Allegations of rape: Why are police asking victims for their phones?

[Cyclone 10]

No, you've now been clear that you think that victims should have their privacy invaded and rights violated.  I thought you'd accepted that victims do still retain a right to privacy and only have to report what they wish in their statement.  But no, you don't think that, despite having said it.

22 minutes ago, Cyclone said:

Of course the victim doesn't have to tell them anything

Except that if they do report the crime then you think that they should have no right to not have their phone seized.  Got it.

[Guest makapaka]

21 minutes ago, Cyclone said:

If you change from arguing one side to arguing the other then you have flipped your argument.  It's nothing to do with consideration, you've changed the point you are arguing.

 

That's fine if you've changed your mind of course, but be clear, do you think that the victim should always hand over their phone, or do you now not think that?  You can't think both.

There are very few circumstances where the phone of the victim of a rape will help.  This entire thing is about disproving the story of the victim.

So in the few circumstances where it would help you are ok for that information not to be made available? That would be unfortunate for the person who it would have helped wouldn't it?

 

Who do you think is trying to assist rapists by legislating to help disprove the victim?  Who would do that?

14 minutes ago, Cyclone said:

No, you've now been clear that you think that victims should have their privacy invaded and rights violated.  I thought you'd accepted that victims do still retain a right to privacy and only have to report what they wish in their statement.  But no, you don't think that, despite having said it.

Except that if they do report the crime then you think that they should have no right to not have their phone seized.  Got it.

Now you're definitely confused.

Edited May 2, 2019 by makapaka

[Cyclone 10]

That's up to the victim isn't it.  I've never suggested that the police can't ASK for the phone to be handed over.

 

You have seen that recently a number of high profile rape cases have collapsed due to the police and CPS failure to hand over evidence to the defence?  This appears to be related.  But it appears to be an entirely inappropriate response.

[Top Cats Hat 10]

This whole thing may fall foul of the European Court of Human Rights.

 

The right to privacy is protected by the Court but exemptions are made in cases where a suspect is being investigated for a criminal matter.

 

I very much doubt that the Court will allow a victim’s right to privacy to be exempted also. In fact I’m sure it won’t.

[Yeah but 0]

Outrage by certain people over the police having access to their phone for the purposes of an investigation is a Libertarian stance that is seldom reflected in any other part of these people's lives.

[Cyclone 10]

1 hour ago, Yeah but said:

Outrage by certain people over the police having access to their phone for the purposes of an investigation is a Libertarian stance that is seldom reflected in any other part of these people's lives.

What an odd thing to say.  Most people expect a right to privacy from the state.  I can't think of anyone who'd be happy to have their phone or other personal data seized simply for the act of reporting a crime.

[Guest makapaka]

25 minutes ago, Cyclone said:

What an odd thing to say.  Most people expect a right to privacy from the state.  I can't think of anyone who'd be happy to have their phone or other personal data seized simply for the act of reporting a crime.

They are not being seized - stop exagerrating.

 

People are being asked to sign consent forms granting permission.

 

[Top Cats Hat 10]

2 minutes ago, makapaka said:

 People are being asked to sign consent forms granting permission.

 

Under the threat that it may prevent a decision to charge the suspect being made.

 

That no longer makes it voluntary.

[Cyclone 10]

17 minutes ago, makapaka said:

They are not being seized - stop exagerrating.

 

People are being asked to sign consent forms granting permission.

 

And being told that if they don't then most likely no prosecution will take place.

It's quite clearly coercive.

[Guest makapaka]

1 minute ago, Cyclone said:

And being told that if they don't then most likely no prosecution will take place.

It's quite clearly coercive.

Coercive to what end? Are you back to the police trying to help out the rapists again?

Edited May 2, 2019 by makapaka

[Cyclone 10]

1 minute ago, makapaka said:

Coercive to what end? Are you back to the police trying to help out the rapists again?

Coercive to coerce the victim to hand over their phone.  I don't need to speculate as to why they are coercing this in order to see that it IS coercive.

 

Are you denying that it's coercive, a threat that no charge or prosecution will take place unless the victim complies.

[Guest makapaka]

2 minutes ago, Cyclone said:

Coercive to coerce the victim to hand over their phone.  I don't need to speculate as to why they are coercing this in order to see that it IS coercive.

 

Are you denying that it's coercive, a threat that no charge or prosecution will take place unless the victim complies.

Well you kind of do - because earlier you said;

 

"This entire thing is about disproving the story of the victim."

 

So presumably this forms part of the reason why you are against this.

 

You're also exagerrating again - people aren't being threatened.