The tone of the coverage of the Reynhard Sinaga case. *Title edited by MNHQ*

[Dogsaresomucheasier]

Just watching tonight’s news. I do not wish to minimise the trauma suffered by the victims of Reynhard Sinaga, but I’m really struggling with the reporting of the case; even from female journalists. It seems so full of empathy and gravitas, when so many female victims go unheard.

But that isn't relative to this case.

This case is unique. Making comparisions to.other rape case about men or women is pointless

My last post was aimed at timeaftertime on the last page.

Time The Ched Evans trial was slightly different as the evidence of her ex boyfriend was deemed to be relevant to the trial (think it was to do with her never having done a sexual act or something and her ex came forward?

And you are wrong about the phones.

Sexual history is only supposed to be admissible when it's materially relevant (arguably, never then - unless you're going to argue that because a person had consensual sex once they're always going to consent) but in practice it is introduced in a third of trials. Also clothing - the teenager in Ireland told that the fact she was wearing a thong meant she consented, the married woman in England told likewise because she didn't have underwear on etc etc etc). Article here:

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/rape-sexual-history-assault-cross-examine-trial-court-voices4victims-plaid-cymru-mp-liz-savile-a7570286.html

Basically this is a thread about women having no evidence that this case would have been reported differently in the 2 days after the lengthy sentencing of a man for 136 rapes if they had been female victims rather than male. The massive number of convictions and the judge’s comments would make it phenomenally difficult to report this case any other way without appearing to want to bring the investigation, the trial, the judge and the law into disrepute.

@Walkaround all of the male victims here had been clubbing, presumably not in monks' robes, were drunk and went to a stranger's house. There has been no value laden descriptor of their behaviour other than that they were "vulnerable" and no mention of their appearance at all, although presumably they were dressed with requisite care and attention as befits going to a nightclub.

I don’t ask my witnesses about their sexual history apart from their last partner (if relevant). None of us do.

@Nicknacky

Time The Ched Evans trial was slightly different as the evidence of her ex boyfriend was deemed to be relevant to the trial (think it was to do with her never having done a sexual act or something and her ex came forward?

And how did he know about it? People aren't supposed to know all about the evidence right?

slippery I have no idea, I’m going from memory. And the public won’t be told how that information came before the court.

Sexual history is only supposed to be admissible when it's materially relevant (arguably, never then - unless you're going to argue that because a person had consensual sex once they're always going to consent) but in practice it is introduced in a third of trials.

It seems to come up pretty often in 'rough sex' murder trials, where the testimony of a previous sexual partner that a woman enjoyed rough sex with him seems to confirm that she will have wanted her last partner to do whatever violent acts took place to her, and that consent can be assumed.

@Nicknacky let me refresh your memory.

£50000 is a lot of money, isn't it?

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/oct/11/witness-in-ched-evans-retrial-accused-of-lying-to-land-50000-reward

Was he convicted of perjury then?

@butterymuffin, indeed. After all, what woman who likes trying out a few things she's read in fifty shades wouldn't want to have her skull repeatedly fractured by a blunt object? See, relevance.

Ps, no.

I personally think you are being very unreasonable. If a man had raped nearly 50 known female victims (and god knows how many unknown), I cannot believe the reporting would be any different.

Article here about police attaching condition of digital downloads of victims' mobile phone data prior to proceeding with crime investigation, now the subject of a legal challenge by ten human rights organisations and also an ICO investigation.

But yeah, nicknacky's never done it so obviously it doesn't happen. Perhaps they're all just making it up. Women do that, you know. Make things up.

Oops sorry, article:

www.theguardian.com/law/2019/jul/23/police-demands-for-access-to-victims-phones-unlawful

The person convicted was on a student visa and has raped 195+ victims. Why are people making this about it being men??? If this were the same headline involving women it would gain the same coverage. There are now other men supposedly coming forward. How can anyone start a gender issue. Rape is rape. I have never heard of this many victims owing to a singular perpetrator end of.

I have seized phones of victims IF it is relevant to the enquiry. It’s not don’t routinely and as the article says “in some cases” they may not be able to proceed with the investigation.

I have seized a victims phone with evidence on it which was instrumental in her attackers conviction.

TimeAfterTimeAfter - that is simply untrue, the men were not all reported as having been drunk in any of the articles I have read. Why are you assuming that? Because the prosecution tried to claim that they were (which would imply this is seen as making them blameworthy, not vulnerable)? I have no doubt whatsoever that what has mainly protected these men from media insinuations about their sobriety, sexuality, choice of nightclubs and clothing is the fact that there were reporting restrictions on the three trials until all the damning verdicts, judge’s summing up and massive sentence had been given. And that enough of the men were not gay, drunk or dressed particularly provocatively to encourage the likes of The Daily Mail to froth at the mouth about young male promiscuity and men’s appetite for strange sexual practices no doubt encouraged by the accessibility of gay porn - because that’s far more Daily Mail than actual sympathy. Still, at least they get to be horrified about a depraved monster rather than the state of modern society, and that is their 2nd favourite thing to do.

They have used it to seize phones in the cases of stranger rape really, why is your phone relevant when you dont know the person who raped you? So they are going to login to mumsnet and see I've been raped previously and not proceeded with it because of them they can see I'm not a boris supporter and they can see I've bought period pants off amazon (which are not bad actually)

All I can see is my personal life being picked over in an effort to make me into a slut

This case is very different from almost everything that has gone before.

Why do people say this?
Most pedophiles offend an average of 200 times before they are apprehended.
It is now common practice for rapists to record their crimes and post them on porn sites.
The only thing unusual about this rape case is that the perp was found guilty and given an appropriate sentence, and the corporate media treated the victims with far more respect than they do when the victims are women and girls.

Isn't the phone thing because someone almost got convicted of rape when there was evidence on a phone that it wasn't? Can't remember the details but I'm sure that was the reason.

@HandsOffMyRights. I haven't read them, because I know they will annoy me. For every positive one (occasionally I like to leave nice comments on the DM site in an attempt to balance it out) there'll be half a dozen implying its her own fault, based on that headline.

Nicknacky
The Ched Evans trial was slightly different as the evidence of her ex boyfriend was deemed to be relevant to the trial (think it was to do with her never having done a sexual act or something and her ex came forward?

It was due to her alleged history of blacking out after drinking and acting normally/consenting to sex with others.

However it didn't answer the question of whether evens or his mate asked and gained consent for sex for evens which was part of the major reason he was convicted in the first place.

The Ched Evans one always baffles me - he admitted he didn't obtain consent, because he admitted he never spoke a word to his victim. How can the jury not see that that means no consent was obtained! You can't consent if you don't communicate!

Also this random ex conveniently popped up for the appeal after the Evans clan offered £50k reward for evidence, reiterating stuff that was said in the original trial...stuff that's in the public record...funny that coincidence 🤨