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?

Given the recent horrific stats of how few rape cases get to trial.
The horrible stories on here about women being badly injured by men, during rape and the cases not being prosecuted.
That the woman who recorded her rape couldn't get the case prosecuted.
I find it hard to believe that men are innocent when a case does get to trial.

And that is wrong as some men could be innocent, but it is hard to shake off.

Firstly, I didn't say it is practically legal so we'll leave that point. I never said no smoke without fire either. What I said was people need to be educated about the legal system. I said he shouldn't have been named in the first place. I also said that he might well be innocent but he could also have done it but gotten away with it due to the 'beyond reasonable doubt' clause of the legal system. I then used this to disagree with those on twitter arguing to name and shame and blame the woman because his 'not guilty' verdict does not show that she is a liar. That is all I have said. I have then used my personal experience to back this up. I also agreed with you when I said 'we will never know' whether he had or not. Maybe you haven't read all of my posts properly, it seems that you haven't.

Sorry that was in response to @AllAboutMeAlways

@SleepingSloth Thankyou! And yes you're right in this case the circumstances have made it even harder to know what happened.

Unpopular opinion he shouldn't have been named either.
No one should be named until after the court date and only then if they are found guilty. Whether he did it or not, don't forget he was charged with another man who as far as I can find hasn't been named publicly!

@TheOnlyLivingBoyInNewCross The nuance can be lost when writing but I didn't mean in the legal sense of it. I'm just not here for brandishing every single male ever reported or accused or rape as guilty as charged in a case closed manner.

No, I said it was practically legal

When only 1.7% of reported cases are prosecuted at all, and victims must hand over access to their phones to have every message / google search / Facebook post used against them, I’m not sure what else you can call.

Out of 100 women who actually report a rape to the police, more than 98 of them won’t have it go any further.

*of

Whether he did it or not, don't forget he was charged with another man who as far as I can find hasn't been named publicly!

Err yes he has, even in articles linked to in this thread.

Aimily He has been named but because he isn't a celebrity he can just slip back into anonymity.

Unpopular opinion he shouldn't have been named either
No one should be named until after the court date and only then if they are found guilty

I would agree with you if we actually had a justice system but right now being named and shamed is basically the only deterrent rapists have. The vast majority of guilty men sure as hell won’t be going to prison.

Hithere12 Likely because you haven't seen or heard all the evidence. This is why publicly naming and trial by social media is very very dangerous.

If she can't be named, he shouldn't be named. Across all cases not specific to this.

The odds are stacked against women but innocent men can also be destroyed.

That's not fair or equal.

The amount of people who think false rape claims is a widespread thing shows what a number the tabloids have done on the public.

This thread was started with good intentions to discuss a point of law but reading it I think some posters need to be urgently informed about defamation instead! All you saying he's must be guilty are actually defaming him now, which is a whole other court case

Oh no! I’m going to court! 😂

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?

You know what would really help the small number of falsely accused men? More convictions. Because then the majority of men found not guilty would actually be innocent. Instead of the current system where 90+% of men found not guilty are, in fact, guilty.

So if innocent men actually cared about either innocent men or women, they would campaign for higher conviction rates. The only people who are aided by the current system are rapists and misogynists.

The amount of people who think false rape claims is a widespread thing shows what a number the tabloids have done on the public

I know. It’s less than 1% of cases that the accuser is proven to be lying. Yet for “some reason” trash like the Daily Mail cherry pick those stories?!

What kind of rapey agenda do they have??

Hithere12 Ha, best dust off your nice clothes to appear before the bench! Seriously though, people commentating that someone is guilty as hell after due legal process has acquitted them is part of the problem with the way serious sexual crimes are reported in general.

You know what would really help the small number of falsely accused men? I'm sure that would really help Damon Osborne, Liam Allan, Mahad Cassim to name a few.

@MrsTerryPratchett. Do you have actual stats that show over 90% of men found innocent are actually guilty? I’m not sure how you would be able to show that because clearly the court has found them not guilty in the first place?

Not sure it’s up to the general public to just decide we know better and that they are in fact clearly guilty, just because they’re men? I have to say I very much hope that most people on our juries have a slightly more open mind than you appear to have 😳

When people say “his life is ruined”, what exactly do you mean by that? Do you mean the way paddy Jackson’s life was ruined? How his girlfriend stayed with him and he carried on playing professional rugby with his full family’s support? That sort of ruined? Or Ched Evans who despite initially being convicted, his girlfriend stayed with him, and had her family financially support him? I believe she even went on to have his baby. He also had interest from some professional football clubs after his release from prison. Is that the sort of ruined we are talking about?

I have to say I very much hope that most people on our juries have a slightly more open mind than you appear to have

Well I'm afraid the stats rather imply they don't, seeing as they side with the accused over 98% of the time.