trial of alleged rape victim who killed herself

[chaosmonkey]

www.theguardian.com/law/2014/nov/06/call-crown-prosecutors-account-suicide-alleged-rape-victim

A young woman who said she had been raped went on to kill herself after the Crown Prosecution Service put her on trial for making up the allegation in a case originally instigated by her alleged attacker.

A bit speechless, so have just cut and paste initial para - sorry

Why would someone who was never charged and has never been publicly named seek prosecution unless it's to intimidate and bully the witness?

If he has/had a well paid job which is dependent on DBS, then he might have felt he had no choice.

The police have concluded that a crime was committed and have closed the case.

So he will have an allegation of rape on his record, and therefore on his DBS disclosures, for ever. DBS covers all 'caring' professions and anything to do with children (including fostering and adoption).

Now, with the exception of the specific barring lists (which I doubt he'd be on), DBS does not specify who can or cannot do what job. Instead the disclosure lists all convictions, cautions, reprimands, warnings and (for serious offences) allegations and it is the employer's responsibility to perform a risk assessment in each case. However, employers are now so risk averse that anything other than a perfectly clean DBS disclosure is likely to be a complete career stopper - why would you take the risk on somebody with a rape allegation on their record? And DBS has to be re-checked at least every 2 years.

So if he is, say a senior doctor, counsellor, social worker or teacher, I can well see why he would spend £200 grand to try to clear his name, as an alternative to spending the rest of his life working in Lidl.

Alternatively of course, he could just be a very rich evil bastard.

I heard the father on the radio, and it was heartbreaking. His candid account revealed that the case was not quite as black and white as others have assumed, but I still don't understand what the CPS thought they were doing. Everybody knew she had current mental health issues - even if, for a moment, we consider the worst possible case and assume that, even though she absolutely genuinely believed it herself, her claim was not true, why on earth would the CPS even think of prosecution? Mentally ill people make all sorts of claims all the time, but the CPS doesn't prosecute them.

It's all just so very very tragic in every respect.

Peakham

Good post !

mega rich financier

alexander economou

greek shipping magnate father and financier according to daily mail, the only paper to name him so far

Blows the DBS thoughts out of the water.

He's just a powerful man, who's doing what powerful men do best.

By that, I'm not implying that your post wasn't a good one Peckham, by the way.

Would a successful private prosecution eradicate that allegation of his DBS record?

I know it probably should, but would it? Because the burden of proof is less and it isn't a criminal prosecution so on the periphery of the judicial system.

Anyway that's a tangent. It doesn't surprise me. At. All. That he is so much more powerful and privileged than she was.

Hmm. Wonder who was lying in this case? The one with the sense of entitlement and documented history of stalking vulnerable women or the one being harassed but who dared to speak out?

No wonder the police dropped the case. They knew who she was up against and how that would pan out for her in court.

MEOD bloody hell.

God almighty. That poor woman :(

And I know he's not been charged but I hope he rots in hell

Oh well - I suggested two possibilities and one of them was right...

It's worth remembering about DBS though - even if the police or CPS say that there is not enough evidence to secure a conviction, the DBS system should ensure that your rapist never works with vulnerable people (in the UK).

It was a good thought. I almost wish it was the right one and we had all been wrong about this.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2854324/The-double-life-tragic-suicide-girl-accused-rape-tycoon-s-son-says-Don-t-judge-know-story.html

Interesting hearing the otherside of the story. He has a serious issue with the police and it seems he had compelling evidence to prove she lied, which would explain CPS running with the prosecution.

Difficult situation all round, if what he says is true, I can understand why he was angry.

I have to say I hadn't seen this thread and have just read his interview with the Mail.

I have no idea what to believe to be honest. His account does seem totally plausible.

That's disgusting. He didn't get his chance to trash her in his private prosecution so he did it in the Daily Mail instead.

Alexander is determined to see something positive come from this, such as changes in police procedure, forcing them to deal even-handedly with both sides in rape cases.

What a fucking joke.

Yep, he's still harassing her in death.

All he had to do was disappear into obscurity to 'clear his name'. None of this was about clearing his name, it was about destroying a woman who accused him of rape.

In his defence the impression I had of the case was that he raped her and was let off due to her mental health issues. He then initiated a baseless private prosecution.

If the article is accurate then he is an innocent party. I can see why the police didn't investigate - however they should have, and dealt with it at a very low level. The fact the CPS took it on shows there was plenty of evidence for the police to at least look at.

The fact the CPS took it on shows there was plenty of evidence for the police to at least look at.

No it doesn't. If you base your views on a mouthpiece article in the Daily Mail, it's hardly surprising you'd struggle with that.

If there was no evidence of her lying then why did the CPS take her case?

Just because there is insufficient evidence for a likely rape prosecution does not mean the accused is definitely innocent (or guilty either!).

And moreover this does not mean the accuser is lying.