Man to sue after rape trial collapse

[pipelineaudio]

I'm sure they will after the investigation, and it was the prosecutor who actually insisted on getting the info. Which is refreshing, actually doing a proper job and not looking for wins.

Jeez! Give that prosecutor a medal and send him over the pond! Ours get rewarded for doubling down and even murdering people, no consequences

 

[Wayward son]

I'm lost. Where did the "phone records" come from? How do we know what the complainant said to her friends?

The police had 50,000 messages from the accusor - both text and recorded phone calls. They had also reviewed them and did not turn them over to either the prosecution or defense.

 

[Minoosh]

The police had 50,000 messages from the accusor - both text and recorded phone calls. They had also reviewed them and did not turn them over to either the prosecution or defense.

Thanks. That makes sense.

I wonder why it did not occur to her that the messages could hurt her case.

 

[smartcooky]

...A stated desire to have sex with him does not mean he didn't rape her after all.

Err, no. By doing so, she effectively said "yes".

By doing so in a text or email message, she has effectively told the world that fact.

Proceeding to a trial would be pointless, as no reasonable jury would have convicted him once those message were read out in court.

I hope they throw the book at her. Its women like this who make it all that much harder for REAL victims of rape to be heard.

 

[Minoosh]

Err, no. By doing so, she effectively said "yes".

By doing so in a text or email message, she has effectively told the world that fact.

Proceeding to a trial would be pointless, as no reasonable jury would have convicted him once those message were read out in court.

I hope they throw the book at her. Its women like this who make it all that much harder for REAL victims of rape to be heard.

Actually I think ponderingturtle makes a valid point. It's possible there were times when she didn't consent. But I agree it makes prosecution pointless.

If I understand the facts of this case - a big if - I wonder what she thought was going to happen. Presumably she knew she was giving police records that seriously undermined her allegations.

 

[smartcooky]

Actually I think ponderingturtle makes a valid point. It's possible there were times when she didn't consent. But I agree it makes prosecution pointless.

I have absolutely ZERO sympathy for any woman who says yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, no, and then cries rape.

I am very loathe to use the expression "she was asking for it", but in this very rare case, I think its applicable. I mean, what the hell did she think was going happen when she pleaded for sex from this guy in 40,000 messages?


The only thing I would say against the guy is that he ought to have realised he was dealing with an absolutely, bat-crap crazy bitch.. a real fruit-cake, and left well enought alone!

 

[Samson]

I have absolutely ZERO sympathy for any woman who says yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, no, and then cries rape.

I am very loathe to use the expression "she was asking for it", but in this very rare case, I think its applicable. I mean, what the hell did she think was going happen when she pleaded for sex from this guy in 40,000 messages?


The only thing I would say against the guy is that he ought to have realised he was dealing with an absolutely, bat-crap crazy bitch.. a real fruit-cake, and left well enought alone!

Louise Nicholas?

 

[Minoosh]

I have absolutely ZERO sympathy for any woman who says yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, no, and then cries rape.

That's not an impossible scenario.

I am very loathe to use the expression "she was asking for it", but in this very rare case, I think its applicable. I mean, what the hell did she think was going happen when she pleaded for sex from this guy in 40,000 messages?

I wonder that myself.

 

[Wayward son]

I have absolutely ZERO sympathy for any woman who says yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, no, and then cries rape.

If someone says no, then it doesn't matter if they had said yes a million times in a row before. It is still rape.

I am very loathe to use the expression "she was asking for it", but in this very rare case, I think its applicable. I mean, what the hell did she think was going happen when she pleaded for sex from this guy in 40,000 messages?

I don't think that it is applicable in this case, and I feel that you don't understand what happened in this case - which you seem to think was a situation in which someone repeatedly said yes, and then once said no, and therefore, for some bizarre reason, she deserves what happened to her. That is not at all what happened in this case. And in making the claim that you do you are accusing the defendant of committing a crime that he did not commit, and claiming that the accuser is a victim when she is not.

The accuser claimed that she was raped by defendant 6 times. She claimed that she had sex with him, did not enjoy it and did not consent.

The reality is that the accuser had sex with defendant many times - and consented. At the end of the summer, the defendant went back to university and broke off the relationship. She retaliated by claiming to the police that she was raped. The police failed to perform due diligence and simply believed her despite knowingly being in possession of information from her phone that showed she was lying and that confirmed the claims of the defendant.

This not only included a zillion messages about wanting sex - both before and after the alleged rapes occurred, but also messages about fantasizing about being raped, and a message to a friend of hers that said "It wasn't against my will or anything."

I am a person whose default position is to believe the victim, but that is not the mindset that the police or prosecutors should have. Sometimes people are just plain terrible human beings - and this woman appears to be one of them. The police opted to "believe the victim" even while knowing without a shadow of the doubt that the accuser was lying. They took things farther when they held back information from the prosecutor and defence. The police involved should be fired immediately, but they won't be. The accuser should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, but she won't be.

