To not automatically support my male friend (potentially triggering!)

[User14356]

Agh this is keeping me up tonight, sorry if it’s a bit rambly

My very close, male friend (totally platonic) picked up a woman last weekend at a club. I had left earlier in the night, from what I was told, they were drunk, she had a screaming argument with her friend and then he took her home. Things were done but they didn’t have full sex.

Cut to today and I get a worried message from my male friend saying he has been contacted by this girl saying he took advantage, he is a sex offender and that she’s going to go to the police. This text message was sent at 4am and badly spelled so the assumption is that she was drunk.

I want to believe my friend, but I’m now massively morally split, between not wanting to call this girl a liar, but then not being there for him if the accusations are blown out or false. For now, I’ve been supportive. Is there any way to manage this situation without taking sides- AIBU to have doubts about my friend?

@ShatnersWig so that text is sufficient for her to be prosecuted for making a false allegation? Would there be no defence for her given the content of the texts that she apparently sent?

Shatner Ok, so the accused has to provide evidence that they are not guilty, as they would if they were accused of another crime.

She should be prosecuted. In court she can have a barrister propose a defence.

If you admit committing an offence in writing, why the hell shouldn't she be prosecuted?

Did she admit to falsely accusing him?

I haven't read all the texts. But as she personally went to the police and accused him of rape and then sent a text to a friend admitting there was no rape, specifically using the words "not against my will" that's pretty cut and dried and is why the judge threw the case out after three days and why tge CPS and Police are now themselves being sued.

That's irrespective of the many other texts sent to Allen by the woman asking him to meet up for more sex. Unlikely you do that with your rapist, so that probably would have counted against her too. But it is the text where she admits she did not have sex with him against her will that is the crux

But women lie. So maybe she was lying to her friend about the not against her will part? Asking for sex afterwards doesn't have any bearing on whether the particular situation she reported was rape. It may not have helped her case, but that's not the same as definitive proof that she was making a false allegation.

The case being thrown out doesn't automatically mean that the woman must have made a false allegation.

There's a line between believing a complainant and investigating the claim in an unbiased fashion and believing the victim to the extent that any evidence that benefits the accused is ignored.

AssasinatedBeauty define 'many'. When I started researching I was horrified by the extent of the issue - the numbers of reports that lead to no further action, the number of caes that get to court and the defendent is found guilty in a short period of time - 30 minutes or less sometimes. The number of people who are told by police and solicitors that the only evidence needed, especially for historical cases is the statement of the complainant. After all, who else is there in the vast majority of cases? My information comes from the support sites I mentioned. I haven't counted accurately. There were too many.

The Criminal Injuries Compensation Board is the organisation that deals with payouts for victims of crime, real or imagined so far as sexual crime is concerned and the police oftenpoint complainants in that direction, such is the level of their belief. A guilty verdict is not required.

No it doesn’t - it means they have to prove they are innocent, just like in any other crime

I am sorry, but are you out of your fucking mind? That’s a terrible idea.

Proving guilt is one thing. But proving that someone is not guilty?

The idea that one has to prove a negative (that one is not guilty) / or the absence of guilt is problematic. For several reasons?

1. Have you ever heard the phrase ‘you can’t prove a negative’? That’s not quite true. But it didn’t just come out of nowhere.

And more importantly, in this case someone is making a claim / accusing someone and someone else may end up being prosecuted based on this claim / accusation. The prosecution is therefore taking on the role of the accuser / are the ones making a claim. The person making that claim is generally the one that has the burden of proof. That’s an extremely old concept, already found in Roman law.

1. The presumption of innocence is absolutely fundamental. Society might collapse if it wasn’t... Because anyone with a slightly vindictive streak could accuse anyone of anything. I could e.g. accuse you.... and you - a private person with most likely limited resources- would be tasked with proving innocence.

1. The presumption of innocence is a legal right according to the UN Declaration of Human rights. Also of the council of Europe.

Sigh.

So where does that leave "I believe you" if women lie to their friends about not being raped?

Freddie I apologise for my clumsy wording, that’s obviously caused you a lot of anguish. It was in response to a PP who suggested ‘we are listening’ was more appropriate than ‘I believe you’. I disagree with that because I don’t see why the process of being accused of a sexual crime and being innocent is any different to being accused of any other crime and being innocent. And a crime being reported would result in an enquiry (? Not sure if that’s the right word, but I can’t think of the English for ‘someone looking into this as a crime).

@ShatnersWig you're convinced that the content of the texts proves beyond reasonable doubt that this woman made a false allegation. I'm just not sure how that can be the case.

Well that's why the CPS itself is being sued.

But still, begs the question just asked. Where does that leave "I believe you" if, as you suggest, a woman would lie about not being raped?

AssasinatedBeauty

The case being thrown out doesn't automatically mean that a woman must have made a false accusation.

Of course not. I didn't mean that it does. False accusations are beyond hard to prove, but have you ever tried to prove a negative? Often the best a defendant who knows that he has been falsely accused can hope for is 'not enough evidence' because the complainant's statement is evidence in and of itself. This is not justice and even when the complainant admits lying she is rarely prosecuted and there is no redress. Part of the injustice is the police targets for sexual crime and the fervour with which they pursue prosecutions regardless of the evidence. Even the Liam Allen case was described as a 'failed prosecution' rather than a revelation of innocence. The pendulum has swung to far. One of my fears is that it will swing again in the other direction but too far again. Our justice system is supposed to prosecute the guilty and protect the innocent. Falsely accused men are innocent and are not recieving justice in any way, shape or form.

