Would you stay with a partner accused of rape?

[Scrapper142]

Inspired by news and personal experience, interested to know, would you stay and if you have experienced it, did stay or get out?

Ed Westwicks gf has been defending him and said she believes he's innocent. Although postponed getting engaged.

The man who raped me is happily in a new relationship. It's something I don't tend to think about, but his name was tagged in a fb post on my feed his week and in a moment of weakness I looked. There was a picture of his gf blissfully happy.

I just wonder how she stays with him (assuming she knows). I'm sure if she has been told it's an edited and manipluated version. But I expect she is completely unaware and unaware of the reality of the man she is sharing her life with. It makes me so sad for her and then so fucking angry (that he can do this).

It's strange as I feel connected to this complete stranger, I know it's not my problem but I can't help but worry about her. Then I think she'd probably never want to hear or accept the truth anyway?!?!

eryi

The CRB thing raises a huge red flag in that story. A dropped allegation would not be shown - the checks record convictions, reprimands, final warnings etc - not a dropped allegation.

I suspect you have not been told the whole truth, that he does indeed have something that would show on a CRB check and that that is why he doesn’t apply for jobs.

Abusive people tell other people who they are all the time and for some reason we are prone to think ‘why would they tell me that if it was true?’

Also you don’t know what he said about why it was dropped is true.

It was laughably incredible why would he be arrested?

If he wasn’t arrested then why would there be anything on his record?

Now, I’m not arguing for a second that he is a rapist. I’m arguing that actually what you have based your very strong opinion of innocence on is not at all convincing, it is very subjective.

‘I know him, I know what he is like, why would he tell me about it if he wasn’t truthful, he has told me why he wasn’t charged’

If you unpick that keeping in mind all of the things Tammy has said you will see that it is possible that actually what he is is a man who is managing his image very carefully in light of having been arrested, it is not at all definitive, or even particularly safe that he was actually falsely accused...

‘Why would he tell me 15+ years later?’ would immediately make me feel ‘because he needs to control how people see this event from his past’ not ‘he must be innocent’ he might want to control it because he is innocent or because he is guilty....

According to some PP due to this one accusation he should be denied any future relationships and happiness.

I don't think anyone's arguing this.
There is a huge difference between an allegation which was quickly thrown out by police as an obviously false claim. (and if you were the wife you would probably have more information than that) and a claim which doesn't make it to court due to lack of evidence.

I do also think that many of us did stupid things when we were young. maybe even things we are ashamed of, possibly even things which are criminal. Genuine repentance and life turned round for some (and definitely not all) but for some does mean that they become the least likely to reoffend in that area. we are not the same people aged 40 that we were at 18

According to some PP due to this one accusation he should be denied any future relationships and happiness.

And I think this is a silly way to interpret the responses here TBH.

Some people are saying that they wouldn’t want to be in a relationship with a man who had been accused.

Some people have said for them they would make various and quite complicated individual judgements about it.

No-one has said that their individual feelings about what they feel they would do should be imposed as rule of law on the world.

I think it's more a lack of trust in the system and with the police (which is unsurprising when they turn up on doorstep accusing you of rape), he just doesn't want to find out the hard way. Wasn't even cautioned, but unsure whether police contact would show up for CRB. I'd hope it wouldn't but no idea either what actually does and doesn't show up.

I don't think it's hard to imagine that Rape victims are the only people let down by the police/legal system in terms of lack of information/ explanation.

And he does apply for jobs, he has a very good career, it has mainly meant he has turned down volunteering opportunities because it just isn't worth the stress for him.

The CRB thing raises a huge red flag in that story. A dropped allegation would not be shown - the checks record convictions, reprimands, final warnings etc - not a dropped allegation.

This, Eryi. Maybe your friend is a totally innocent, stand-up guy. But nothing you've said is evidence of that.

You've made your choice, obviously. Other women might make a different choice, as is their right. No woman owes your friend - or any other man - a relationship. No woman owes your friend - or any other man - the duty to ensure his happiness. I wish more women felt able to put their own safety and happiness first.

Lots of people are let down by the criminal justice system because it is concerned purely with dealing with things that are so sad or harmful that they are considered to be crimes.

No-one is saying no man has ever been falsely accused, that men who have been falsely accused are fine, that every man must be suspected every single time a woman speaks.

People are talking about their personal feelings and the judgements that they would make pursuant to achieving what they feel to be their own best interests in a very personal situation that really have very little to do with the criminal justice system.

