to worry about the accused?

[WitchWay]

DLT for example. How is anything going to be proven? Are people jumping on a bandwagon or am I very wrong to even think that? I don't condone abuse - far from it - but surely they can't all have been sailing along in JS's wake - can they?

INaming the accused is an integral part of the UK open justice system, and as beach said, I can't converse with someone who doesn't believe in that

So, going with that. A woman accuses a man of rape. He is identified, she is kept anonymous.

He strenuously denies the allegation and makes a formal counter accusation of filing a false report and slander.

Fair for her to be identified as the accused, or not?

In the event of a woman making a malicious false allegation, she is named. The Daily Mail loves those stories.

In the event of a woman making a malicious false allegation, she is named. The Daily Mail loves those stories

In the event of a woman being convicted of making a false allegation she is named. That is vastly different.

Do you mean that the accused has been found not guilty in court?

Rape is seen traditionally as a crime committed by men against women but it seems the FBI in the USA now allows that women can commit rape too, on men and other women.

If we follow suit, will that change any of our attitudes, do you think?

Suzanne- have you forgotten that link to the thread where somebody said all men were diseased?

Wedding sure.

So, all woman, girls, men, children and boys, will be named in the press.

So we get back to the situation in the 60s (I think) where people didn't report at all.

Certainly that is an approach that can be taken, do you feel that is desirable.

Oh and also.

A couple of you might be disconcerted by the removal of the right of the defendant to represent themselves in these cases, in a total step away from what happens in other criminal matters.

How do you feel about that, given that all other defendants (unless really good reason) are allowed to represent themselves?

Suzanne- have you forgotten that link to the thread where somebody said all men were diseased?

No, but I don't want to point the finger at an individual for reasons already stated, especially as she isn't here (on this thread) to defend herself.

And, if you don't believe me when I say she said it, I don't think any subsequent discussion on the matter between you and me is likely to prove very constructive, do you?

Oh and also.

There are moves to change the rules in certain sex cases whereby "victims" - and we need to remember they are "victims" and not victims after all - need only be questioned by one defence person, instead of many defence people, where there are multiple defendants.

What is your view?

Do you think that each alleged perpetrator needs a barrister to question the alleged victim (witness), even in cases where there only one young witness and there are multiple accused people? Is it fair if only one defence person gets a crack at the witness?

This is a question going on now, so interested to hear.

The way it works is;

A person reports a sexual offence.

The police present the case to the Crown Prosecution Service. The CPS decide if it should go to court.

The Crown is the prosecution - they are the ones accusing the defendant of the crime. Neither they, or the défendant, is anonymous.

The alleged victim of the crime is considered a prosecution witness and awarded anonymity as a form of witness protection.

The 'all men are diseased' post doesn't exist.

Beach, well yes, apart from where it goes

A person reports a sexual offence
And gets disbelieved / doesn't get evidence taken/ gets no-crimes for no apparent reason etc etc

Step bloody 1 isn't even happening often, it seems. certainly hasn't been in the recent past.

The 'all men are diseased' post doesn't exist.

Then denounce me as a liar.

It's not much of an insult when added to what's gone before.

But yes, the person who reported the crime is a witness.

And as such has no legal person "looking out for them", even when they are extremely vulnerable.

That is something else that looks like it may be changing, after a string of suicides. Still, I'm sure people will think of reasons why people in that position shouldn't get help.

Ditto the rules are changing around children after cases where young children were cross-examined in an adult court. A lot of people might have difficulty with those changes too - surely each defendant has a right to their own defence? And of course a witness (even a young one) as a right to none.

What absolutely inane, ridiculous, self serving pathetic and insulting comments.

YOU have a choice to walk away from this thread, wow you could even put it on hide - how can you even begin to compare the trauma and horrific and long going pain of someone who has been subjected to rape and child abuse to being called out on your rape myths and propagation of misogynist view points.

But I repeat, in case you missed the first sentence, you have a CHOICE, you can leave, you can stop, you can switch laptop off.

Victims of rape, victims of sexual assault and victims of abuse, they have NOW CHOICE, NO POWER, NO ANYTHING at the time - you demean them and you demean yourself.

I do feel sorry for you though - because you can lie to everyone else, but deep down, you cannot lie to yourself.

*Hopefully, they realise that ganging up to bully and abuse me on a personal level makes them no better than the abusive real-life people they purport to condemn.

Isn't it amazing that people who are at such pains to show unlimited sympathy to real-world victims of abuse are often the first to join forces in a mob to bully and berate and browbeat most mercilessly anyone who annoys them on a chat forum?*

I advanced search 'men' and 'diseased' - I would have liked to read it. It doesn't exist. I have never seen even the most ardent feminist on here say such a statement.

But you're free to link to it if it exists. I would certainly take issue with it.

Well, I can't find it. I find it bizarre that you think it's OK to say something like that as example of man hating feminists but aren't prepared to provide any sort of context. Do you think people should just so "oh, my mistake- there are extreme man hating feminists on Mumsnet- I just never noticed them"?

What would you say the answer is Nice?

The accusations of rape that don't proceed to trial don't because of lack of evidence.

The very nature of the crime says that in many cases it will be a he says she says arguement. There IS no evidence in a lot of rape accusations.

How to increase the number going to trial then? You can't convict someone with no evidence, for any crime.

I would like a "not proven" option, as I believe they have in Scotland.

I would also like Judges comments to be published as they were in the Le Vell case, that judge made it perfectly clear he believed the victim, I have had sight of a later in a case similar, where the police brought the letter written between the CPS solicitor and the barrister in the case, referencing judges comments made, which the victim was allowed to "see" but not keep, in which the judge made it clear he believed the victim was "true and honest" and he was making a ruling as a point of law - again making it clear he believed the victim but had his hands tied.

I see no reason why these views of the judges, should be kept secret.

yes, quite agree Nicetabard about And gets disbelieved / doesn't get evidence taken/ gets no-crimes for no apparent reason etc etc

bah not the Le Vell case - the case where the judge after wards referred to the victims trauma - which one was it - googling like mad!

Sabrina and Curlew, if either of you were looking for anything but trouble, I'd happily send you a private link to the post.

But you're looking for trouble so you won't be getting the link.

Let's try to keep on the subject of abuse trials and away from personal vendettas, shall we?

I listed my initial thoughts as to what I would do to start improving things, upthread.

In like, a List.

And in answer, to that exact same question.

Is it possible that some people aren't actually reading the posts on this thread?

kier steiner on false allegations

Less than one percent and he believes the victim of something

" For a period of 17 months, I also required CPS areas to refer all cases involving an allegedly false allegation of rape, domestic violence, or both, to me personally to consider.

This report outlines the key findings from the review of those cases and the steps that we plan to take. Importantly, what it shows is that charges brought for perverting the course of justice or wasting police time for such "false" allegations need to be considered in the context of the total number of prosecutions brought for those offences. In the period of the review, there were 5,651 prosecutions for rape and 111,891 for domestic violence. During the same period there were 35 prosecutions for making false allegations of rape, six for making false allegation of domestic violence and three for making false allegations of both rape and domestic violence.

Furthermore, the report shows that a significant number of these cases involved young, often vulnerable people. About half of the cases involved people aged 21 years old and under, and some involved people with mental health difficulties. In some cases, the person alleged to have made the false report had undoubtedly been the victim of some kind of offence, even if not the one that he or she had reported."