Decades ago black men used to lynched, or imprisoned based on faulty claims made by white women in a legal system in which the black men could not get a fair trial (if they were lucky enough to not be killed by a mob before). We understand that false claims of sexual assault happened back then. They were not common but they had devastating consequences.

False claims continue. They are not common but they have devastating consequences (the prosecutor has said that thankfully a grave injustice was avoided here - but that is not true - a grave injustice occurred for two years). These types of incidences also undermine real sexual assault claims, so those who are concerned about preventing sexual assault and punishing those who commit sexual assault should be the most adamant about ensuring this kind of injustice is prevented, but very few care at all.

 

[PhantomWolf]

Err, no. By doing so, she effectively said "yes".

That doesn't mean she can't say "No" afterwards.

By doing so in a text or email message, she has effectively told the world that fact.

It certainly would have made it near impossible to get beyond reasonable doubt.

Proceeding to a trial would be pointless, as no reasonable jury would have convicted him once those message were read out in court.

True

I hope they throw the book at her. Its women like this who make it all that much harder for REAL victims of rape to be heard.

Only if it's fully established that there was no actual rape at all. It sounds that way, but it's always best not to assume without all the facts.

 

[Wayward son]

I wonder that myself.

I imagine that she didn't think that the police would read her texts. Probably just felt they would look at her call log or contacts or something. This is not the first time where people have handed over their phones and then been surprised in court that the texts were looked at. It is a new world where there is a paper trail for a lot of our conversations, and many people for some reason seem to believe that their text conversations disappear because they, themselves, are no longer thinking about those conversations.

At the same time, I wouldn't generally assume that someone who makes up these types of claims is thinking logically about consequences.

 

[smartcooky]

If someone says no, then it doesn't matter if they had said yes a million times in a row before. It is still rape.

Perhaps, but I reckon I could still make a good case against the women for the civilian equivalent of entrapment. Her incessant badgering of the man for sex could be construed as luring him into committing a criminal act (the rape) in order to get him prosecuted.

In this case, it would be conspiracy to commit rape, she would be the "co-conspirator" and therefore an "accessory before the fact".

 

[Andy_Ross]

Another case collapsed today over late disclosure.
Met Police suspending all sex offence cases for review of disclosure processes.

Some figures around rape investigations on BBC today.

Over 46000 ongoing cases in the UK.
Each officer in the Met police sex offences squad has more than 20 cases at a time.

Main problem seems to be around phone and social media records due to the amount of data that needs to be reviewed.

 

[Nessie]

Another case collapsed today over late disclosure.
Met Police suspending all sex offence cases for review of disclosure processes.

Some figures around rape investigations on BBC today.

Over 46000 ongoing cases in the UK.
Each officer in the Met police sex offences squad has more than 20 cases at a time.

Main problem seems to be around phone and social media records due to the amount of data that needs to be reviewed.

The irony being, it would help to disclose the evidence and let the defence review it!

 

[Nessie]

From an MP accused of rape,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42417553

"But Mr Evans, who is meeting Mr Allan in the House of Commons later, said the late disclosure of evidence is "common" in investigations.

Speaking to BBC Radio 5 Live, he said: "It seems to be in too many cases that police are cherry-picking the evidence that is there in order to get a prosecution.

"That is not what the justice system is about - it should follow the evidence."

 

[Darat]

From an MP accused of rape,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42417553

"But Mr Evans, who is meeting Mr Allan in the House of Commons later, said the late disclosure of evidence is "common" in investigations.

Speaking to BBC Radio 5 Live, he said: "It seems to be in too many cases that police are cherry-picking the evidence that is there in order to get a prosecution.

"That is not what the justice system is about - it should follow the evidence."

There are I think two levels of disclosure - one is the police to prosecution service - which seems to be where the current example failed - and then the disclosure of evidence to the defence by the prosecution.

 

[zooterkin]

That doesn't mean she can't say "No" afterwards.

Certainly true; consent can be withdrawn at any point. But if she was, as I believe was what happened, pestering for more sex after the time she later alleged was when the rape occurred, then I don't think she has a convincing case.

 

[ponderingturtle]

The limited details is another reason why we should presume his innocence.

I am a bit taken a back that you think reporting a rape is a bad idea. Why?

All it leads to is humiliation by the police and prosecution for no benefit.

http://www.businessinsider.com/why-i-never-reported-my-rapist-2016-10

Really reporting rape just isn't worth it most of the time.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Only if it didn't happen.

You should really ponder that some more,,

We don't know that it didn't happen, the only report was that she sent messages about wanting to have sex with him. See you can intend to have sex and it can still be rape. Shocking I know but intent at one point does not remove the need for consent at the time and it also does not preclude withdrawal of consent.

Up next trying to prove that sex workers can be raped instead of just treating it as a monetary crime of non payment for services.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Err, no. By doing so, she effectively said "yes".

Yep just like being married means you agree to sex and hence marital rape is just not a things that is possible. You said yes at the altar so you can't suddenly say no now.

Wanting to have sex with someone doesn't mean that they can't rape you.