another man falsly accused of rape...

[Skybore]

... but named and shamed forever anyway no doubt...

BBC

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape#Crown_Prosecution_Service_report_.282011.E2.80.932012.29

From Wikipedia:

A report by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) examined rape allegations in England and Wales over a 17-month period between January 2011 and May 2012. It showed that in 35 cases was it considered that there was enough evidence to prosecute a person for making a false allegation of rape compared to 5,651 prosecutions for rape. Keir Starmer, the head of the CPS, stated that the "mere fact that someone did not pursue a complaint or retracted it, is not of itself evidence that it was false" and that it is a "misplaced belief" that false accusations of rape are commonplace.[3] He added that the report also showed that a significant number of false allegations of rape (and domestic violence) "involved young, often vulnerable people. About half of the cases involved people aged 21 years old and under, and some involved people with mental health difficulties. In some cases, the person alleged to have made the false report had undoubtedly been the victim of some kind of offence, even if not the one that he or she had reported."[4][5]

While any false allegation is one too many, there are far, far fewer than actual rapes - the figures in the above cited review equates to 0.6% of rape allegations being false.

Yes I know all that, and neither you me nor Wiki will ever know what the real figures are. I would imagine both of the numbers you have made bold are way higher in reality. Of course I could start another thread about how low the rape conviction rate is here in Scotland. Is there something wrong in starting a different thread on a different topic? Maybe we shouldn't bother discussing the latest failure of child protection services/police etc in a child cruelty death, because the figure of the number of children that ARE saved by these services will be many many times higher? The next time a child is killed by mum and step-dad will you just counter the first post with a cut and paste from Wiki of how many more children in danger were removed and re-homed? I have put my name to numerous campaigns aiming to improve the low rate of rate conviction, but I am still allowed to believe that the naming and shaming of men accused of rape is wrong am I not?

Um, not sure what your point is? The man in this case has not been named, never stood trial, his name has never been released, while hers has.

If you are arguing for anonymity for the accused, this is a bad case to stake your claim on. It's a bad idea anyway, to treat men accused of rape in a special way denied to anyone accused of murder, assault, GBH, fraud, burglary, all sorts of other crimes that are very embarrassing for the accused, even if they are eventually found guilty.

The only reason for singling out rape would be the idea that a. women lie. A lot. All the time and b. being accuse of rape is uniquely shameful. Neither are true.

Woman commits crime, gets punished. Not really news, is it ?

I find it more heinous that so many rapists commit rape and don't get punished.

What Edam said.

His name and picture was on the Mails website this morning.

Lots of defendants in other types of crime get splashed across the papers and then acquitted.

I get that it must have been horrible for him but she's been punished, his name has been cleared and a message has been sent that false accusations are not only unacceptable but criminal and will be prosecuted.

Sorry but I can't help but compare that to the completely inadequate way that rape victims are treated. Even when their attackers are prosecuted and found guilty, the victim is still left with people questioning their integrity and questioning what she did to deserve it.

I don't see anyone wondering what this man did to deserve it or campaigning for her to get off. No it wasn't right or fair and will probably have an impact on him but let's not pretend that, in general, false rape accusations are common.

Hi, did you mean "even if they are eventually found NOT guilty"? I think so. And he was named, and that is typical, so I think it's as good an example of this as any. I can't speak for you, but yes for me being accused of rape or sex crime would be embarrassing and life changing, more so than the other crimes you have mentioned. I'm often told men cannot what rape means. Perhaps you cant understand what it's like to be falsely accused of a sex crime in the community? It doesn't mean we are enemies. I can still agree with you on rape whilst believing that men should not be named until they are found guilty of a sex crime.

Your use of the phrase "another man falsely accused" suggests that this is a common event.

It's newsworthy precisely because it is not common.

Rape convictions on the other hand barely make the local press. Because they happen all the time. And the successful prosecutions are the mere tip of the iceberg.

So yes I feel immense sympathy for this individual, but I really don't think that this is evidence of a massively unreported crime with a low conviction rate.

I notice today on BBC that a man is found guilty of raping a 13 year old girl, given a short sentence IMO. If you really think that if he was found not guilty his name would be cleared no problem, then all I can say is that you do not live in my world. He would have to move away and change his job if he had one, and people would never forget.

Why are sex crimes different ? What's so unique about a man accused of a sex crime ?

A mother accused of killing her child is named, a paedophile accused of child sexual abuse is named, a husband accused of murdering his wife is named. Our criminal justice system affords protection and anonymity only to the victims, and often only where they are vulnerable. The accused is afforded protection by the justice system itself by way of a fair trial. Only if the accused is in somewhat significantly vulnerable should they be provided with anonymity.

Look, if you were arguing that all accused parties should not be named unless there was a conviction, then I'd have more sympathy for your views. I wouldn't necessarily agree with them.

But you're not, you're arguing that this protection should only be afforded to men accused of sex crimes.

What Edam said

It's shocking.
Maybe if the vast majority of rapists just stopped raping then there would be a very low rate of rapes. Imagine, say, 35 cases a year - still 35 too many of course. The ones that would still be committed could be investigated properly, and reported in the media and everyone would know who committed the crime. You would never get away with making a false accusation then. That might be the only solution.

I can say with complete certainty that I don't want to live anywhere near your world, skybore.

Hi. You are right my choice of phrase in the title is wrong. I'm on about the bigger picture of being named before there is any guilt. And I agree with all comments about rape conviction rates etc. It is allowed to be both upset about low rate of rape conviction and believe that people should not be named until found guilty of sex crimes isn't it?

I don't agree that there should be a distinction about sex crimes. For me I genuinely feel it would be worse to be falsely accused of fraud or theft than a sex crime.

Treating sex crimes as uniquely shameful is negative to victims as well as acquitted defendants.

I suppose in an ideal world. But I think most people here are looking at the bigger problem, which is the number of rapes and the number of them that go unpunished. Practically all.

Though you are right, for the individual involved it is awful.

If a woman falsely accusing a man of rape is one of the worst things a woman can do, then a man accusing a woman of making a false claim must be at least as bad, if not worse - particularly if he has in fact raped her.

Would you not agree OP?

Do you also post threads for the much larger number of cases where a man has falsely denied being a rapist? Or do you just see it as a problem when a woman does not tell the truth, and it is just a man's right to lie about such things?

Great name, Haughty

If, OP, you genuinely want to debate the rather old subject of whether those accused of sexual offences should have a special exemption in our justice system and remain anonymous, rather than just goad a female-dominated website, then I think you are wrong.

There are good reasons for naming the accused, not least that it can encourage other victims to come forward, as we have seen so often in recent high-profile cases.

I respect all views and agree with you more than you probably know. You probably already do live in my world, its quite a common reaction in a community. I work with young people and know of suicides and attempted suicide by young men before they have even been found guilty due to shame, it is different than other crimes. And if the only retort is "but many more woman have committed suicide after being raped" then we might as well all pack up and go home now. Two wrongs don't make a right. Yes HC I agree, of course.

You know of multiple cases in which innocent men have been falsely accused of rape and have attempted or committed suicide? Really?

I find that hard to believe frankly.