What do people feel about the anonymity of accused rapists until the trial? I know there has been a lot about it in the past, especially with the celeb issues; victims are automatically kept anonymous aren't they? Do people think accused rapists should be named?

It would depend entirely on the credibility of the accusation.

Plus I know DH, and what he is and isn’t capable of,

No, you don't. I don't and I've known my husband for 15 years, together for 10. I don't think he could do that, but I don't know and cannot know.

And he does apply for jobs, he has a very good career, it has mainly meant he has turned down volunteering opportunities because it just isn't worth the stress for him.

A truly dropped allegation wouldn’t show. I dont think your friend is telling you the whole truth.

I have experienced similar (not rape but violence related) with the ex of a friend who told us a detailed and very plausible version of what had happened in his past. Also an entirely false version as it happened. Sometimes people whitewash the past.

If your friend had a totally dropped allegation, he would have nothing to fear from even an enhanced CRB / DRB

Mad - I think the current system is fine. The court can make a judgement that the accused should be anonymous too if they feel it is necessary.

Automatic anonymity for any accused would be against the interests of justice IMO.

With recent high profile accusations, it's only the fact that they're not anonymous that has enabled more victims to come forward, and identifying other victims and patterns of behaviour is one of the few ways that guilt can be established in cases like this.

A truly dropped allegation wouldn’t show. I dont think your friend is telling you the whole truth.

Do be fair to him, if you google "CRB check arrested not charged" there are a lot of people asking/ thinking the same thing, so I hardly think that a lack of trust in the legal system can be seen as a strong assumption of guilt.

mustbemad17 I think there should be anonymity for the accused (not just rape but murders) as standard, since our legal system is supposedly built on the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, with maybe a court application process for very specific and exceptional cases where naming would be necessary to gather evidence/ identify further victims (ie Jimmy Saville).

Offred i wasn't aware of that (courts able to grant anonymity) so that is interesting.

Tammy that's my take on it, & I was thinking specifically to the likes of the Jimmy saville & Rolf Harris cases.

Although - and I hope people don't take this the wrong way - I find it exceptionally difficult to comprehend how cases from years ago make a conviction despite no physical evidence...yet modern cases with physical evidence are shut down.

Also along with increase anonymity for the accused, where name and image of accused were necessarily released I think a system should be in place where the police and press are only allowed to use one photograph of the accused that meets a set down criteria (like passport photos), as the media are a nightmare for using photos taken out of context to manipulate public opinion.

There is research into attrition and abuse in the criminal courts. As far as I remember most attrition occurs due to various factors involving police investigations.

I find it hard to see how it would be in the public interest to have a presumption of anonymity re those who have been accused TBH. That’s why it is rare for the court to use the powers they have re reporting restrictions and anonymity.

Many people were up in arms re the fairly limited reporting restrictions/anonymity re James Bulger...

If there was a presumption of anonymity we would essentially put the criminal justice system beyond scrutiny and this would be quite frightening for all involved IMO...

I find it hard to see how it would be in the public interest to have a presumption of anonymity re those who have been accused TBH. That’s why it is rare for the court to use the powers they have re reporting restrictions and anonymity.

Until it is you who is falsely accused, and way before you even get your day in court the newspapers have trawled out you life story (no holds barred) for everyone to see. Then all it take is the people who believe in "no smoke without fire" and your life is changed/ ruined forever.

But I don’t think being falsely accused means you get a bigger say TBH.

I don’t agree with much of the ‘victims rights’ stuff that is coming from the opposite direction and in the same vein either.

I very seriously doubt that anonymity for the accused has anything at all to do with your friend for example. If he was never even arrested or even if he was but was never charged and he isn’t a public figure no-one from the press would know or be interested. So I doubt he has been ‘tried by media’. This is all about his own feelings TBH.

And a lot of the ‘victim’s rights’ stuff has been spun in the media to appease torch waving mobs...

What we have actually got out of it is better involvement of the victims in the system leading to better cases being built and victim impact statements for which there is some evidence that they help with rehabilitation of offenders by getting them to engage with the victim as a human being.

The CRB thing raises a huge red flag in that story. A dropped allegation would not be shown - the checks record convictions, reprimands, final warnings etc - not a dropped allegation

Agreed. It wouldn't show. And if the guy wanted to know what if anything was held in police records, he could do a 'subject access request' for a tenner.

I also agree that if he never applied for anything that requires DBS check it's because he wouldn't pass. That would relate to cautions, convictions etc

Sounds very similar to a sob story a colleague was once told about a domestic violence charge. False of course. Except she did Clare's Law it turned out to be true.