To think that people accused of rape should be given anonymity until proven guilty?

[DaleyBump]

Controversial.

I don't mean to start a bunfight, honest! Am I the only one that thinks that people accused of rape should be given the same anonymity as the rape victims until they've been proven guilty? By all means, once they've been found guilty, feed them to the dogs but being accused of rape publicly and then being found not guilty still has a major effect on someone's life.

I'm not saying rape victims should be outed at any point, by the way.

As the parent of a child victim, shall I tell you whose lives are destroyed
OURS
Shall I tell you who was shunned
US
Shall I tell you who was identified
MY CHILD all the time - by his abuser
Shall I tell you who is so anxious, after over 20 years of working I can no longer work
ME
Shall I tell you who is facing losing his job under the strain - as his helpful employer is currently trying to sack him (to our doctors disgust)
MY HUSBAND
Shall I tell you whose lives are a living hell
OURS
Shall I tell you who is now in an out of catchment school, with an hours drive each way for their own protection
MY OTHER CHILDREN
Shall I tell you who is living a nightmare
US

And the abuser, who was never found either innocent or guilty - in answer to the hung charges question

He is earning upwards of 80k a year on the oil rigs not a care in the world, the abusers life hasn't been destroyed ours have, and given that his own father stood up in court and gave evidence against him - I know who I'd believe, even if my child wasn't the victim.

The public have the right to know so they can make up their own minds.

eretrew Flora- Its a public justice system so where a person is acquitted then all facts should be released including the names of the accuser. In the case of a not guilty verdict then releasing the facts of the case is a necessary feature of liberal democracy.

This doesn't happen as a matter of course with any trial for any crime. There are some principles behind the concept of "open justice" - it's not a code word for free-for-all. For the accused, it is important that the public knows who they are so that we know that influential people are not receiving special treatment. For the witnesses, it is important that the accused knows the identity of the person who is accusing him so that he can present his defence. The public generally does know the name of the witnesses but this is less fundamental to the principles of open justice.

The Scottish third verdict of "Not Proven" is actually a more accurate verdict than "Not Guilty".

NiceTabard- The facts of all cases brought to trial should be available to the public

PomBear- I would put it on public record as is befitting of a transparent legal system

Not by juries, clearly. Who represent society, that's the point. Or by some police officers. Or by friends and families of the accused. Or the victim, for that matter.

Or perhaps they are. The minority dark alley, stranger rapists. Which the nice-looking, suited and booted boyfriend/husband with a respectable job before them in the dock doesn't resemble.

YABU.

namechange that is awful, I'm sorry that happened to you.

This issue of victim anonymity is massively overblown. Most of the time, the victim is well-known in their local community.

My point was that rapists are despised by virtually all of society. This is not true.

actually my view is that society doesn't care about victims of rape or child abuse, everyone thinks they do until they are confronted with it - then they just want it to go away, to disappear, to be swept under the carpet

its too horrible for people to think about - and so victims get marginalised along with their families

I would like to say this is my own personal experience, but I know from speaking to others, it is a story that is replicated a million times over

Your point is utterly wrong techno. Have a read of namechange's post.

Most perpetrators are serial offenders and without naming them, other victims rarely have the courage to come forward. One accusation is actually unlikely to get to court without witnesses or actual evidence - which is of course often sadly lacking given the nature of the crime. The prompt for other victims to come forward and give corroborating evidence is invaluable in gaining a conviction.

We have an open justice system - the accused are named for all crimes except under exceptional circumstances - but this is particularly important for crimes like rape, where the perpetrators are so often serial offenders, so often other victims come forward.

Freud

I'm assuming, having never been involved in such a case, that the police question the victim to establish the events of the alleged crime. They then question the accused to build a case.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree though. I think virtually all MNers would be outraged by rape of any kind and I don't know anyone close to me that thinks that any form of rape is remotely acceptable.

What you are suggesting is that politicians want effectively to class 90% of rapes as non serious and I don't believe that for one minute when much work has been done to try and improve conviction rates and how victims are managed.

namechange I salute your bravery in coming on to these awful, shallow unthinking threads to bear witness to what happened to your family.

People are outraged at rapes they recognise as rape. At those they don't, not so much. In fact, they get quite upset and tend to post a lot on-line to stress that penetration via coercion or when a woman is asleep is not rape and an insult to real rape victims.

Look up Ken Clarke rape comment

MN does not represent our society, has a cross section but not all comment on this subject

Is the husband accused of raping his wife treated terribly, named and shamed, beaten up in prison i doubt it as he is unlikely to ever get there

sabrina I'm sorry to be pedantic and I agree with everything you have said. I get twitchy when people do not include witness testimony from victims as "actual evidence". I am pretty sure you mean "physical evidence" e.g. DNA so again, sorry for the pedantry but this comes up all the time in reporting of rape cases and sometimes the even worse: "there was no evidence". This happens even in national newspapers who should know better. Witness testimony is evidence. Scientific or medical evidence is also evidence but is generally limited to being evidence of the fact that intercourse occurred (which may not be in issue) or the presence of force (but not the absence of consent). I think we have become misled by CSI Wherever into thinking that scientific evidence is superior to witness testimony and is somehow "real".

Sorry again sabrina.

namechange that is just awful :( I hope your family have better times coming to you very soon

Thank you there is so much more

Social Services - no abuser (banned from house), so no child protection issues, so no SW allocated.

