To think people accused of rape should not be named?

[IHaveArrivedAtABadTime]

A rape allegation could seriously damage someones life and reputation. I think that by all means name and shame them after conviction but not before.

A friend of mine was falsely accused of rape last year but during the investigation the police happily told people his name when they were interviewing witnesses so everyone knew who he was . How is that allowed? My poor friend will have to live with this forever.

Luckily it didn't reach the press. It would have been so much worse if it did.

I myself was actually raped recently but I didn't report my rapist because I was terrified no one would believe me. It's too late now to report it I think. I feel women who lie about being raped like the woman who accused my friend should be locked up.

IDK I just feel so annoyed that my friend was put through this and annoyed that I can't report my rapist!

This article was shared on another thread this week and it mostly talks about how women behave when they're assaulted - and why we're conditioned to not fight back. It follows through to a logical conclusion I'd never considered before:

*I am focusing on women here. I tend to do that, being one and all, but let’s mention something about men. If men have been raised to behave aggressively, to discount what women and weaker men want and feel and say, to obtain power and social standing through force, to deny emotions exist, to feel that women are fundamentally a different species, to set a boundary and keep it NO MATTER WHAT, to make a decision and stick to it NO MATTER WHAT, to feel entitled to sex, to feel they will be ostracized and possibly physically attacked if they don’t acquire sex with women, to feel under threat of harassment and attack if they don’t constantly maintain a hyper-masculine exterior, to prove their manhood through dangerous and degrading physical activities…

if you have seen men behave in this way, and encouraged it, and thought it was normal, so normal you didn’t even see it…

then you never have the right to say “He couldn’t possibly have done that” when you hear that your brother raped somebody*

you can't know that your "nice" friend was falsely accused unless you are him or the woman he assaulted - they're the only two who know what happened. Naming the suspect allows other women to come forward when they feel frightened to report their rape. It allows some support which seems to be sadly lacking in these matters.

Thank you SwearyGodmother, that is well worth reading.

This again?

We have a system of innocence until proven guilty. This means that the accused are named in order for the alleged crime to be investigated. If they are not named then the allegation cannot be investigated. Basically to not name a person accused of a crime we need to switch our entire legal system to a napoleonic code approach whereby guilt is assumed until innocence is proved. That way an investigation can take place, though in practice it will probably still name the accused.

Either way it is a pretty big change for a crime that, in reality, rarely takes place.

A rape allegation could seriously damage someones life and reputation.

To be honest, I have not observed this in real life.

Child abuse allegiations, sure. That makes people angry, as long as the child was very young, or male.

But raping teenage girls and adult women seems to be no stain on a man's reputation, even if it is proven. Lots of famous men did it, and most of them still have lots of fans.

I really cannot get very outraged on behalf of the, uh, 0,01 percent of men who might actually be wrongly accused of rape.

Statistics say that false rape accusations happen about as often as false theft or burglary or whatever accusations, but I am pretty sure they are rarer - you don't get treated like crap when reporting a burglary, even though it is perfectly possible you just want to cash in on the insurance.

"And people cleared of rape can and do go on to continue their careers with the support of the public and very few consequences for them (Bill Roache, Michael LeVelle etc). How many rape victims have the same luxury?"

This.

YABU, and I hope that anonymity for the accused in rape/sexual assault cases never comes about.

How would the police investigate the rape if they didn't identify the potential rapist to the witnesses???

I am with the OP.

In fact I don't think anyone should be named until they have been convicted. Regardless of alleged offence.

Innocent until proven guilty - but it's not because people assume no smoke without fire and even if people are found not guilty you get lots of people saying it was a technicality etc.

This comment kind of proves my point often if someone is found not guilty in court it's due to lack of evidence rather than them being innocent

The implications are obviously more serious with a sexual crime, but I would not want to be publicly accused of shoplifting if I were not guilty, either.

As for the coming forward because you know other people have come forward - surely if you are victim of crime you report it because it happened to you, not because you find out it has happened to others? If something happens, you go to the police. You don't need the validation of knowing the alleged perpetrator has done it to someone else. In fact if you had reported, it they might not have done it someone else because they'd already be locked up. I'm not talking about cases like Saville where victims were ignored, that's not the case these days.

