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.

ppplease that is what this whole thread is about.

I can only assume you haven't bothered reading it.

WTF telling people to go and start another thread about the exact issue that this entire thread is about in the first place.

That's just lazy. Kind of shoddy too.

But people do step aside all the time. For many reasons.

It is a perfectly normal thing to do. Him refusing to do it was not what normally happens, which is why this whole bloody thread is about. Although clearly some people are perfectly happy to assume they know what the thread is about, and barge in and tell all the posters who have been on here since May to shut up and piss off.

I am really annoyed about that.

It is standard practice to step down in the public sector. However, there is no real choice. You are pushed regardless. It actually causes a lot of resentment and anger when someone is forced to leave a role they enjoy whilst an investigation goes on.

If a choice was given most would continue. This man had a choice. He said he had done nothing wrong, he wasn't charged, he didn't bow to pressure. Good on him.

LS. This isnt your private thread!
Any poster at any time can add to any thread on mumsnet.

If you want privacy, discuss this sort of thing on a private Facebook group or something.
Nothing on mumsnet is private!

How do you know btw, that I am not a nc from earlier on this thread[I am btw]

He shouldn't have to be pushed, no-one should. When you're being investigated for a serious crime you step aside. When you're being investigated for something at work, you'd be asked to step aside - it's totally normal and common practice.

If I'd been accused of a crime I would step aside during investigations, if for no other reason than that I wouldn't be able to give anywhere near to 100% to my work due to worry.

I think it shows a lack of regard for the position, and for the seriousness of the crime and its affect on the victims (or complete faith in the justice system/his lawyers, or enormous narcissism) not to step down.

Chunky,

Really? So, if I accuse you of something you know you are totally innocent of, you will step aside? It seems like an ideal instrument of revenge if that is the case.

I can see people ringing up the police as we speak.

Are all feminists and rape victims, judge jury and executioner?

Here is some excellent research on false rape allegations from Prof Liz Kelly.

I'd also like to point out that according to the FBI, which, the last time I checked, aren't renown for being a hotbed of radical feminism, that more men report themselves as dead to commit insurance fraud than real false allegations of rape were made.

The fact of the matter is, statistically, that this man is probably guilty but the CPS don't believe they can secure a conviction. The reasons for this are fairly obvious across this thread. And, that's without looking at the very clear research which demonstrates that men commit rape on average 10 times before they are reported to the police.

StewiesBack. Have you reported him to mumsnet?

Though thinking about it, I presume he is allowed to post like that, if indeed he is?

Stewie's libellous post has been reported.

pplease, I think all sardines was doing was pointing out that you seemed confused about the thread, as if you'd not read it? It was a fair comment, I was bemused too because you seemed to be suggesting you start another thread to discuss exactly what was being discussed here.

It wasn't any attempt to gain 'privacy' so far as I can see.

I will ask HQ to pop the link to their Rape Myths, but sadly, I'm fairly sure larry's been sent that link before by them. I don't think there's a specific rule against posting rape myths (could be wrong?) as usually HQ say they'd rather see posters educated than deleted, because a lot of people genuinely do not realize they are rape apologists.

LRD,

Which rape myth am I perpetrating, please, on this thread? If you have a problem with a post of mine, please explain it, rather than attacking me in person.

Stewie has exhibited the exact reason why pre charge, some people believe, the name of the suspect shouldn't be released. When someone is arrested for a sexual offence the mud sticks, within the community.

An arrest for Burglary, Robbery, Theft, Assaults, Drink Driving etc even Murder - without a charge - no stigma would be attached to the person. The mere accusation of Rape or other sexual offences is enough for a community to brand someone guilty and make them a social pariah. Until that attitude changes then the push for anonymity will continue.

Buffy,

I referred very carefully to this specific case in my post. I stated where my interest came from (article in the Sunday Times) and why. I also stated what I did and did not know about it.

There is no way that is 'sailing close to the wind' unless what you are basically saying is that to be accused is to be guilty and that there is no other reason to make an allegation other than it is the truth.

You point me to MN 'rape myths' and I will point you to Arthur Miller's 'The Crucible'.

larry

The idea that a false rape claim might be 'revenge' is an extremely common rape myth. In reality, false rape claims are extremely rare. It is much, much commoner for people not to press charges, because of their fear of being seen as vengeful or of suffering public vitriol.

Comparing rape cases to a witch hunt (as you have just done) is also, I would say, a rape myth. We all know that story: a good man is brought down by a scheming woman. To apply that to rape cases is to suggest you believe a comparison of a lying woman and a man whose life is ruined is an accurate representation of rape cases, and that is, obviously, a rape myth.

As I understand it, we do not know that, as you claim 'what is a fact is that there is insufficient evidence behind the accusation to overcome the first legal hurdle and proceed to trial'. It is very, very common for women not to press charges in rape cases for reasons that do not have to do with having insufficient evidence. To presume (as I believe you are here, though you may correct me) that the reason is insufficient evidence is to perpetuate the rape myth that women can press charges free of any fear.

I must ask you to apologise for claiming I attacked you in person (not that I imagine you have it in you). I didn't. I described your actions. If you cannot educate yourself on rape myths, it is not my job to do so. I do not have to explain the obvious to you. I've done so in this post, but to point out that you are perpetuating rape myths is something that should make you seek to educate yourself. It should not be reason to attack me, or other posters, or to throw around the word 'libellous' in the hope we don't know the law. We do.

LRD and Buffy,

What both your posts are sailing very closely to is questioning the presumption of innocence in law. It does not matter how small the percentage is, until someone is convicted of a crime, we must assume that they are innocent of it (well, we can have our own personal opinions, but it is certainly libellous/slanderous to propagate them).

I am not trying to deny that the vast majority of people who accuse someone of rape have been raped (and having been on a rape jury which convicted a rapist of 20 years ago 11-1 (I was not the one), I believe in the power of oral testimony).

However, in this case, as I stated, there was a lot of politics and reasonable motive for an unfair accusation. Neither of you (or I) can know what happened but we do know that the man was not prosecuted, nor, as far as I know, is he being sued. Have you read the Sunday Times article?

LRD,

I took this statement as a personal attack:

'I will ask HQ to pop the link to their Rape Myths, but sadly, I'm fairly sure larry's been sent that link before by them.'

If it were not meant as one, I unreservedly apologise to you.