Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think that most people who think men accused of rape should be granted anonymity don't understand what it actually means?

135 replies

PlantsArePeopleToo · 13/09/2018 18:49

Anonymity simply refers to press anonymity. It has nothing to do with not being named during the course of the police investigation.

Even if those accused of rape and other sex crimes were granted anonymity it wouldn't stop allegations of those things needing to be investigated which would mean the suspect/accused would need to be named when speaking to potential witnesses and when building the case. Anonymity wouldn't stop those witnesses from then telling people who he is and it certainly wouldn't stop people walking into a rape trial and finding out who he is that way. Anonymity wouldn't stop bail conditions been set. It wouldn't stop people gossiping and making their own judgments.

I have seen it a lot, even on here, where people argue that they should be given anonymity because they know someone who was accused (falsely or otherwise) who had their lives torn apart as a result of the investigation or bail conditions despite the fact that those things have bugger all to do with anonymity and would still happen even if anonymity was in place.

I've even seen cases where a minor was accused and people still used them as examples as to why anonymity is important despite the fact that minors are automatically anonymous Confused.

Not to mention the fact that the majority of men accused of rape are not named in the press anyway. Generally men only tend to be named if they are high profile or if there is an unusual or interesting element to the case (e.g serial rapist). The majority of men accused of rape already are anonymous.

I've been quite surprised by how many people seem confused by this why I've explained to them what it means or just flat out don't believe me.

AIBU to think that a lot of people arguing for anonymity for the accused think that it means that they won't be named or identified at all during the investigation? AIBU to think most people misunderstand what anonymity means?

OP posts:
Original poster
PlantsArePeopleToo · 13/09/2018 19:30

Many lives have been ruined due to false claims of sexual assault.

Indeed they have and usually that is a result of the investigation itself and what goes along with it.

OP posts:
YeTalkShiteHen · 13/09/2018 19:31

Indeed they have and usually that is a result of the investigation itself and what goes along with it.

The same statement could apply to justice not being done.

Original poster
PlantsArePeopleToo · 13/09/2018 19:32

I agree that naming them sometimes is helpful. John Worboys comes to mind.

OP posts:
GunpowderGelatine · 13/09/2018 19:33

YADNBU and I feel really strongly about this. It's not just about understanding that, actually, to be 'named and shamed' means that a reporter has to take an interest in the case and be working/available that day, and or that the police press office is giving out information. By this point the CPS have taken the case to court, they don't do that with every complaint, they on take cases to court they think can end in a conviction - so there's a fantastic chance the defendant is guilty. It's not just a case of walking into a police station and making w false allegation then it being over the newspapers the next day - that's what people don't seem to understand!

Also, false accusations are ridiculously rare and there is NO evidence to suggest being falsely accused of rape is any more common or detrimental than that of other crimes. So if we were to just anonymise rape allegations, what message does that send out? Why would that decision be made?

Those who say false allegations ruin lives - TRUE allegations don't even ruin lives! The most powerful man in the world has been accused dozens of times and still holds a great deal of power.

Also, if allegations were anonymised at the point of a court case then Jon Worboys would still be raping women in his taxi today.

Think about that before you put the needs of men first

Original poster
PlantsArePeopleToo · 13/09/2018 19:34

Also lol @ my superior intelligence. That genuinely is funny. Thanks for the laugh.

OP posts:
YeTalkShiteHen · 13/09/2018 19:35

Well you’re insinuating everyone is stupid and getting shitty with anyone who disagrees. So what else am I supposed to think?
For the record I don’t think you have superior intelligence, I think you think you do.

ArsenicNLace · 13/09/2018 19:35

What a patronising OP!!!

I think most people of even average IQ understand what anonymity means has n the case of rape trials. In actual fact it means the name cannot be published at all and that means as well as the press it can't be published by private individuals ( or anyone else )on Social Media.

That is the issue. Yes local people may gossip amongst themselves but if the person is found 'not guilty' or never charged no googling of their name will bring up the allegation for evermore. The allegation won't follow them for evermore if they are indeed innocent giving them a better chance to rebuild their lives.

I think it's the OP who doesn't really understand all the issues around anonymity!!!

RubiksQueen · 13/09/2018 19:35

I actually think that a lot of people in RL DO think anonymity means that nobody should be able to know about it. That people questioned must be told they can't tell people, that you won't be allowed to post about it on social media etc. That workplaces couldn't be told, that it couldn't affect someone's life until it was 'proven'.

A lot of the things people complain about when someone is accused of sexual offences aren't because the person was named in the paper. It is because officers turned up at somewhere that would embarrass the suspect. Or because the suspect has been suspended from work and the allegation has got out as to why that was. I think that there are those who are close to folk who have been suspected of these crimes who think that if they are investigated for something that could be seen as quite so embarrassing and career ending that it should be done in secret to preserve their reputation. However I'm pretty sure that if it were their loved one as a victim they would not extend the suspect the same courtesy.

GunpowderGelatine · 13/09/2018 19:35

So why shouldn't the accused be granted the same privilege?

