Changes in how rape will be investigated- about time!

Bigloads and their ilk are so boring. They like to come on these threads, wave their willies around for a bit then leave having convinced themselves they've told those illogical feminists how the world really works

I wonder if they realise what a stereotype they really are

Also, I think this idea that a rule or guideline change shouldn't be implemented in case someone finds a way to use it in a way its not intended is all very well and good but name a law or guideline that doesn't have that problem already? It's not like because there's a law the person committing the crime immediately rolls over and says, "You're right, I did it. This is how." Let's get real here.

I wouldn't worry too much about bigloads Sardine.

He's already said he'll stay away from women. He's decided to keep himself away from the rest of the world. We should be really happy about that.

i agree i don`t see modern woman certainly not british ones somewhere i would like to spend the rest of my days with, i do not condone rape at all i said i felt the laws in this country protect woman more than men.

and they do ,

You are assuming that such a case would get to court morebeta.

There is a long process between somebody reporting a rape case and somebody being cross examined by a barrister, even assuming they report the rape in the first place.

The CPS would have to decide to prosecute a case on no more evidence than one person's word against another - even with the new guidance, is this really likely? - and the person who reported the case would have to be willing to go to trial. If I were going to stitch somebody up, I think there are easier methods.

Poor old bigloads. I know it's hard to attract quality women when you

A) basically hate women - the quality ones totally don't dig it
B) live through eastenders

Hating women yet curiously obsessed by them, poor old biggers.

As I repeatedly said, the issue is in those cases where there is neither a verbalised 'yes' or a verbalised 'no'. Was she enthusiastic is just a qualitative judgement impossible to prove and very much in the eye of the beholder. I think this guidance will not help and could harm women if we start off down the road of relying on 'non-verbal' signals open to interpretation - at worse it opens up the 'well she came to my flat and took her clothes off and she didn't say no' as a legitimate defence.

You've already said yourself that you believed that someone coming to your house and taking her clothes off indicated consent. Many men think that way MoreBeta and it is already used in court cases as a way of implying that rape didn't happen.
What this guidance actually does is say that even if a woman comes to someone's house and takes her clothes off, that is not consent. So it actually guards against the situation you are worried about.
What it says is, it doesn't matter if a woman is buck naked, she must actually be participating and participating freely, not out of fear or inability to say no.

I still don't understand why you have such a problem with this. Is it because you feel you raped someone when you were younger? Your attitude would indicate that you had the potential to be a rapist.

And now you say that you think a good approach after rape is to tell the woman that if she reports you, you will murder her.

Scary.

Sorry but these guidelines are a change in the way the legal process operates. The onus will be on the man to explain himself in the police station well before it gets to court and a refusal to do so which he is perfectly entitled to is very likely to lead to a charge because he has not been wiling to explain how he got a positive 'yes' consent.

This is true of anyone charged or accused of any crime. Let's run through an alternative scenario:

Police: "Sir, you've been accused of breaking into the house over there and stealing the tv."
Person: "No no, that wasn't me. I was told by the homeowner I could take the tv."
Police: "Really? Right, can you give me some details - when and where did the homeowner suggest this? Did she offer you a time to collect the TV? Did you agree how you would remove it and when?"

At this point, the accused can go silent. Or he can state out that he arrived, as agreed, at 15:00 on Tuesday, was let into the house and removed the TV in his white van.

Assuming the accused is NOT innocent, he's going to be unlikely to provide any of this detail. In addition, the police will simultaneously be looking at other evidence eg history of the homeowner and the accused ever actually talking to each other, signs of breaking and entering etc. They'll then make a decision on whether or not to take the case further. It's not like they simply charge him and send him to court on a once off accusation by the person who originally owned the TV.

So why is it so difficult to accept similar guidelines for other crimes such as rape? This is not a change in how the process operates and under what conditions rape is considered rape. It's simply saying that the accused needs to at least attempt to explain himself.

And let's face it, if he says, "We got into bed, got naked and she kissed and cuddled me" the chances are that the police are going to say, "Okay then. this will be dropped." even if the woman says that she subsequently changed her mind as the police, even if they believe the woman, are going to find it very hard to prove that the man is lying.

No I think you are scary.

The things you are writing are scary.

You don't think men who are suspected of rape should be fully questioned by the police
You think there's "no such thing as rape" only delayed acceptance
You see women as nothing more than sadistic selfish leeches who happen to have holes that you like to fuck so sometimes you pay them for that even though you hate them

You sound scary. I'm perfectly serious.

im not scary , but yes if i was the rapist sort i would take this tact , get the victim to agree or they end up in the channel with cement jimmy choos

And this is a good tactic in your view.

it means the tactics of the rapist is to confirm acceptance is it not ?

guy rapes bird , guy says thanks for the lovely night on facebook twitter to give evidence of acceptance .

What does that mean bigloads?

So you rape someone and then threaten them until they say that they wanted it?

You guys are getting that this person is actually a scary bastard aren;t you? I mean it's funny and all but seriously it's kind of not?

i have kids?? where???

The joy of a man of a certain age still being able to come in his own mouth.

Life has been good to him indeed.

Right

So the man on this thread:

Uses prostitutes
Doesn't think men who are suspected of rape should be questioned by the police
Thinks women are all after his money and his sperm in a mug and has what is obviously a hugely inflated sense of his own appeal

Um.

petula i am sure many hard working men have to provide for your kids already

I grovel an apology, and have seen my error.

Thankfully I have you guys and bigloads to show me the way.