Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think "being drunk" is no defence for raping someone

259 replies

SmashingNarcissistsMirrors · 08/03/2011 12:15

i'm absolutely shocked by this case where a man has been acquited of raping a woman because he was so drunk he thought she was his girlfriend and didn't realise he was in the wrong bedroom.

this is so so wrong. how many men will now use "being drunk" as a defence?

not only this but according to the article the girlfriend had earlier said she was too ill for sex. plus the victims phone was found dismantled in the mans sock when he was arrested.

how can this happen?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1363964/Haydor-Khan-cleared-rape-said-thought-I-BRUNETTE-girlfriend.html

OP posts:
KnittedBreast · 08/03/2011 12:56

i suppose the argument is that his gf might have changed her mind after saying she didnt want sex earleir

Original poster
SmashingNarcissistsMirrors · 08/03/2011 12:57

the consent seems to have been him saying she "touched" him in such a way it signalled consent.

lying bastard.

OP posts:
LaWeasel · 08/03/2011 13:00

How can you be so drunk you don't realise you are raping the wrong woman but still sober enough to notice them touching you in a consentual way??

I guess that touch is what has been amplified into reasonable doubt. Even though that is the only part that is he said she said. And the he was intending to rape his gf part doesn't seem to be.

Gemsy83 · 08/03/2011 13:01

Sorry but to the people saying 'how she didnt wake up is beyond me' sounds like an underhand way of yet AGAIN blaming the woman for BEING raped....no wonder men dont get convicted really...

ZZZenAgain · 08/03/2011 13:01

possibly, that and the fact he apparently left once she awoke before ejaculating (sorry if that is too graphic), broke it off as it were

mayorquimby · 08/03/2011 13:01

"If he'd gone back to his own room and had sex with his sleeping girlfriend who had clearly stated earlier she did not want sex, she had then woken up and decided to press charges, does that mean it couldn't be considered as rape?"

No that would be rape as well, if that is what would have happened. However, per the article, he claims that she touched him in a way that indicated his gf's consent. This could mean anything. It could mean that he went and got into the bed, and in her sleep the woman snuggled into him/rubbed him etc. and he thinking it was his girlfriend, thought this meant she had changed her mind and was initiating sex and that she was in fact awake.
Or it could mean that he initiated sex while he thought his gf was still asleep and knew she had earlier said she didn't want sex and then only after he had began did he feel touches which he thought indicated the consent of his gf.

Once again, this isn't me trying to justify what he did, just trying to put forward possible points as there are certain points which are unclear.

TotemPole · 08/03/2011 13:02

Unless there is something major not being reported it does sound like a horribly biased judgement.

The phone in his sock.

Claiming he was so drunk to not recognise his own girlfriend. The victim is a size 6 and blonde. His girlfriend is size 12 and a brunette.

Claiming he was so drunk, yet managed to undress her.

There must be something missing from the article.

Tortoiseonthehalfshell · 08/03/2011 13:10

Or there is nothing missing from the article and it's yet another example of juries scrambling to find any possible reason, no matter how unlikely, to acquit an accused rapist.

Why would you assume there's something missing from the article? This happens ALL THE TIME.

sethstarkaddersmackerel · 08/03/2011 13:16

I agree with Tortoise and LaWeasel, unfortunately.

mayorquimby · 08/03/2011 13:16

Well I'd be weary that there may be parts missing from the article only because it is written to portray one side of the story and it's in the DM.
Not that I'd automatically assume that there is definitely some completely reasonable and golden piece of evidence that they've deliberately missed out, but that without reading the transcript myself (or at least a few reports on the case from various sources) there may be context or mitigations as to the defendants testimony which may provide some logic as to how the jury found there to be reasonable doubt.

TotemPole · 08/03/2011 13:17

This is an unusual case, isn't it?

I don't understand how he could mix up the two women, no matter how drunk he is.

AyeRobot · 08/03/2011 13:21

It's not that unusual. Shit like this happens all the time, it just doesn't get reported/go to trial.