How would the police investigate the rape if they didn't identify the potential rapist to the witnesses

Very few rapes are witnessed by other people.

This means that the accused are named in order for the alleged crime to be investigated. If they are not named then the allegation cannot be investigated

Not true - other countries do not name suspects and seem to manage to investigate perfectly well.

In fact I don't think anyone should be named until they have been convicted.

But how would the police be able to investigate crimes if you couldn't name the suspect?

Not true - other countries do not name suspects and seem to manage to investigate perfectly well.

They don't name them at all? Not even during the course of the investigation?

Or do you simply mean they aren't allowed to be identified in the media?

As for the coming forward because you know other people have come forward - surely if you are victim of crime you report it because it happened to you, not because you find out it has happened to others? If something happens, you go to the police. You don't need the validation of knowing the alleged perpetrator has done it to someone else. In fact if you had reported, it they might not have done it someone else because they'd already be locked up.

Jesus Christ.

Also just because you report a crime to the police that doesn't mean it's going to be taken seriously or that the police will do anything about it.

It took 12 women reporting John Worboys before the police actually took their claims seriously and began investigating him.

If John worboys hadn't been named, he would have been accused of the rape of one, perhaps two women who went straight to the police. The police may or may not have pressed charges.

By naming him, a further 10 people c forward which helped the police and cps establish a pattern of behaviour ending in rape. He is believed to have raped over 100 women.

OP, have you spoken to anyone about what happened to you two weeks ago?

"In fact if you had reported, it they might not have done it someone else because they'd already be locked up."

Oh. I'd never thought of that .

What if I don't report him and he hurts someone else? That will all be my fault

Sparkle just the doctor and nurse who I saw when I went to A&E.

Oh God I feel really bad now. I could have reported him but all I was thinking about at the time was me, me, me. I never thought about other people he might hurt.

I'm going against the grain. I think people should be named once the police and CPS have decided to charge them. Thjere are many, many cases where further victims come forward once they see someone's name in the paper.
Cases like the OP where victims fear they won't be believed.
Very often, if they see their attacker named in the paper they find the courage to come forward - strength in numbers. It also increases the chance of securing a conviction if there is more than one victim, and we all know how appallingly low conviction rates are for rape.
There's a duty on the press to report the outcome of the trial, and how good they are at doing that varies from paper to paper, but IMO if anything should change, it should be the onus on the press to report the outcome of a trial, not to keep it secret until conviction, which may or may not happen.
It's not perfect. There will always be cases where someone is falsely accused, but when someone has made a false allegation it is taken seriously and their case is reported.

That will all be my fault

No it wouldn't be your fault. It would be his fault. You are not responsible for his actions

I agree that people charged with rape should be named, like any other crime. I also think it's silly to suggest police could investigate an alleged rape without witnesses guessing who they were investigating.

Two weeks is nothing, OP, in reporting a rape. In terms of evidence from A&E, I'm not quite sure what you're asking? They won't have taken any samples, if this is what you're suggesting. If you're referring to your medical notes, then they'll definitely still be available. Off the top of my head I think it's about 5 years of not using an institution before they're destroyed, but may be longer.

I am going through a very difficult time at the moment, my FIL has been accused of "inappropriate / sexual abuse" of minors (two boys / men) fifteen years ago - historical case raised by "victims" six months ago. My FIL was named in the press just before Xmas as he has been charged. We're waiting for the trial which is now set for January 2018. I have no idea whether he is innocent or guilty but I'm assuming the press article was in order to get others to come forward if they haven't been brave enough to do it on their own?

Of course it won't be your fault! Try not to think like that. You're not responsible for his possible future actions. Your responsibility is to you and your well being. If reporting is something you want to do then go for it. If it isn't then do what you need to do for your own wellbeing. No one should be pressurizing you or blaming you.

I was raped and reported it. Rapist was acquitted. Doesn't make him innocent, just means there wasn't enough evidence. The only tiny consolation is that everyone in the area knows he's a fucking rapist and hopefully women will stay away from him.

Op, it will not be your fault if you decide you can't report him and he rapes someone else. It is only his fault.