BBC Sounds so much like a state run media..

londonTiger

Gingernutty wrote: »

The article states the major differences in how the UK and the US CJS' deal with sex crimes.

The US doesn't have a uniform method of dealing with any cases as the different states have varying laws.

A suspect who commits a crime in one state and then skips over the state line to another has to be extradited as if in another country.

To point out the differences doesn't mean that the BBC is left wing.

A statute of limitations means that those who don't have the money or influence to pursue a case would eventually have to give up as there would be no point in carrying it on.

How is that right?

The fact that there is no statute of limitations here means that every case is open until solved. Surely that's fairer?

I don't want to discuss statute of limitations, becuse we can go backwards and forwards. I just didn't like the tone of the BBC article. It's like they're missing the forest for the trees. "hey, our justice system is better than theirs". Meanwhile there are some extremely shocking cases in our midst that we're covering up.

What bill crosby did sounds like it pales in comparison to what the mp and the lord are accused of. Not to mention that we have something called an injuction which is utterly ridiculous.

Last year an injunction was used to stop a footballer from being named in a sex triangle involving 2 brothers and their wives. Everyone knows who they are but we're legally barred from mentioning their names.. Great justice system indeed!

geerex

vuvuzela wrote: »

I've made up my mind, as you suggest, and to me it doesn't read like you say at all - it seems quite balanced. You simply sound like you've got an axe to grind with the BBC (or with all the immigrants you mention) and are deliberately looking to find fault with them. It's a bit odd.

You don't live in London, do you?

asajj

londonTiger wrote: »

Whenever I read or hear someone say that a centerist organisation like the BBC is biased I immediately think they are the ones who are actually very skewed to one side. Sure enough I'm ususally right, there is nothing biased about BBCs reporting of Palestine Israel conflict. Actually it could be argued that the BBC is complicit with Israel in that it does not report on the day to day hardships, sanction and economic extortion that Palestinians face.

Israel repeatedly bars UN observers and international press like the BBC from gaining access to parts of Israel that would make it appear in poor light to the international press but the BBC does not mention it.

What's more due to Israels sanction of the palestinian territories, the only access for international observers into Palestinian lands is through Israel and Israel flatly refuses access by international media to these places.

gaza is blockaded, West bank has checkpoints everywhere by occupied IDF and they refuse access to international media without a permit from Israel.

The BBC is firmly on the fence on this issue.

Exactly my thoughts and they are always first to the migrant blaming party too

DKLS

Their model is dying, technology is making auntie beeb irrelevant. If it isn't pay per view in the next 5 years I would be very surprised.

NICHOLAS_2

I have never had a tv license and never will unless it becomes a real law, but it seemed like a reasonable article. The BBC seem to try to educate as well as entertain. No one in the UK would want to read about how the Canadian sex laws differ to the USA's really, would they? And UK people will only be marginally interested in it thanks to the likes of touchy feely jimmy and a whole host of national treasures caught in compromising positions - otherwise they probably wouldn't have posted it.

It certainly beats Russia Today, now that really is a sack of !!!!.