StealthPolarBear · 08/03/2011 13:23

"Sorry but to the people saying 'how she didnt wake up is beyond me' sounds like an underhand way of yet AGAIN blaming the woman for BEING raped"

Quite, you're right. Really, given there are a few of these comments on this thread maybe it's not that surprising that a jury acquitted.

mayorquimby · 08/03/2011 13:27

Yup. That could be a reason, seems beyond me that people think like that.
The question is then, what can be done about this. People will often lament the law and the legal profession in their approaches to rape cases and poor conviction rates. But if we take this case as an example what more can be done? A fairly clear-cut case is acquitted by the jury on the basis of what (if the article is accurate) is a flimsy explanation of the events by the would be rapist.

GabbyLoggon · 08/03/2011 13:27

there is said to be a 6 per cent conviction rate in rape cases.

So, the CPS dont bother to sent many for trial.

There seems to be no answer to the problem

AyeRobot · 08/03/2011 13:29

Lots of threads on that exact subject Here, mayorquimby.

Indith · 08/03/2011 13:32

I am sure it is perfectly possible to not wake up, have none of you ever experienced really vivid dreams which blended with reality?

A friend of my sister was often raped in her sleep by her bf (sister doing her best to support friend until she came to the realisation that she needed to leave).

Still a horrible case and I don't understand the decision.

GetOrfMoiLand · 08/03/2011 13:32

It is disgusting.

If a woman is drunk and gets raped, it is usally seen as 'her fault'.

Now if a man is drunk and a woman gets raped, it still seems to be her fault.

It is a disgrace.

TotemPole · 08/03/2011 13:32

AyeRobot, isn't the mistaken identity part unusual?

StealthPolarBear, I asked because I couldn't have slept through being undressed unless perhaps if I was totally bladdered. I've been put straight by others, so now understand that a heavy sleeper could sleep through it.

It could be the missing details of the mistaken 'consent' that caused the jury to acquit.

mayorquimby · 08/03/2011 13:34

"there is said to be a 6 per cent conviction rate in rape cases.

So, the CPS dont bother to sent many for trial."

Just a question on the 6% because I've heard various uses of that statistic.
Is it 6% of rapes reported to the police or 6% of rapes that take place based on the rape crisis centres statistics? I've heard both claimed.
I was of the impression that cases which get to trial did have a fairly high conviction rate due to the CPS only putting forward cases with a strong possibility of conviction.

diddl · 08/03/2011 13:37

"I don't understand how he could mix up the two women, no matter how drunk he is."

Not the same at all, but a very drunk guy once tried to get into our neighbours house-even though his own house looked nothing like!

Was convinced that that was where he lived & wouldn´t listen to reason at all.

And if the woman was so drunk that she didn´t wake up-how could she have consented?

And why does the fact that he thinks she did make it so?

Shouldn´t it be that if there´s any doubt, you don´t bloody well do it?

AyeRobot · 08/03/2011 13:50

There's a table Here on conviction rates etc. Am in the middle of something here and wish I could get into it because there is so much more to talk about than just the bald statistics. Loads of threads on the feminism boards about this and anecdotal evidence (yes I know they are not data) about the reasons why rape cases are not reported or pursued.

ZZZenAgain · 08/03/2011 13:55

article

just getting the link to your article to work OP

Bottleofbeer · 08/03/2011 13:57

Problem is if there is any doubt he raped her he has to be found not guilty. It's a hell of a crime to be convicted of so you have to be sure beyond reasonable doubt. Enough doubt is placed on her case and he's 'not guilty'. Sad but true and often to be fair, completely neccesary.

Original poster
SmashingNarcissistsMirrors · 08/03/2011 13:59

maybe it is time to consider not having a jury judge rape cases. it sounds as if there is too much prejudice in the general population.

i hate to say it but her being blonde and a size 6 probably worked against her. it seems all too often juries are easily lead to see sexual complicity on the part of the woman.

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread