Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To be angry about the Oritse Williams rape case?

678 replies

prettyinpink23x · 28/05/2019 14:48

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?

OP posts:
Deathgrip · 28/05/2019 16:29

Totally ruined. Like being appointed to the highest court in America, ruined?

Or even when found guilty, getting a six month sentence, ruined?

There are comments here saying that women shouldn’t go back to the hotel rooms of men if they don’t want sex - how about not taking extremely drunk women back to your hotel room if you don’t want to be accused of rape?

Mammyloveswine · 28/05/2019 16:30

Just read the evidence given by the co-accused... jesus christ! He described oritse as "oafish" and tried to instigate a threesome whilst the victim (and i believe her) was being penetrated by oritse and "not looking like she was enjoying it". She "was not getting turned on" whilst he touched her vaginally. Ffs it sounds to me like this poor woman was absolutely out of it and had barely any idea what was going on. Oritse having sex with her in an "oafish" manner hardly sounds like a mutually consenting sexual encounter and then for the other bloke to start touching her.Im appalled that both were found not-guilty. Nowhere did she consent to any of this.

isthatabloborwhat · 28/05/2019 16:31

Difficult one, this. And I am not commenting on this particular case, but I find myself wondering how to get round a rather thorny issue.

These days everybody thinks:

Guilty = they did it.

Not Guilty = they must have done it but we just can't prove it.

So what do we call it if people are genuinely innocent, since it seems that a Not Guilty verdict doesn't cut the mustard any more?

Jebuschristchocolatebar · 28/05/2019 16:32

In Ireland if you are accused of a sex assault you are not named unless proven guilty.

SleepingSloth · 28/05/2019 16:32

If someone else, a witness, describes her as a zombie then I think we can view her in that way especially if she had gaps in her memory

I don't know. I imagine they were both drunk so it's possible to not realise how drunk someone else is when you are drunk yourself. Apparently he 'couldn't perform' so I imagine he was very drunk. I obviously have no idea who is telling the truth, none of us here do. The whole situation sounds awful, I hope whoever is telling the truth has support. As I said before, men and women need to stop putting themselves in these situations.

Original poster
prettyinpink23x · 28/05/2019 16:35

@SleepingSloth When I was in court they had my blood alcohol level which proved I was very drunk so perhaps they had her blood alcohol level as evidence which could prove how drunk she really was? Also, I was very drunk and was taken to an alley and it happened so with respect even if you don't go back to someones or 'put yourself in that situation' it can still happen if the rapist wants it too. Unfortunately its not as simple as avoiding going back to someones and even sober women or children etc. get raped so lets try not to victim blame. If a rapist wants to do it he will regardless of what the victim is wearing or the setting. Obviously it does make it easier for them if they are in private and the girl is drunk but we can't all stop going out or having a drink because there are bad people out there.

OP posts:
Deathgrip · 28/05/2019 16:36

Exactly - this is the sworn testimony of one of the accused, so probably not fully reflective of reality:
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/jls-oritse-williams-rape-latest-manager-threesome-wolverhampton-court-a8924216.html

Does this sound like an account of consensual sex to you? Did he state he asked her permission or get any indication of her being interested before he started touching her?

I feel like I’m living in a parallel universe sometimes.

burnoutbabe · 28/05/2019 16:36

Surely people are charged with making false accusations if they know that the man was elsewhere at the time (and assuming not a stranger and so maybe misidentified in a line up). Else it's generally that they did have sex and at best poor judgement was exercised by the man.

PinkieTuscadero · 28/05/2019 16:37

Well said, prettyinpink.

QueenOfTheTofuTree · 28/05/2019 16:37

Legally he is innocent of rape.

However she hasn't been charged with anything. She hasn't been proven to have made anything up. Legally she is innocent of making a false accusation.

Innocent until proven guilty works both ways.

SleepingSloth · 28/05/2019 16:38

That's just not good enough though. As a society should we just shrug our shoulders and accept a 1.7% conviction rape? No. We shouldn't.

But what is the answer when the nature of sex and therefore rape means that it usually happens in private. We can't just convict any man who is accused.

ILoveMaxiBondi · 28/05/2019 16:38

so what about all these woman who make these false claims

That’s already a crime and punishable by prison time. “All these women” who make “these” false claims have been assessed by the police who will send the case to the CPS for a decision to be made on whether to prosecute. Just the same as a rapist will be assessed.

PinkieTuscadero · 28/05/2019 16:38

Mammyloveswine, so fucking grim Sad

LonnyVonnyWilsonFrickett · 28/05/2019 16:39

The best way for innocent men to avoid rape charges (apart from not raping anyone) is to work their arses off to change rape culture. To play their part in making rape so vanishingly rare that the false accusation stats wither on the vine. In other words, if Ortise's manager had behaved like a decent human being and said 'mon mate, let's just go back to the hotel, this complete stranger is plastered and I think perhaps might not want our cocks in her' then no-one would have been accused of rape that night, would they.

VladmirsPoutine · 28/05/2019 16:40

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Deathgrip · 28/05/2019 16:40

That's just not good enough though. As a society should we just shrug our shoulders and accept a 1.7% conviction rape? No. We shouldn't

1.7% prosecution rate. The conviction rate is lower. Rape may as well be legal, especially in cases where there are no witnesses or you have evidence that the victim was interested in you beforehand (eg agreed to a date, was friendly) and especially if they are in shock and don’t immediately follow the accepted victim script afterwards.

PinkieTuscadero · 28/05/2019 16:40

But what is the answer when the nature of sex and therefore rape means that it usually happens in private. We can't just convict any man who is accused.

Good thing then that no one has suggested we convict any man who is accused.

You might be fine with this pitifully low conviction rate, but society shouldn't be. I don't know what the answer is but I'd imagine there are legal professionals who have suggestions as to how to make the process more just.

TheOnlyLivingBoyInNewCross · 28/05/2019 16:40

That there are many cases of false rape accusations is beyond a doubt

Is it? Really? Can you provide reliable statistics for this?

Sagradafamiliar · 28/05/2019 16:42

YANBU.

PinkieTuscadero · 28/05/2019 16:42

1.7% prosecution rate. The conviction rate is lower.

Apologies. You're right.

derxa · 28/05/2019 16:42

His career is over.

Dorsetdays · 28/05/2019 16:42

My understanding is that the decision was unanimous and took two hours to reach? With a jury of 8 women.

Evidence was presented which suggested that one of the victims was ‘zombified’. Evidence was also presented which suggested that when hotel staff approached the victim her words were that ‘nothing had happened, nothing bad at least’. The victim also allegedly returned to the hotel room where the alleged initial assault had taken place.

I’m sure there are many cases where rapists are found not guilty. However, from what has been reported so far I haven’t seen anything to suggest that this verdict was due to a lack of evidence rather than because he was actually innocent.

Not sure it’s helpful to suggest otherwise and think ‘social media trials’ are concerning as we don’t know all of the facts.

TheOnlyLivingBoyInNewCross · 28/05/2019 16:43

Not guilty as some here would like to imagine does not mean that there just wasn't enough evidence to prove that he's a raping guilty bastard.

Um, I think you'll find that's exactly what "not guilty" means. Confused

What would you like it to mean?

AllAboutMeAlways · 28/05/2019 16:43

Prettyinpink You are just as bad as the loons on Twitter screaming for her to be “named and shamed”.

The man has been found not guilty. Whether he is factually innocent or not will never be known so your “no smoke without fire” attitude is extremely idiotic and ignorant.

As is the “rape is practically legal” in this country crap other people are coming out with.

No, it isn’t. It’s not even close to being “practically legal”.

We have a justice system that requires evidence to convict. Rape only very rarely generates the kind of evidence required. This is nobody’s fault - not the victims, or the police or the courts. That’s the unfortunate nature of the offence. From a purely evidential standpoint it is often indistinguishable from a consensual sexual encounter.

It’s very, very hard to know what to do about that...but the hysterical “it’s practically legal” suggests that’s because the justice system doesn’t care. And that’s utter crap.

QueenOfTheTofuTree · 28/05/2019 16:43

Also an anonymity law wouldn't mean that accused men don't have their lives ruined or suffer any consequences at all.

Alleged crimes have to be investigated and this means the alleged perpetrator will have to be named throughout the course of the investigation in order to build a case. Nine times out of ten when people talk about men having their lives ruined as a result of being named they are talking about being named throughout the investigation. An anonymity law would not change that.