CreateDebate



Welcome to CreateDebate!

CreateDebate is a social tool that democratizes the decision-making process through online debate. Join Now!
  • Find a debate you care about.
  • Read arguments and vote the best up and the worst down.
  • Earn points and become a thought leader!

To learn more, check out the FAQ or Tour.



Be Yourself

Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.

Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.


Twitter
Twitter addict? Follow us and be the first to find out when debates become popular!


pic
Identify Ally
Declare Enemy
Challenge to a Debate
Report This User

Allies
View All
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic


Enemies
View All
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic


Hostiles
View All
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic


RSS Atrag

Reward Points:5434
Efficiency: Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive).

Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high.
89%
Arguments:7058
Debates:148
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
10 most recent arguments.
1 point

Some of his policies were left: protection of the environment, helping children and animals, banning smoking in the workplace.

These are his right wing policies: eugenics, exterminations of the jewish race, invasion other countries as a means of furthering the economy.

1 point

Well then of course it does exist. Your president jokes about grabbing people by the pussy and his supporters cheer him for it.

2 points

Especially if its a Chinese restaurant. You are supporting their economy by buying that hat.

1 point

Define the term rape culture and we can discuss whether it exists or not

.

1 point

HOW AND?

TOTAL SUBTRACT LOVE INDUSTRY DO EVERYTHING NEED!!!

No idea what youre talking about love.

1 point

This is incorrect as well. The suspect is detained and interviewed, or simply agrees to an interview. They aren’t arrested. That’s well after the investigators have something to interview them about. Meaning they already found some amount of corroboration.

You cannot be 'detained' but not 'arrested'. Maybe you mean something else. I'm a law graduate btw. You think if someone is accused of abusing a child they are invited to the police station for a voluntary chat?

If some child says that Mr.Rogers from TV touched him at school, but Mr.Rogers has never been to that school, no one is going to call in Mr.Rogers for an interview. You may call that evidence that damages the allegation, but what it actually is, is a specific lack of corroboration.

You confused about lack of corroborating evidence and evidence for the defense that shows innocence. The fact that he isn't there is evidence for the defense. If he were at school, it wouldn't be evidence of anything.

Anytime an allegation is denied, there’s evidence to consider for multiple scenarios either for or against the accusation. This is weighed by investigators and prosecutors to determine if the accusation is probably true or probably not. If it is probably true, then the police have probable cause for an arrest. If it is probably not, then I’m not likely to hear about it, and if I hear about it, I will determine then if I agree that it probably didn’t happen.

Means motive and opportunity. All of those are fulfilled by a child saying they were abused by someone who has opportunity to be alone with them.

The fact that it is done by someone the child trusts is exactly why it is often unreported, and the crime repeated. When this happens, a pattern is created that can be investigated. When allegations are made, and are true, patterns corroborate. It is rare that a thing happens once. When it does, finding that they were never even alone together is lack of corroboration. Inconsistent accounts are considered. There’s always something when there’s something to it.

I don't know how to explain it to you... it is just fact that people get convicted of sexual abuse of a child even if its just once. I guess google news reports if you dont believe me...?

A specialist who is trained to interview children is brought in, otherwise small kids tend to say what they think the adult interviewer wants to hear (including baseless accusations). Interviews can be checked for consistency, and inconsistencies can be analyzed by psychologists.

Children don't usually lie in that way, but they are more likely to do it than adults are. But yes the person making the allegation can be questioned multiple times. This is often AFTER the initial arrest is made.

1 point

One example is the very recent Catholic Church abuse scandal where over 1,000 identifiable credible allegations were brought to light in an organization that is practiced at covering them up. Crimes create evidence.

The thing that produced the evidence was that other adults knew about it and did nothing. Hence the scandal.

Beyond reasonable doubt gets convictions. Probable cause gets arrests and is a much lower standard. Accusations are sometimes baseless and investigations can often show this.

You seem stuck on this point. If you take your child to the police station and the child tells the police that they have been abused, the perpetrator is arrested and interviewed.

Sometimes there are very troubled kids with substantial emotional and behavioral issues who baselessly accuse numerous people. This is more likely in bigger schools with more kids. These allegations are treated seriously but descretely with the credibility of the accusation established quickly. I say this because it is likely that a teacher in a big school near you was once accused baselessly, but you never heard about it.

Yes sometimes that happens and the defense has a huge task trying to discrete the childs testimony. You are talking about an allegation being made AND evidence that damages that allegation.

Seriously.. the majority of child sexual abuse is committed by someone the child trusts. In the case of sexual touching, when the child is alone, what evidence can there possibly be other than the allegation?

1 point

None of those pieces of evidence usually exist with child sexual abuse cases unfortunately. It is often the offenders word against the victims. This will often lead to not being able to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Personally, I would not be willing to trust anyone that a child has accused and would generally assume that there is a real chance he did in fact abuse the child.

1 point

Thats very liberal of you. I would say most people wouldn't want to trust someone to look after their kids if another kid has accused them of sexual abuse.

1 point

Insincere political blah blahs

.

About Me


Biographical Information
Gender: Male
Marital Status: Single
Political Party: Independent
Country: Spain

Want an easy way to create new debates about cool web pages? Click Here