innocent that story is back on page 32 where no one ever sees it!

[BartSimpson]

On the opposite side of things if the name is published then other victims might come forward and give the prosecution an even better case against the accused.

[Unsound]

Damn you Bart, it's annoying when you make a good point that conflicts with what i was about to say.

I suppose I still have to lean toward not publishing names until guilt is proven though. I think that these kids of things are always known on the community anyways so other victims, if there are any, will still hear that a person has been charged.

Or possibly news organizations that wish to publish have to promise that the verdict, guilty or innocent, will also be published with just as much prominence...?

[ShepherdsDog]

Good point.....Graham James being a case in point. however, I think that those who make false accusations of sexual misconduct should face penalties that are just as severe as the penalties faced by actual molesters.

[Unsound]

I agree Shep, though I would add that they would probably have to be able to prove in court that the allegations were false and malicious. If a person could face punishment just for making an accusation that wasn't in the end proven on court I think it would make it too hard for victims to come forward.

[BartSimpson]

Unsound Unsound:

Damn you Bart, it's annoying when you make a good point that conflicts with what i was about to say.

Happy to be of service, sir!

Unsound Unsound:

I suppose I still have to lean toward not publishing names until guilt is proven though. I think that these kids of things are always known on the community anyways so other victims, if there are any, will still hear that a person has been charged.

Or possibly news organizations that wish to publish have to promise that the verdict, guilty or innocent, will also be published with just as much prominence...?

Once an indictment is handed down then I don't see the harm in the public knowing about it. And that can work both ways. One way is that more victims come forward to support the indictment and the other is that people come forward to offer exculpatory evidence on behalf of the accused.

You're dead right that a wrongful indictment screws up a person's life and that's why I've long wanted prosecutors not to be immune from being charged with malfeasance and malpractice when they knowingly accuse and prosecute innocent people.

[Brenda]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Unsound Unsound:

Damn you Bart, it's annoying when you make a good point that conflicts with what i was about to say.

Happy to be of service, sir!

Unsound Unsound:

I suppose I still have to lean toward not publishing names until guilt is proven though. I think that these kids of things are always known on the community anyways so other victims, if there are any, will still hear that a person has been charged.

Or possibly news organizations that wish to publish have to promise that the verdict, guilty or innocent, will also be published with just as much prominence...?

Once an indictment is handed down then I don't see the harm in the public knowing about it. And that can work both ways. One way is that more victims come forward to support the indictment and the other is that people come forward to offer exculpatory evidence on behalf of the accused.

You're dead right that a wrongful indictment screws up a person's life and that's why I've long wanted prosecutors not to be immune from being charged with malfeasance and malpractice when they knowingly accuse and prosecute innocent people.

to the both of you