I've never seen your face ... but I expect I'd be able to see a hooked nose or a scar over your left eye or .... if you weren't wearing a disguise.
Human Wrongs, Not Rights Abused Here By the Veil
- Thread starter dumpthemonarchy
- Start date
I've never seen your face ... but I expect I'd be able to see a hooked nose or a scar over your left eye or .... if you weren't wearing a disguise.
All the better to hear you with. The cold wet nose is for ID too ... but humans are so uptight about that.... ;-)
..... So, at the moment that the police establish that you are a cooperative witness, they choose not to ask the victim that will assist in ID-ing the perpetrator or simply disregard any info that the victim may have given by the victim?
When it comes to minorities, my attitude is that their beliefs, their culture should be accommodated wherever possible. Here I don’t see what is going to be achieved by asking the woman to uncover her face in the courtroom. If she wants to continue wearing niqab in court, I don’t see what the big deal is about.
My understanding is that in Sharia law, if a woman accuses a man of rape and cannot prove her claim, she can then be charged with adultery and stoned to death if convicted.
Scott Free, my understanding is that US law works the same way as Canadian law. In the case of assault, murder or rape, it is the state which brings the prosecution (same as Crown does in Canada), not the victim. So I don’t see how anybody can be confused by watching American TV.
I think it is just the general ignorance of the people, that many of them seem to be unaware of the fact, I don’t think US TV is to blame (though it can legitimately be blamed for many things).
The fact that anyone would expect a woman to strip herself of what she feels to be her modest clothing, in order to appear before men accused of raping her, is far more troubling, degrading, and misogynistic, than the phenomena of the burqas and niqabs.
They can see her just fine without having to violate her personal security even further.
They can see her just fine without having to violate her personal security even further.
Would it be equally fair fro the accused to wear a deep-set hoodie, dark glasses and ball-cap that covered their identifying features, assuming that this was their accepted dress?
I don't agree with granting criminals, even accused criminals, the luxury of religious consideration, or the luxury of freedom or security of person if it impedes an investigation or trial. Take away their kirpans and prayer beads for a trial... take blood for DNA testing regardless of their views, no problem.
The defining difference is that they are the accused. She is a victim, not the accused. She is not on trial. She has not given up through action, her right to personal security. Only the accused, and the eventual prisoners, have any rights removed when they enter into the legal process. Not the victims.
That is up to the judge, it is his court. If the judge doesn't object, why should anybody else?
How about if the accused insisted that it was their right regardless of what the leagl system or judge said?
That is what this issue is all about.
That is what this issue is all about.
They can insist all they want. When you enter the legal system as an accused person, you are removed of your rights to certain freedoms. That's the way the law works.
those rights and freedoms are removed only once the accused is convicted.
Innocent until proven guilty.
Innocent until proven guilty.
Nope... in many legal cases those rights are often curtailed through imprisonment until the issue is resolved.
Only in very few. In addition, the vast majority are able to post a security bond and gain their freedom until the trial.
Sorry Karrie, but you are mistaken.
Sorry Karrie, but you are mistaken.
We are in Iraq did we do what the Iraqis do?
We are in Afghanistan
We are in Pakistan
We never follow the rule Jack
No Morgan, I am not mistaken. The accused are the ones on trial, not the victims. They are the ones who the court has a right to curtail freedoms on, NOT the victims, NOT the witnesses.
Then explain how an accused individual can post a bond and se freedom?... this is impossible if the individual is guilty until proven innocent, right?
In the US, a Confrontation Clause allows the accused to face his/her accuser "eye to eye". That right isn't guaranteed in Canada.
Judge to hear arguments over right to wear veil - Canada - Canoe.ca
Judge to hear arguments over right to wear veil - Canada - Canoe.ca