To be angry about the Oritse Williams rape case?

[prettyinpink23x]

He's been found not guilty today by a Jury.

So many people on twitter are saying 'name and shame the woman, she's lied' 'she deserves a prison sentence'. This is infuriating! Do these people not realise that 'not guilty' does not equate with innocent and it doesn't mean she's lied?

Is it unreasonable for me to be angry about this?

Deathgrip

The comments about “bafflement” and so on. I don’t find it baffling that they were acquitted. I think it’s perfectly possible they are guilty, but I think a conviction in this case would not have reflected a proper understanding of our laws, so it doesn’t surprise me.

Also how many consenting adults would agree to have sex with “two” men they’d just met. The article keeps talking about “both” men. It all seems so suspect.

Hithere12

I know people who have had threesomes. It’s not something I would do, but that isn’t the standard for what someone else will do.

What reason would she have to lie? Yes it is possible she could have been but It would be much easier if she consented and was embarassed to say yep I had a threesome or slept with a famous guy it was out of character etc and I regret it than to go through the 3 years of pain and measures that rape victims have to go through. In fact Id say the process victims have to go through is worse in terms of embarrassment than actually admitting it was consensual. So this whole ‘she had sex enjoyed it then regretted it and lied’ spiel is far fetched. If a woman is lying it is usually very obvious unless she is a sociopath. It is very rare for women to have a false allegation and if they do it is rare it reaches court. A woman in my area said she was raped when walking her dog. Only two weeks later the police announced they were no longer pursuing lines of inquiry due to inconsistencies and it came out she had lied. Similarly when chris brown was accused it was dismissed within days. So even if a woman was lying (which is unlikely) it is then unlikely it would reach court. Even women telling the whole truth cant even get their case to court most of the time. To lie, go through the medical processes, invasive measures, police process, interviews, the court process and cross examination would be highly unlikely. There were many times where I wanted to end the process and avoid court and I was telling the truth because the stress and pressure of it all over 3 years was killing me.

prettyinpink23x

It doesn’t matter why she might lie. She may not be lying. Some people believe things happened that didn’t. Some people lie because they are malicious, or wish for fame, or wish to be compensated, or want sympathy.

It is awful - unimaginably so - that women who are telling the truth are so often accused of lying, but at the same time, people do lie.

Herculepoirot

Yes I understand she may have lied and that is a possibility but im just saying from personal experience having gone through the whole process myself, I find it very hard to believe someone would voluntarily go through that process rather than telling the truth. They would have to be an extremely malicious person to do it. Most of the measures done by the police and court are worse for the victim than the perpetrator and I often felt that I was on trial and that I was being punished even though I hadnt done anything. So I am saying it is possible but unlikely in my eyes.

prettyinpink23x

It is unlikely. It is relatively rare. But it does happen. So we can’t discount it, because then we would be certain of sending at least some innocent people to prison.

Some women do lie though, I had a friend who said she “felt raped” because a guy she slept with didn’t want a relationship with her after, so in her words he had “basically raped her” as she wouldn’t have slept with him had she known he only wanted sex. I’m not saying this is the case for this woman as only they know what happened

@herculepoirot2

I know people who have had threesomes. It’s not something I would do, but that isn’t the standard for what someone else will do

Oh was that with two strangers they’d met the same night??? Yes I know what threesomes are they’re usually planned in advance between three consenting adults who know each other.

Hithere12

Yes. It happens. It’s not my thing, but as an activity that takes place between consenting adults, it’s not evidence of coercion.

Yes true people do lie and some probably do in the earlier stages when it is initially reported but Im talking about when it gets to court. Either the police will suss that out or I dont think a woman lying would go that far due to how difficult it is. And if a woman said ‘she felt raped because he didnt want a relationship’ the police would be able to distinguish this from actual rape. The police are supposed to be objective and not take a side. They only push it to the CPS and court if it is highly likely the guys done it they dont just rely on a womans word. I wasnt allowed to know any other evidence until court to stop it tainting my perspective. My actual statement was a very very small part of the whole thing.

prettyinpink23x

Yes, the case should only get to court if there is evidence to support it, but even at that stage it still has to be proven to the standard of “sure”.

You're so right, pretty. Some people seem to think that 'lying women' think nothing of going through the violation and what most would think of as degradation, of a court case, for no reason whatsoever. A very traumatic, public process. For what? The 'glory' of having accused someone? Nonsense.
Vanishingly rare. And it's hard enough to get a genuine case to CPS anyway.

Oh was that with two strangers they’d met the same night??? Yes I know what threesomes are they’re usually planned in advance between three consenting adults who know each other.

Of course it happens

Tbh I imagine someone famous wouldn’t struggle with that at all.

Unfortunately, inconsistency in testimony when you are the only witness is the definition of doubt. It’s horrible, but I can’t see a way round it.

Not the only witness.
The accused was there too. I am sure his story would have inconsistencies as well, especially if it was years ago. Yet, somehow, his inconsistencies don't matter. His history of lack of/non-consent doesn't matter. His behavior prior to the crime doesn't matter, his text-messages before and after don't seem to matter either.

Only the victim is on trial.

She was also very drunk so of course her memory won't be fully accurate. Also when you go through trauma your brain blocks out details to try and stop you remembering and you go into shock its very common.

Rape is practically legal in this country.

No, it's not. Nice hyperbole.

It is absolutely not true that men's lives are ruined because of rape allegations.

Most of them probably are. Maybe rightly so, and maybe wrongly so.

It is a complete myth.

Again, no, it's not.

CaptSkippy

I don’t know all the details of this one. It’s a general point I am making.

I am making a general point too. Unless the accused can prove he was somewhere else he is a witness too.

CaptSkippy

Of course. But the prosecution need to prove he is lying about the case to the level of surety. If he is inconsistent then yes, he might be lying. We know that anyway or he wouldn’t be in the dock. But if the accusing party is inconsistent, doubt is introduced, and doubt means no conviction.

prettyinpink23x

And I have an enormous amount of sympathy for that trauma. But it makes for an unreliable witness.

herculepoirot2

Perhaps it does make for an unreliable witness but it seems the odds are stacked against the victim. She has to be a perfect witness in order to hopefully secure a conviction whilst dealing perhaps with memory gaps and shock whereas he can tell some lies be a bit inconsistent with what he says and is allowed to be found not guilty. And the fact that the witness isn't allowed to see the evidence and the defendant can is massively unfair. So he can see all of the CCTV, forensics etc. and change his story if he wanted to. The victim is kept from this and so walks into the court room completely blind. Its not equal.

prettyinpink23x

No, it isn’t. The court system is designed so that the accused is given the benefit of the doubt. I appreciate that this places an enormous strain on the alleged victim, but it is the same as for other crimes.

"Rape is practically legal in this country.

No, it's not. Nice hyperbole"

Only 2% of rapists are convicted, never mind all the cases that don't get to court? How is that hyperbole?