To think Cliff Richard and co should stop their awful campaign?

[PinkyOfPie]

news.sky.com/story/sir-cliff-urged-to-drop-campaign-for-anonymity-for-sex-offence-suspects-10620627

In a nutshell Cliff Richard and other well known men have launched a campaign to grant anonymity to accused sexual offenders.

AIBU to think they should FOTTFSOF? Aside from it being a well known fact the other victims come forward when they see their abuser/rapist has been charged, there is absolutely zero evidence to suggest a 'false' accusation of a sex crime impacts a person more than a false accusation of any other crime. Its a horrible rape myth that damages victims.

Also the official stats false accusations for rape and sexual assault (of which around 35 people are convicted a year in the U.K.) are no higher than false accusations any other crime.

So why in gods name would those accused of sexual crimes ever get special treatment?

You really think that an accusation is enough for people to be named and shamed before prosecution?

No. and I've never said that. I do think a charge should be enough though

Pinky I wasn't aware of that. I can see why the CPS took the case the court. That case needed to be heard. I feel very sorry for the girl and I can't believe there hasn't been action taken against those who made her name public.

Anyway, I still think in cases that get as far as court the name of the alleged rapist should be made public. I would hope the CPS does a good job of filtering through cases that should be heard in a court. The BBC overstepped the mark with Cliff Richard and should be held accountable for that but his name should have been made public so any victims would come forward.

Want 10 people have been convicted so far of naming the poor girl on social media, including a teacher. She's had to change her identity 5 times I believe. The people who named her got fines, nothing more

In a nutshell Cliff Richard and other well known men have launched a campaign to grant anonymity to accused sexual offenders.

I'm confused.

The campaign is to stop those accused being named, not those charged.

He wasn't charged.

It's actually very scary how easy it is to find the name of the woman in the Ched Evans case.

I managed to find it the other day after a simple five minute Google search. It wasn't really well hidden either.

There are also still tweets up from 2012 where she is named.

So much for life long anonymity.

Pinky Fines is not action. They should be in jail. That poor girl's life is ruined.

I won't get into whether or not Cliff is innocent, but I think he has a point about the media being partly to blame in their lust for getting gossip on people. There's no way that the BBC should have been tipped off by the police so that they could show the raid on TV and there's no way Cliff's name should have been released until he'd been charged with something.

I'm not sure whether there should be anonimity for accused people, but I do think those who falsely accuse others of sex crimes should be prosecuted. In Sir Cliff's case, his accuser was known to the police as a fantasist who had done things like this in the past. That should have set alarm bells ringing.

You should read Paul Gambaccini's book. It's excellent. Lots of questions need to be answered - why was his name released before he was charged with anything? Why was he continually re-bailed for 12 months? Why did the police not do a quick passport check and realise that he wasn't even in the country when these supposed assaults happened? Why did the police ring around female presenters and gay presenters to fish for an accusation from them?

I think that, in many cases, the police have acted awfully.

I know someone who was falsely accused of rape. Eventually, thank God, it was proved beyond absolute doubt that the woman involved made it up with absolute concrete evidence. However, he was named, dragged through the mud, had his house attacked, couldn't see his children, lost his job. His life was and is totally ruined because there is always a significant number of people who, no matter what, believe "no smoke without fire".

Prior to this incident, I would have agreed with the OP. I'm afraid, having seen it at first hand, no matter how "tiny" these cases are in comparison with actual rapes, because the mob DO see sexual cases in a very different light to any other, I believe totally and utterly in anonymity at the very least until charged in these cases and quite probably others too, as even though there can be less stigma, the destruction is appalling.

The media have a huge part to play in this. The style and manner of reporting these days, plus the internet, have caused a lot of these issues. It started with Christopher Jeffries and seriously crossed a line with the live raid on Cliff Richard's house. The behaviour of the Police in colluding in the latter and the behaviour over Gambaccini by the Police really raises very, very serious questions and implications.

Nigel Evans was charged and is supporting the campaign so i imagine they do want anonymity until convicted as well.
We all know this campaign will succeed. I expect a government announcement on the law changing by the end of the year.

The root of the problem to me , is that the victims are scared to come forward. If the process to report any crimes were more compassionate then victims of historic or recent crimes, would come forward, regardless of press reporting controls.