You're really comparing a rapist to their victim? One has (probably, and likely) done wrong the other hasn't

Original poster
PlantsArePeopleToo · 13/09/2018 19:35

Hmm, I am autistic and I wonder if that makes me rub people the wrong way. Somehow I doubt people would have reacted this way if it was someone else who started this thread.

OP posts:
HeadsDownThumbsUpEveryone · 13/09/2018 19:36

actually, to be 'named and shamed' means that a reporter has to take an interest in the case. By this point the CPS have taken the case to court,

That's nonsense, it's very common for an individual to be named in the local press, just because it is not reported nationally doesn't mean that the damage hasn't been done.

YeTalkShiteHen · 13/09/2018 19:36

Oh don’t start OP, being autistic doesn’t make you be shitty to people. I’m autistic, blunt yes, but deliberately goady and nasty? Nope.

Original poster
PlantsArePeopleToo · 13/09/2018 19:39

Totally agree @RubiksQueen and @GunpowderGelatine.

You are both obviously much better at it than I am.

OP posts:
GunpowderGelatine · 13/09/2018 19:40

Heads it's very rare an alleged sex offender is named before the trial. In which case the accused has been charged which means there's a great deal of evidence against them. Local press usually have a Crime Reporter who attends court as and when they're available and they are within their rights to report any case (ores restrictions exempt)

m4rdybum · 13/09/2018 19:40

Hmm, I am autistic and I wonder if that makes me rub people the wrong way. Somehow I doubt people would have reacted this way if it was someone else who started this thread.

Oh my Christ Hmm

GunpowderGelatine · 13/09/2018 19:40

Sorry, named in the press that is

Original poster
PlantsArePeopleToo · 13/09/2018 19:40

A lot of the things people complain about when someone is accused of sexual offences aren't because the person was named in the paper. It is because officers turned up at somewhere that would embarrass the suspect. Or because the suspect has been suspended from work and the allegation has got out as to why that was. I think that there are those who are close to folk who have been suspected of these crimes who think that if they are investigated for something that could be seen as quite so embarrassing and career ending that it should be done in secret to preserve their reputation. However I'm pretty sure that if it were their loved one as a victim they would not extend the suspect the same courtesy.

Pretty much this.

And none of those things would be fixed with anonymity.

OP posts:
marvellousnightforamooncup · 13/09/2018 19:42

Absolutely Gunpowder. 👏

Seniorschoolmum · 13/09/2018 19:42

YAbu

noobs18 · 13/09/2018 19:48

Op you seem to think the general population are all idiots. In fact, you're an idiot. Nobody believes that anonymity means the police won't use the accused's name in the course of their investigation. And you are stupid to think so

Also what's this nonsense about the press rarely release the names of accused rapists?! The press ALWAYS release the names. Whether it's national newspapers or just the local rag, it always happens and lives are ruined as a result

DerekTheBrave · 13/09/2018 19:53

I think most people of even average IQ understand what anonymity means in the case of rape trials

This.

I think maybe the people you go around ‘explaining’ this to are humouring you op.

GunpowderGelatine · 13/09/2018 19:53

A lot of the things people complain about when someone is accused of sexual offences aren't because the person was named in the paper. It is because officers turned up at somewhere that would embarrass the suspect. Or because the suspect has been suspended from work and the allegation has got out as to why that was. I think that there are those who are close to folk who have been suspected of these crimes who think that if they are investigated for something that could be seen as quite so embarrassing and career ending that it should be done in secret to preserve their reputation. However I'm pretty sure that if it were their loved one as a victim they would not extend the suspect the same courtesy.

Exactly. You couldn't live in a world where NO ONE was told. I mean could you imagine if it was - if for example what if a doctor was accused of rape but no one told his employer to protect the anonymity of those tiny amount of people falsely accused. So he's not suspended from work. Imagine if he was convicted and you saw him on the news convicted of rape. having just had your smear done by him last week. This is why the victims needs should always come first.

GunpowderGelatine · 13/09/2018 19:57

Also what's this nonsense about the press rarely release the names of accused rapists?! The press ALWAYS release the names. Whether it's national newspapers or just the local rag, it always happens and lives are ruined as a result

Because the case is in court and they have a right (and an interest) to report it.

I meant the police rarely release names before a court case unless there's a very good reason to. The press rely on the police for the information so if they don't give it they don't know it. I think some people think the police fax the local rag a copy of names every day

Original poster
PlantsArePeopleToo · 13/09/2018 20:06

The press ALWAYS release the names.

They don't simply because it's not practicable to do so. If the news reported on every single rape allegation they would never get anything else reported.

I was sexually assaulted a few years ago and I reported it to the police. I can assure you that at no point was he ever named in the press. Even after the case was dropped I can still Google his very unusual name and nothing relating to what he did comes up.

OP posts:
1981fishgut · 13/09/2018 20:09

I am afraid sometimes women do make false allegations

And unlike some not eveyone eveyone has big brother recording

You shouldn’t be named until charged or in court

Do we remember that poor landlord who’s name was dragged through the mud because he was odd and he did nothing