Since October 16, 2017, the hashtag \#metoo has been used by many women to speak up about Sexual Harassment they have experienced. By November, 2.3 million tweets and 77 million Facebook posts have used \#metoo hashtag. Sexual Harassment is a severe workplace code violation and in some cases a criminal offense. Every case of Sexual Harassment should be investigated by appropriate authorities. Unfortunately, in the current political climate any man accused of Sexual Harassment is presumed guilty by the Court of Public Opinion. Anyone who publicly supports accused men's Presumption of Innocence is subject to a stream of vile abuse himself or herself. Even though the Court of Public Opinion can not sentence anyone to incarceration, it can pressure any company to fire an employee and it can effectively blacklist a person. While Presumption of Innocence existed, it played an important part in protecting innocent men. While nationwide statistics may not be available, some local statistics illustrate the point. During the 2015-2016 academic year, 27 faculty and staff members of Northwestern University have been accused of Sexual Harassment. In 18 cases, complainant elected to proceed with formal resolution and 17 cases were investigated. Four of the accused were found guilty and lost their job, while 12 of the accused were acquitted. When the accused are presumed innocent, about 15\% of them are convicted. Presumption of Guilt in Sexual Harassment cases would bring drastic changes to every workplace. Almost all of the accused would be fired and blacklisted. Many people see the positive aspect of Presumption of Guilt -- the fact that more men guilty of Sexual Harassment would be blacklisted. But Presumption of Guilt has two negative aspects. First, it would get many innocent men blacklisted. Second, it would put every male employee in danger of being falsely accused and blacklisted. Even though most women would never make a false accusation, just one accusation is enough to destroy a man's career. Under Presumption of Guilt, hundreds of thousands of men per year will lose their careers to unsubstantiated accusations. Most men are valued by society and their families as providers. For them the loss of career would be a life-shattering experience. Many or most of male employees will live in fear of false accusations. Presumption of Guilt will bring enormous suffering to hundreds of thousands of innocent men. Hopefully it would have positive aspects not intended by those who support such policy. Hopefully, hundreds of thousands of men whose lives are destroyed by unsubstantiated accusations would find a new purpose in life -- advocating for Men's Human Rights. Hopefully, more men will understand that we are being discriminated against in many ways. Hopefully, the next generation of men will be conscious of the ways men are discriminated against and men's collective interests. We are not asking for understanding from those who are incapable of it. We are grateful to extraordinary men and especially women who publicly defend Presumption of Innocence.
Witch hunts of any kind are not beneficial to society. Today I noticed in an eatery I frequent that some men that had to walk through groups of people in there were holding their hands close to their bodies so no inadvertent "touching" occurred.
Until I saw the evidence, I presumed he was innocent. Now I know he is guilty as Clara Harris, Bette Broderick.
But he was found not guilty....what evidence? But yet you don’t believe eight women who had similar experiences who did not know each other and have nothing to gain. I am speaking about Judge Moore
I do not know about Judge Moore -- perhaps he is guilty. I am saying that presuming an accused guilty on one unsubstantiated accusation is a great injustice.
That is not what I have said. Any crime is wrong. Presumption of Innocence is not a license to commit crime. Presumption of Innocence is one of the most fundamental Human Rights.
Or even multiple unsubstantiated accusations. There are many cases of collusion between liars to destroy innocent men
The DNA evidence proved his guilt and no one but you said anything about Moore you are making assumptions about others.
Every case can be decided by a competent court. Presumption of Innocence is one of the most fundamental human rights.
Wrong. It did prove his guilt but he had a better defense team. Juries are made of people and sometimes they can ignore proof.
Daniel Holtzclaw, Giam Gomeshi just to name a couple. I know women who have been victims of rape and abuse as well. Most of them ( not all ) recover even if they always carry scars and they go on to live normal lives especially if their attacker is punished as he should be. On the other hand men falsely accused seldom recover. This is why a false accusation is as bad and as heinous as the crime of rape.
DNA evidence was destroyed in the Simpson case, there was no intact evidence in the Simpson case, Thanks to incompetence of the Sheriff's department as far as chain of custody of evidence etc...
