A man who has a photo of you in bed with him is entitled to sex

[Bananamanfan]

AIBU in thinking the reporting of this story is totally irresponsible given the low reporting of rapes by victims.
The BBC are harping on about this FFS! It all perpetuates the myth that false accusations of rape are at epidemic proportions. I really think we are travelling backwards through time at the moment.

Do you have evidence if this as I haven't been able to find any

The Isaac Itary case was entirely based on the fact she was unable to give consent as she was 15. He said she had told him that she was 19 and evidenceo showed not only had she repeatedly told him she was 19 she routinely told other men she was too. So that one conclusively proved he wasn't aware she was 15 and therefore it wasn't rape as he believed she could give consent.

The Liam Allen case had such extensive evidence you couldn't reasonably believe it was rape. She sent him 30,000 messages many pestering him for sex after the supposed events, she repeatedly told people that she had consented and enjoyed it, and she lied to the police about important aspects of the case like the fact she claimed she'd never been able to enjoy sex and would never consent to it with anyone.

The Danny Kay one also had messages admitting consent and frustration about lack of contact afterwards.

All of those reach a burden of proof which would be heavy enough to convict (messages admitting rape) so they should certainly prove innocence.

I was not aware of the myth that false accusations are epidemic

There are MRA types trawling the news for any case that collapses or where accusations are withdrawn and presenting them as false allegations.

I know of a case recently that has collapsed, not because it didn't happen but on a technicality, it's still been picked up as further proof of false allegations.

elton

So no charges of false accusations or anything like that

No official confirmation that it was definitely a false accusation (but its not going to be taken further)

Just reporting

Even if the picture was taken on the night of the rape it means exactly nothing.

You can't possibly say that without more information. If, for instance, she claims that the whole thing was forced, she was protesting all the time and got away as soon as possible, then pictures over a period of time showing her cuddling up, happy and smiling would clearly mean something.

Hearsay is not allowed as evidence in any other type of case - why is it still essentially allowed in rape cases?

Why on earth is this hearsay? If you couldn't allow photos taken at the relevant time in criminal cases you would risk some very serious miscarriages of justice.

yes

I don't believe you should automatically believe that the accused is guilty

I just didn't understand why you quite rightly said that either could be 'lying' but the moral thing to do was believe the accused

In the Ched Evans case by contrast, the jury found that neither side was lying - the woman in question had no recollection of events.

This is one piece of evidence in a case. I don’t know what her exact allegations were but the photos were enough to stop the case.

The fact that these were found by the defendants lawyers after the accusers lawyers and police had had access to the phone and supposedly downloaded everything (which should have included photos) is either negligent or criminal.

Obviously rape and and does occur within relationships but a photo of them cuddling in bed alone wouldn’t say ‘no rape’.

Perhaps she had told the police that there had been no sexual contact at all and the photos prove that this wasn’t true? I dont know.

I think the reporting asks more questions than it answers, to be honest. It's so hard - how horrible for him if it didn't happen as she claimed. But how unspeakable for her if it did.

Mirime

I think the problem here is that, like all crimes, out of any number that are reported, a certain small percentage will always be false. In crimes like rape or sexual assault that often hinge entirely on one persons word against another, that is statistically more likely to happen. That's not an MRA position, its just a fact.

Now like most people I accept that the vast majority of rape allegations are genuine or the accuser believes them to be genuine, however that still means that some are going to be malicious.

Its frustrating when I see people being accused of derailing threads or of being an MRA for simply stating that as a fact.

For what its worth I have personally been on the periphery of a malicious rape allegation (not against me but against someone I knew) in which the woman in question was successfully prosecuted for her actions. I have also known at least two other occasions in my life where a rape accusation has been made and then shown to be 'mistaken' (I'm being generous here).

So it grates on me slightly when people routinely make statements such as false allegations rarely if ever happen or decide to twist the "We Believe You" campaign to take the position of automatic belief, regardless of facts or circumstances.

No official confirmation that it was definitely a false accusation (but its not going to be taken further)

In the Itiary case it's unequivocally false.

In the other cases the level of proof their innocent is much less than the level needed for their conviction and you'd need some sort of pretty convoluted ridiculous explanation to explain them.

Plus we don't know if the cases are being taken forward. Even if they're not, that doesn't mean there wouldn't be sufficient proof to convict them, it may well just have been deemed not in the public interest.

And please be assured that i am in no way meaning to imply that the men mentioned are rapists

This is an honest question/point

Do people think that sometimes because a woman thinks that she wont be believed if she admits that she was having a lovely time and enjoying herself 'until the rape' that she might be more tempted to lie in the first place

Not necessarily about the rape but the circumstances leading up to it

Sorry if that's offensive

I dont know the itary case to be honest

So she falsely accused him as opposed to charges being brought because of her age?

I will have a little google

Well you can believe the accuser

You can believe that she was raped but it wasnt by that man or that she believed she was raped

I wouldn't believe she was lying

I dont believe that the person who says they are being threatened is lying either...but there may be some confusion as to the circumstances or the identity

I don’t think Evans’ case is that unusual. There are a lot of people having sex while very drunk, a lot of men who deliberately target drunk women (though this is finally becoming less socially acceptable) and hence a lot of rape cases (whether or not they get to court) that hinge on a) whether a woman had capacity to consent b) whether the man believed she had capacity to consent. In most of these cases an acquittal does not imply that the woman is lying.

What lady said

So in the evans case i think it would be easy to believe both of them

That she was raped but it wasnt him

In that case though obviously the evidence was such that they were 'happy' that only the two men had had sex with her in the hotel

I agree, it sounds like the reporting is confusing two different things:

• failure to disclose relevant evidence

and

• the existence of a photo of the two parties in bed together.

The result is that it makes it sound as though anyone with a photo of you in bed is entitled to rape you (with a subtext that rape can't happen in a relationship that has ever had an affectionate moment).

I think journalism in this country - even in the higher-end outlets - is an absolute disgrace. The inability of many journalists to grasp basic issues and to relay them clearly is just awful. They harp on about press freedom, but the biggest threat to freedoms in this country isn't controlled reporting, but simply bad reporting, particularly when further distortion is added by an ideological corporate agenda.

What whisky said

People are being very naive here.

I've no idea what the precise evidence is, and it's possible that the photos were taken after the time she claimed to have been raped.

But photos of the complainant and defendant 'cuddling' prior to the 'attack' would be plenty enough for the defence to discredit a rape victim because I've seen it happen in other cases.

For example, in another case CCTV footage, taken days before the alleged rape, of the couple shopping together and hugging was used to discredit another rape complainant.

People find it very difficult to understand rape in relationships. The are a lot of rape myths, and this is one of them.

I think all women know that it's perfectly possible to be smiling and cuddling someone who then goes on to rape you.

But the chances of a jury convicting for rape beyond reasonable doubt when there is evidence of the victim and alleged rapist smiling in bed together is absolutely nil, so cps (procurator fiscal in Scotland) won't waste court time with it.

The worry is that had the photo's not been found, or not even taken then the in all likely hood the accused would have been found guilty.

It would have never have been known to be a false accusation.

Totally agree, Whisky. You put it really well. The BBC is sensationalising a snippet and implying that the allegation was false and suggesting that if you are in bed with someone they have rights over your body. They would do well to point out that it is actually illegal for a husband to rape his wife, I'm starting to wonder how many people know this.

You have no evidence that it was a false accusation waggy

Why do you say that you should believe the accuser yesandho?

That is not what innocent until proven guilty means. There is no presumption that the defendant is telling the truth and any other witnesses are lying.