The cases of Cliff Richard and Paul Gambaccini were appalling handled by the police and media, and I can understand the campaign from their point-of-view.

More responsible reporting, and more responsible actions from the police (both towards the accuser and the accused) have to be the answer. It seems to me the in the above cases any prosecution was wide open to being thrown out due to the accused being unable to receive a fair trial.

I was very on the fence about this until I read Gambo's book. Fucking hell, what a read. It just proved to me that the police are trying to overcompensate for not catching Savile when he was alive and their ethics are very skewed. E.g. the fact that Gambo's name was leaked to the press and was on the radio before he'd even got to the police station. Or that he was continually re-bailed until other trials were over because the police and CPS didn't want to juries to hear of a Radio 1 DJ from the 70s being cleared and thus potentially impacting the whole exercise.

Paul Gambaccini lost £200,000 in earnings and even more in legal fees over those 12 months. Why is it that he doesn't get so much as an apology but his accusers are allowed to walk free with anonimity?

I don't think they should be granted anonymity.

I do understand that being accused of being a rapist carries a stigma worse than other crimes, I'm not saying it's perfect, but on balance I don't think that should be the priority.

The main issue is that most women don't report rape, and out of those that do a tiny percentage ever get to court.

Seeing your rapist charged might give victims the courage to come forward. Good bing accused anonymity reinforces the myth they most women are lying anyway.

I'm sorry for any men falsely accused, I can well imagine and I know it has happened.

But I'm afraid I don't think these men need to be our biggest priority right now. We are nowhere near a level playing field yet.

Ok so tragic as it may be, how many men have their lives destroyed by being falsely accused? Balance that against how many women have their lives destroyed by being RAPED ffs.

Why should the priority go to that smaller group of men?

I do think those who falsely accuse others of sex crimes should be prosecuted.

And they are. That's why when you google "woman jailed for making false rape claims" you get pages of hits to news stories of women being jailed for....wait for it...lying about being raped.

However you need to prove the accusations were false. You can't just start throwing women in jail just because the man she accused wasn't convicted.

Just because someone is a fantasist doesn't mean they can't also be a victim of a sex crime either.

Why should the priority go to that smaller group of men?

Because men are more important than women sadly

But I'm afraid I don't think these men need to be our biggest priority right now. We are nowhere near a level playing field yet.

By and large I agree, but I think that the bull-in-a-china-shop approach displayed by the police and media in some cases (certainly in some high profile cases) doesn't benefit anyone, accuser or accused. When it turns into a free-for-all, it becomes easier for the actual case-in-law to be lost among the white noise.

Apologies if I'm stating the obvious but isnt that the whole point, people are being named purely on accusations when clearly once charged they should not have anonymity.

But that isn't true is it?

Unless the man in question is a celebrity then hasn't going to be named just off one accusation alone.

There has to be a) evidence that a rape took place and b) a strong belief that he has more victims and naming him will make them come forward and in turn make a conviction more likely.

That's why I'm a bit at the poster who said she knows a man who was falsely accused but he had been named prior to being charged with anything.

If he really didn't do it then why would he have been named? There wouldn't have been any evidence that he had done it if he really didn't do it would there?

*Ok so tragic as it may be, how many men have their lives destroyed by being falsely accused? Balance that against how many women have their lives destroyed by being RAPED ffs.

Why should the priority go to that smaller group of men?*

Well said.

The conviction rates for rape are so, so low. It is utterly depressing. We don't need another law to protect these people. We do need to find a way to change the rape conviction rates.

Unless the man in question is a celebrity then hasn't going to be named just off one accusation alone.

Then he isn't

Why is the tiny number of men who have had their lives ruined over being falsely accused more important than the much larger number of women who have had their lives ruined due to being raped?

Absolutely with you, OP. What kind of man has a bit of a think about rape and decides that the first thing that needs changing is the fact that a man accused of it doesn't get anonymity? Yeah, that's the worst thing about all the rape cases - the fact that if you're accused of one of them, one of all the SO MANY rapes, nobody hides you away? Especially awful if you're famous, and you've made your living out of people being interested in what you do, huh?

Yanbu.

Give the victims all the anonymity that they want not the offenders!