Oxford Union president rape allegations - alumni open letter

[FairPhyllis]

The president of the Oxford Union (which is a debating society at Oxford), Ben Sullivan, is currently being investigated over allegations of rape and attempted rape of two undergraduates at the university. He is refusing to resign or suspend his presidency. Speakers are beginning to pull out of events.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10845979/Oxford-Union-boycott-after-president-returns-despite-police-investigation-into-rape-allegations.html

If you are a member of the university or an Oxford alumna/us, and feel strongly about the minimisation of rape and sexual assault "on campus" there is an open letter you can sign here calling for Sullivan to step aside while under investigation. It is organised by the OUSU VP (Women) and other students.

what is meant by stand aside? In my job, I can't 'stand aside'. I'm either in the job or I leave. Standing aside is not an option to choose from.

It is up to the employers if people are to be suspended, on pay or otherwise.

Standing aside and stepping down are not usual employment practices, and I don't know what the reality of such actions would be in real life, and in this case.

kinsorange - just to clarify for you - the OP contains a link to an open letter for Oxford University alumni/students to sign. You stated you wouldn't be signing, so it was a fair assumption that you are either an Oxford University student or graduate. As you are neither, you wouldn't be in a position to sign the letter in the first place so your refusal to sign is spurious.

Morris - as this isn't an employer/employee situation, then the man can't be suspended. So he would be choosing to voluntarily "self-suspend" - i.e. "standing aside" or "stepping down" to allow his VP to take over his duties while he is under investigation. He wouldn't give up his position until he was proven guilty, at which point he'd probably be stripped of his position anyway if he refused to give it up voluntarily.

That's (male) justice for you.

So much for another blow against rape culture.

That's awful, sabrina. Sorry that this made you think of all that (and even sorrier it happened, obviously).

morris - realistically, this is something he does for a university term, and the next person (who has been elected already) takes over next school year. Term ends in a month. This is an eight week gig (or slightly longer, I don't know whether he'd usually stick around over summer holidays). Comparisons have been made to jobs to show how people act in positions of responsibility, but it's not really comparable. Yes, it's really frustrating if he's lost a chance to do something that'd look very good on his CV and which I'm sure is great fun. But ... honestly, I cannot see this amount of concern being raised if we'd been talking about 'this term's head of Reading University debating society'. It's a tough break. He still ought to stop being President for now.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10910280/Oxford-Union-president-is-cleared-of-rape-charges.html

No further action taken. I suppose his decision not to step aside can still be argued. In the eyes of the law he is innocent and he will feel vindicated in standing his ground.

The Telegraph newspaper article linked to by Mengog has the headline
"Oxford Union president is cleared of rape charges", but the body of the article states that "he will not be charged".

How can a person be cleared of charges that were never brought? I think that the newspaper's headline gives the impression that he had his day in day in court and a jury found him not guilty, which isn't what has actually happened.

I'm making no judgement on the man or the case itself, I'm criticising the reporting of the case.

What a crap article.

They've completely missed the point.

He should have stepped aside - it is not about whether he's innocent or guilty, whether he was going to be charged or not - it is (oddly enough) about his attitude towards rape survivors. Which, he's proved, is shit.

That's true, but to me, it's beside the point.

He should have stood aside, no matter what. It should be completely separate from his guilt or innocence - just a routine gesture of basic respect to rape survivors.

The irony is, if it were typical for people to do just that, I don't think there would be such a stigma against men accused of rape. But try telling the 'men's lives' ruined' bunch that.

There's a discussion about it on Jeremy Vine now...

Why on earth should be stand down from his position to show the seriousness of rape? We all know rape is a horrible crime, being falsely accused is fairly shit too and you can't blame victims of that for refusing to welcome further victimisation from a mob demanding their blood to prove their hate of a crime they have been wrongly accused of.

These witch hunts don't benefit rape victims, quite the contrary when they gain so much publicity and it turns out that texts sent after the fact from the accuser prove otherwise. Massive publicity before all the evidence has been collected doesn't just cause huge distress for innocent people on the receiving end of a false allegation, it also highlights that some women do lie. That harms the credibility of rape victims.

Yup, it's all about menz feelz.

He was not found innocent, he was simply not charged. He, like anyone else in a position of authority being investigated for a serious crime, should have stood down from that position until his name was cleared.

It only harms the credibility of rape victims if people keep perpetuating the lie that most rape victims lie.

This Telegraph article is one long rape myth.

Bluebelljumpsoverthemoon You might want to read the
The Mumsnet We Believe You Campaign before spouting rape myths as fact as that is far more damaging to rape victims. And, the term "witch hunt" is about as offensive, ignorant and nasty as you can get when discussing rape and sexual violence.

I would hope that if I was a rape survivor that I would not expect men accused of rape to jump from jobs just because they have been accused.

Else it does not shed rape survivors in a good light.

I'm trying to think of other crimes where people are still presumed to be guilty, despite police or courts coming to the conclusion that the accused is not guilty

I wasn't there, so no idea if he's guilty or not of course...

I am a rape survivor and yes, I would expect a person accused of a serious crime to step down from their role, at full pay while the investigation continued. I would expect the same if they were accused of armed robbery, murder or assault.

Couldn't give a shiny shit if you think it casts me in a good, bad or indifferent light to be fair.

Neither the police nor a court has come to the conclusion that the accused is not guilty.

StewiesBack that Telegraph article is bloody awful. And I call Godwin's on it.

If you RTFT these points were addressed way up-thread.

No one has been 'presumed guilty'. He wasn't being asked to jump from a job - it's an elected position in a university society which lasts a term. It will not ruin his career. All people were asking was that he have consideration for any rape victims at the university and in the Union and step down pending investigation.

Not to mention speakers cancelling because he refused to go.

FFS

sorry Capt obv. not addressed to you

My sympathy lies with the victim, in this case someone who was falsely accused of a vile crime. I don't care what gender someone is, if something shitty happens to them, I'm going to feel bad for them like most normal people. I'm not going lose empathy for this young man because some people have a political ideology that says all men are lying rapists and even those who aren't deserve to be assumed and treated as such anyway.

Oh, he was falsely accused?

So, the 2 women who reported the crime were both lying and are now being charged with perverting the course of justice? Wasting Police time? Anything?

No?

Funny that.