Domestic abuse law 'could change Scotland'

Comms69

The problem ofcourse is in prosecution, many victims don't want it, and some even actively fight it.


Punitive laws only work when there is education, support and cooperation.

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth

I doubt this will solve the problems caused when two teams from Glasgow meet!

Mrs_Arcanum

Comms69 wrote: »

The problem ofcourse is in prosecution, many victims don't want it, and some even actively fight it.


Punitive laws only work when there is education, support and cooperation.

Think the victim aspect is what the Scottish law is trying to address.

unforeseen

I wonder if the author of this was also involved in drafting the DDA?

Both mention thinking an action that might cause harm as sufficient grounds to push for a prosecution.


Woolly legislation from a woolly mind. Trying to make legislation a total catch-all

Comms69

Mrs_Arcanum wrote: »

Think the victim aspect is what the Scottish law is trying to address.

Yes but the law cannot force one to give evidence, nor can it prevent the victim giving evidence on behalf of the defendant

Mrs_Arcanum

Comms69 wrote: »

Yes but the law cannot force one to give evidence, nor can it prevent the victim giving evidence on behalf of the defendant

True. What it does go is make the court look at what would be classed as reasonable behaviour, in an independent way, without the accused being able to blame the victim.

unforeseen

So they will be basing their decision on third party evidence if the alleged victim's isn't prepared to give evidence?

The third party of course will only have small snapshots of behaviour. Like negative reviews, these will stand out in the witnesses mind because people will tend to ignore the 95% positive and concentrate and extrapolate on the 5% negative.

unholyangel

unforeseen wrote: »

So they will be basing their decision on third party evidence if the alleged victim's isn't prepared to give evidence?

The third party of course will only have small snapshots of behaviour. Like negative reviews, these will stand out in the witnesses mind because people will tend to ignore the 95% positive and concentrate and extrapolate on the 5% negative.

I might be misunderstanding but of course they're going to focus on the negative - the 95% positive might help get a more lenient sentence but it has no bearing on whether an offence is committed the other 5%.

The same way if you shoplift once, they won't focus on all the times you paid, just the time you didn't.

Pixie5740

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth wrote: »

I doubt this will solve the problems caused when two teams from Glasgow meet!

You're forgetting about the Jags.

unforeseen

unholyangel wrote: »

I might be misunderstanding but of course they're going to focus on the negative - the 95% positive might help get a more lenient sentence but it has no bearing on whether an offence is committed the other 5%.

The same way if you shoplift once, they won't focus on all the times you paid, just the time you didn't.

You have misunderstood. The only evidence put forward will be the negative with probably no reference to the background etc.it could be a one from, the witness may have a grudge against the accused. Remember this could be a case that may not have been instigated by the alleged victim who also refuse to give evidence either way.

Your example fails because the court is not made aware of previous convictions UNTIL guilt or innocence has been declared