I disagree with that because I don’t see why the process of being accused of a sexual crime and being innocent is any different to being accused of any other crime and being innocent

This is said quite a bit on here, with examples of Trump and other rich powerful men being held up as "proof" false allegations don't ruin lives.

This is quite frankly offensive bull shit. Rich powerful man stays rich and powerful is evidence of fuck all. Your average man/woman in the street however, this is fucking cataclysmic. It's a massive target on your back in most communities. You can kiss goodbye to your job, friends and some family.

If society is that accepting of sex offenders can anyone explain why they are segregated in prison for their own safety? Why their homes are targeted in their communities? Being falsely accused of a sex offence is massive.

Yes, people do lie about crimes being committed against them. People lie for financial gain ('my phone was stolen by a mugger' when they got pissed and dropped it in the canal/ they were burgled, but they exaggerate the amount and value of what was taken for a better insurance payout) or for revenge, or to prove a point - there was a recent case of some 'alt-right' knob who stabbed himself in the head and tried to claim that anti-fascists had attacked him (but CCTV evidence showed him buying the knife he was stabbed with...) I don't think anyone is disputing that it is possible for a man accused of a sexual assault to be innocent (either because whatever sexual activity happened was consensual, or because the victim has identified the wrong man).

MRAs and misogynists are fond of asking the 'hypothetical question' - who would you believe if it was your own son/brother/partner/dad accused of rape? They don't like it when they get the only rational answer which is: it would depend on the circumstances, on my knowledge of the man, and on what he had to say about it.

But the fact that people lie about other crimes doesn't lead to anything like the amount of 'well they must all be liars* screaming and condemnation that a single false (or mistaken, or unproven) allegation of rape does. There's still this insistence that women, in particular, are vicious and untrustworthy and want to ruin men's lives with endless spite-motivated false accusations, or that they are drunken slags who can't own up to the fact that they wanted a good seeing to. So stupid people and woman-haters routinely exaggerate the terrible plague of 'false' accusations, and this is where the 'I believe you' movement comes in.

I don’t see why the process of being accused of a sexual crime and being innocent is any different to being accused of any other crime and being innocent

Really??? You ask anyone who has been accused of rape but found not guilty their experience. It will be rather different to someone who was found not guilty of car theft.

The "we believe you" campaign doesn't mean "we believe you" without any critical thought, whilst ignoring any evidence, whilst not investigating, whilst not giving evidence to the prosecution etc etc.

As it happens I think the campaign needs a rebrand and rewording simply because so many people are determined to represent it as blind faith, as an assertion that women never lie, that the accused is automatically guilty etc etc.

I can imagine scenarios where a woman may make a report to the police and tell her friends something different. I would hope that the police would always believe someone who initially reports a sexual assault/rape as they do for other crimes. These things are not incompatible.

Pumper

Because it would ruin the lives of many ‘ordinary’ men.

And if you factor in things like racial prejudice, financial inequality (=>the resulting differences in such a situation) and (depending on the jurisdiction) plea bargaining, non-disclosure agreements etc?

@Megs4x3 the defence doesn't have to prove a negative. They have to show there is at least reasonable doubt that they did commit the offence. They don't have to prove within reasonable doubt that they didn't do it. In a lot of rape/sexual assault cases they can simply say they had reasonable belief they had consent, and that's job done.

But nobody is arguing that false allegations NEVER EVER happen - we’re saying they’re rare and I haven’t seen any evidence here to refute that.

For the people so keen to believe that’s false allegations are rife, what’s your solution to combat it?

apologise for my clumsy wording, that’s obviously caused you a lot of anguish.

I didn’t feel particularly anguished. Some of the comments on here are imo problematic (and yes, some of them come e.g. from megs and some of them come from users that seem to vehemently disagree with megs. I actually disagree with quite a few of the what one might call more ‘mens rights comments...)

Anyhow. I do believe that we shouldn’t disclose the identities of the accused or the accuser to the general public (in most cases).

It would imo improve the situation for everyone involved.

...and also, how can you be so convinced that it is a false allegation?

Anyhow. I do believe that we shouldn’t disclose the identities of the accused or the accuser to the general public (in most cases).

Releasing the name of the accused encourages other victims to come forward.

Where's the OP?

MasterWu it's different because a manaccused of a sexual crime can lose his job, even career, home and access to his children before he is even charged. He can be kept on bail or under investigation for months running into years. A boy can be excluded from school or university and have his education disrupted. He can lose his friends and family because so many believe that there is no smoke without fire. There is not the same stigma attached to any other wrongdoing. The average criminal doesn't suffer all that.

AssasinatedBeauty when it's one persons word against another it does amount to showing that something could not have happened. What would your defence consist of if the charge against you consisted of raping someone on an unknown date sometime in a period of months? How would you feel if it was shown in court that the 'victim' was still a virgin but you were still found guilty of rape? I assure you, that has happened, but in England and Wales, the verdict cannot be questioned, whatever the legal teams or judge think. Believe me, there are abberant verdicts, but that's the area of wrongful convictions not false allegations and not something to get into just now. With the emphasis on prosecutions, it's not at all simply a case to say you had a reasonable belief in consent and job done. With respect that's incredibly naive.