Oxford Union president rape allegations - alumni open letter

Are all feminists and rape victims, judge jury and executioner?

I can see people ringing up the police as we speak.

Chunky,

Really? So, if I accuse you of something you know you are totally innocent of, you will step aside? It seems like an ideal instrument of revenge if that is the case.

He shouldn't have to be pushed, no-one should. When you're being investigated for a serious crime you step aside. When you're being investigated for something at work, you'd be asked to step aside - it's totally normal and common practice.

If I'd been accused of a crime I would step aside during investigations, if for no other reason than that I wouldn't be able to give anywhere near to 100% to my work due to worry.

I think it shows a lack of regard for the position, and for the seriousness of the crime and its affect on the victims (or complete faith in the justice system/his lawyers, or enormous narcissism) not to step down.

How do you know btw, that I am not a nc from earlier on this thread[I am btw]

If you want privacy, discuss this sort of thing on a private Facebook group or something.
Nothing on mumsnet is private!

LS. This isnt your private thread!
Any poster at any time can add to any thread on mumsnet.

It is standard practice to step down in the public sector. However, there is no real choice. You are pushed regardless. It actually causes a lot of resentment and anger when someone is forced to leave a role they enjoy whilst an investigation goes on.

If a choice was given most would continue. This man had a choice. He said he had done nothing wrong, he wasn't charged, he didn't bow to pressure. Good on him.

But people do step aside all the time. For many reasons.

It is a perfectly normal thing to do. Him refusing to do it was not what normally happens, which is why this whole bloody thread is about. Although clearly some people are perfectly happy to assume they know what the thread is about, and barge in and tell all the posters who have been on here since May to shut up and piss off.

I am really annoyed about that.

ppplease that is what this whole thread is about.

I can only assume you haven't bothered reading it.

WTF telling people to go and start another thread about the exact issue that this entire thread is about in the first place.

That's just lazy. Kind of shoddy too.

They shouldn't need pushing.

If it were standard to step aside in rape cases, the 'false accusations ruin lives' trope would have far less power. By pushing people to see rape accusations as something to be treated differently from anything else, you reinforce the idea this is something you expect to damage a man's life, and you add to that problem.

They are pushed by their employers.
Different thing all together if you have a choice.

There is a thread that could be started about whether public servants and a few others should be pushed.
I would have to take a think about that as the thread progressed.

Or even something like misappropriation of funds. I think there would be understanding that his position was untenable while investigations were ongoing.

It is standard practice.

This thread has me a bit baffled.

I'm confused about this. When MPs / police officers / teachers / MDs / charity heads etc etc etc step aside while investigations into serious crimes are ongoing no-one bats an eyelid.

In this case though apparently an exception should be made. Is it because he was accused of rape or adults? Rather than say child sexual abuse or murder?

love - they're posting because they're jumping on the bandwagon of handwringing 'poor man his life is ruined innit' bollocks.

They don't actually care about the situation, they just want to shout down anyone who suggests it may be a tiny bit less simple than evil feminists picking on some poor, under-privileged lad.

Oh, FFS.

Are you actually incapable of reading?

It's got nothing to do with guilt or innocence. Does being a 'poor bloke' mean you get free rein to be a total tosser? No.

For most adults, fun things like being president of a debate Union come with a little responsibility. He shouldn't have been allowed to throw his hands in the air and say 'ooh, not for me, I'm so special and different!'

I am confused by some of these posts. He's not been to court, has he? Is there are reason that some people are posting that he has?

I am also interested that some people want to do away with the current situation where it is standard practice for people accused of serious crimes to step aside from their job/role while investigations are ongoing. Can any of you expand on those thoughts at all?

Leave the poor bloke alone.

He's innocent ffs!

There was not enough evidence, deal with it.

Oh, FFS.

Why does there always have to be this slew of speculation about 'court verdicts' (non-extant in this case anyway)?

Can't we just accept it is totally irrelevant what anyone except he, the people who might have charged him, and the police think about his innocence or guilt?

What is relevant is his shitty attitude towards rape survivors. He could have stepped aside. He didn't bother because a few weeks of his hobby seemed more important - even if that meant trying to steal money from the Union and spoiling things for everyone else. He sounds a right charmer.

He's only young, but he should know better.

It wasn't a court verdict was it? I thought that no charges had been brought. Or have I misread the thread.

For the umpteenth time, it is standard practice for people accused of serious crimes to step aside if they are in a position of power influence etc while the process is ongoing. It happens all the time. It is quite normal and usual. What was not normal and usual about this was that he refused to step aside while investigations into a serious crime were ongoing.

I personally think that it is correct for people to do so. Which is why it is what normally happens.

leave the poor bloke alone.

He's had a terrible time and he doesnt need a load of feminist vigilantes casting aspersions on the court verdict.

There was not enough evidence, deal with it.

Machinations

Stewie,

He is not necessarily falsely accused but what is a fact is that there is insufficient evidence behind the accusation to overcome the first legal hurdle and proceed to trial.

Anyone can accuse anyone of anything. To the refrain of 'why would they'', it seems in this case there were a lot of political macho nations around the Oxford Union, most of which I don't begin to understand. However (and all I have read is a little coverage and Subday Times article) there is potential motive for a false accusation.

I dont really care how sad that makes the accused person

and you have no empathy. None whatsoever. How very sad for you and anyone else around you.

I hope that you are never on any jury. That could be catastrophic.