No SW means no multi agency working, no joined up working, no help, no support, no nothing, just a family, drifting in a sea of grief, with their every action held against them. I was dealing with 13 agencies, alone, schools, EWO, doctor, CAHMS, police, Victim Support, Witness Services, etc, etc, etc. Some days I would make 20/30 calls, trying (unsuccessfully) to get help.

One day the police came to my house, I was home alone, grieving, distraught, curtains closed, it took me a while to answer the door, this was handed over to the defence as evidence of my (unstable) state of mind and used against us in court.

Seriously, until you have been on the receiving end of what happens to victims in this country, you have no clue.

I never imagined to wake up in this nightmare, but I assumed, there would be someone to help us through, the charities do their best, they helped me because I turned up suicidal myself one day, but its not their job, they are overwhelmed by vicitims and poor funding, never mind their mothers.

There is a wonderful agency in London, MOSAC, but thats London.

This is nothing and no-one.

We have lost our friends, our beliefs, I have lost my child, who has left the family home, I am unable to work, DH is on the verge of being sacked, one of my other children is still traumatised and showing disturbing behaviours.

And you want to add to this, by publicly shaming my child, for being brave enough to speak out and bring his abuser to court, not for themselves, they were safe by now - but TO PROTECT OTHER PEOPLES CHILDREN.

People tell me this didn't happen to me - but let me tell you something, it happened to me, to my husband and to all of us. We have had all sorts of rumours spread around about us. And I am so very proud of my child and we have been so let down.

Sabrina

I'm not wrong, I just have a different POV to you. Namechange's story is awful but is not a cast iron indicator of our society.

I could also point you in the direction of page one of this thread, the one where a poster lost an innocent friend because he committed suicide.

I think it is difficult to say how many people would be encouraged to come forward because everyone probably reacts to to rape differently.

Do we have any stats for victims that come forward due to the accused being named?

I think virtually all MNers would be outraged by rape of any kind

What on earth do you mean by that? I would sincerely hope that anyone would be outraged by rape of any kind but I've been on some awful threads about rape which show that is blatantly not the case.

Most Rapists don't see themselves as rapists - the rapists are the ones with fangs and BO and dodgy hair that can't get a woman and so drag a stranger into an alley (about 11% of actual rapes)...Not them, Oh no. And there are plenty of people in society willing to prop their view.

While I can see the point that making names public encourages other victims to come forward, I am uneasy about the amount of damage a false allegation (or an allegation leading to no conviction) does to the person who is innocent/found not guilty.

A person who either innocent or not guilty has their name pulled through the mud, their family goes through a special kind of hell and in some cases they are ostracized or even forced to move. These problems are a direct result of of sex crimes are perceived and the 'guilty whatever the jury say' attitudes which prevail, rightly or wrongly sex crimes are seen differently to any other crime! I have never been able to justify destroying an entire family for a 'just in case', two wrongs do not make a right.

I think there ought to be anonymity until the point of conviction as a general rule - perhaps with the right to judicial review if there is compelling reason to think there may be more victims (although I'm still a little uneasy with that).

Freud

And Ken Clarke does not represent the entire government.

Flora, lovely, I know exactly what you mean. I did indeed mean 'physical' evidence - DNA, injuries and so on, when I wrote that. Sorry - on ipad and I hate typing on it - takes me an age.

You're absolutely correct.

Techno it is not cast iron, but I have heard it over and over and over again.

And the Therapist tells me she hears it, over and over and over again.

The same things, the same heart break, told by different people, in differing but the same situations.

We had a really strong case, but we were warned, but the prosecution, that juries are scared to convict young white men, of serious crimes, they are scared of making a mistake so they would rather let someone walk free than say - GUILTY.

The only thing that even vaguely keeps our children safe, is the public naming of offenders, I am so, so very sorry for the minute proportion of people who get falsely accused, but they are a minute proportion, everyone has a story of someone who killed themselves following a false allegation, but victims, kill themselves all the time.

Sometimes they commit suicide.

Sometimes they drink themselves to death, or times its drugs, homelessness, mental health issues, my dear friend tells me one period he spent sectioned, he was the only person in the whole ward who had not been abused.

Some become strong and become survivors, sharing their stories and providing inspiration to the rest of us, helping us through our black times.

But no-one deserves to be treated like a criminal because they were brave enough to speak out in the first place.

False allegations are horrible, but the are far far rarer than people think and me, I prefer to focus on the countless victims, some of whom speak out and some of whom don't - who never see justice prevail.

Namechange, I'm so sorry

OP, if you believe in anonymity for all accused, or if you believe in no anonymity in any circumstances for witnesses, you have a consistent philosophical position. Otherwise, not so much.

I might have to take a break from MN for a bit. This thread has made me despair.

I think anonymity should be maintained for the accused and the alleged victim. I'd also consider the 'suppose others wished to bring similar claims' argument to be very thin and highly speculative. We try cases individually, not as a 'pack'. Juries convict on the evidence of cases before them without other associated instances.

Techno - namechange's story most certainly is an indicator of how society treats victims.

Honestly, this thread is just too triggering to engage with properly, but if it was a genuine question at the beginning, then please, please take away from other posts that YABU, and that the reasons to let the accused's identity be public are valid and are in the best public interest. Also, as others have outlined better than me, it is really fucking disgraceful that anyone could look at the state of rape reporting and conviction rates in the UK today, and come away from that thinking that false allegations were the most pressing problem.