Well, I'm not responsible for the title, but it doesn't seem like the charges deserve any credence, let alone that they should result in a conviction, so "unbelievable" is about right.
How can you say it doesn't deserve any credence ? What if I say it deserve? Your opinion vs my opinion then.
Well, "common" may be overstating it, but it's true that some paedophiles choose to become teachers in order to access children.
In such cases, though, it's also common for them to give off all kinds of other "danger signs" that other people pick up
Some pedo cases only opened 20-30 yrs later, once victims are adults. No, signs not always visible.
A genuine paedophile working in a school who has accusations made against him and is then supported by his wife, family, colleagues, and other students? Who has a normal and healthy sexual relationship with another adult? Who has never even been accused of any such impropriety before? Bantleman would be the first in the world, I think.
Nope. A lot of pedos have very credible public life
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elm_Guest_House_child_abuse_scandal
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rochdale_sex_trafficking_gang
> You cant 100% control children and what they are going to say. Everything is 50-50/chance. You can't bribe them.. Fixing a kid testimony is risky. And even a layman can see if something is being staged.
Well, which is why the "investigators" went to such lengths to coach the children on the answers they should give, and refrained from recording
Its not recorded, so your claim cant be proved. Isn't the defendant also have access to questions the children? He can get child-experts to ask non-direct questions to get the truth. My wife can do this to her students to get more info to er students home conditions. Experts should be even more capable.
Unless they don't have access to question the children. That would be unfair.
> some judges take bribes, but I have to say, it is not as often as you think.. usually they only take of they are given an "offer they cant refuse" such as: take this money, or ill take your daughter. Basically bribes come from people in (political/exonomical) power.
This claim appears to contradict everything that every reputable international anti-corruption agency has ever said about judicial corruption in Indonesia. I'm sure, though, that you have some evidence to support this claim?
No evidence. Just life experience. I know several judges. Also, in a family vs well established rich educational institution... Who is more likely to bribe?