Early notes from Meta:Brainstorm

The "innocent until proven guilty" argument in terms of consequences for illegal actions prior to a court finding Thayvian (talk) 19:44, October 22, 2013 (UTC)

Legal issues

Please continue this discussion at Talk:Name and shame#Legal issues Thayvian (talk) 23:58, March 22, 2014 (UTC)

The article really needs to discuss and link to resources about some of the legal issues that may come with calling out people's behavior. A possible retaliation by an abuser is to file a defamation lawsuit, which, regardless of truth or provability, will often cause real pain to victims both financially (winning doesn't necessarily recoup the thousands of dollars in legal fees and losing in some jurisdictions also carries jail terms in addition to costly financial damages) and from the psychological stress of having to relive their trauma in the face of victim blaming and invasive questioning from the opposing side (only in this case, there is the explicit rather than implicit assumption the victim is lying).

The risk isn't that high since most abusers also can't afford to file charges and wouldn't want to risk the lawsuit leading into an actual criminal investigation, but one that knows the evidence, court biases, and/or lack of financial ability for the victim to defend themselves are in their favor could very well end up winning regardless of the facts.

This is not to say that people shouldn't feel empowered to speak out against their abusers and warn others away from them, but they should understand and be prepared for the risks that come with publicly speaking on these topics. To pretend there isn't would be a great disservice to people that have already been greatly hurt by another person's actions. 18:05, March 22, 2014 (UTC) (Tor IP)

That section might actually fit better in Name and shame which already has some pros and cons discussion. I'll copy your comment to Talk:Name and shame and comment more there. Thayvian (talk) 23:57, March 22, 2014 (UTC)

Are the moderators here aware of the necessity of the presumption of innocence and that it underpins the legal systems of all the civilized countries in the world? Or is this all an elaborate working example of Poe's Law in which I have found myself ensnared? 21:01, January 26, 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I'm sure everyone is aware of the presumption of innocence in a court of law, but those standards do not have to apply in the "court of public opinion." For example, no one has any trouble with labeling Al Capone a gangster, even though he was only convicted of tax evasion. The presumption of innocence argument is that everyone is mistaken by calling him a gangster.Joe Cursio (talk) 15:05, January 28, 2016 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.