MPs committee strongly recommends anonymity for people accused of sex crimes

[PilchardPrincess]

This is back again:
here bbc

I am wholly of the opinion that this will go through, and handily just in time for when the investigations into historical sex offences by powerful people including many politicians gets underway.

It's just pathetically transparent.

Below the line commenters are all red hot keen, with many advocating for anon until found guilty. A few people saying that this should apply for all crimes (which is a far more logical standpoint unless you believe that women and children are inveterate liars when it comes to reporting abuse) and I haven't spotted anyone saying it might cause problems, although only skimmed top rated.

I think for me, the concept of not being allowed to report until charged, if it applied for all crimes would probably be reasonable and not interfere too much, although you'd need to try it to find out.

The idea that it's needed for sex crimes only as that ruins lives more is just such a load of shit. A person being accused of torturing animals or murder or conning old people out of money doesn't exactly get off scott free in terms of reputation. The reasoning is actually that many people like to think that women and children lie about this all the time for reasons that are never fully explained, and the evil bastards must be stopped.

So if they do this and make it for sex crimes only they are reinforcing the idea that many / most of these reports are lies and that will set things back years. Which will help though because actually people in authority don't want this stuff reported, it costs time and money to investigate, it makes things difficult with their friends, it makes them look bad when it turns out they didn't do it properly (rochdale, jimmy saville etc etc so many examples) and so on. Far better that people who are assaulted just put up and shut up which is what happens most of the time anyway but might push it back even further.

It's basically a large number of (low importance) victims being chucked under the bus to protect a tiny handful of powerful men, plus ca change.

"It's a great idea, if we WANT to see a big fall in the number of sex crime convictions."

I don't see how anonymity for a suspect would make them less likely to be convicted. The judge and jury decide on whether to convict, so what difference will it make if the suspect is in the newspapers or not? How will the public knowing about the accusation increase the chance of a conviction?

Really Fayyive? Read the thread and then get back to us.

Fay, if you read the thread, it's clear that publishing the name of a suspect has, many times, brought forward other witnesses. John Worboys, Gary Glitter, Rolf Harris etc I believe all fell into this category.

Yonic, yes that's true but only aprox 11% of reported rapes even get to court in the first place. The CPS have to have a pretty watertight case for there to be a 'reasonable chance of conviction'. Most cases are weeded out before they get to that stage. One of the most common reasons is 'lack of evidence'. Since most rapes happen in private, often with no injuries it tends to be one person's word against another. Since this isn't enough for a jury to be sure, it's unlikely to go ahead... Unless other victims come forward, which they are much more likely to do if it is reported in the press. False allegations are only aprox 2-3% of allegations. Furthermore there are aprox 85,000 rapes in the UK A YEAR and only 5-15% get reported. So we are talking a tiny number!

Further complicated by the fact that just because a case is dropped or a suspect is found not guilty, DOESNT MEAN IT DIDN'T HAPPEN, just that it couldn't be proved.

Well done MPs, this is basically a Rapists' Charter.

You'd think that after all the high profile cases the last few years the powers that be would want to make it easier for women to come forward and report rape. Wouldn't you...?

I am so angry about this. Especially at a time just after Jimmy Saville, Rolf Harris etc. why can't people see that this rule would protect people like them?

Re the petition louise Pennington started, does anyone know who it was that refused to sign it, because they disagree with her on other issues? Shame.

It doesn't help that the petition's written in Spanish! Is there some way to switch it to English?

It's in English..... Using your link.

What really doesn't help is so-called prominent 'feminists' publically refusing to support it because it's written by someone they don't bloody like. So, petty jealousy and personal differences are more important to those people than protecting women. Nice

[[http://elegantgatheringofwhitesnows.com/?p=2366 Blogpost here]]

It's all in engish for me in your link

Huh? I'm too! Oh, well, good to hear it is in English (except for me.)

It's shockingly petty

Lol maybe there are some settings you can fiddle with on change.org?

Have signed - it's mad that this is even on the cards at the exact same time that police are appealing for more witnesses to come forward re historic abuse.

Come and tell me if IABU :) I've got to go out for a while! www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/2337681-People-accused-of-sex-crimes-shouldnt-be-given-anonymity?msgid=53303350#53303350

Sorry, forgot to trim the link www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/2337681-People-accused-of-sex-crimes-shouldnt-be-given-anonymity

Actually, don't look at that thread. The usual rape apologists postulating that all women lie. bleah.

I don't understand why so many posters (apparently) can't see this, either, Buffy. The trauma suffered by a FEW men who've been maliciously accused is very similar to that suffered by the MANY victims of sex crimes.

Both types of victim have suffered a crime. So why devalue the suffering of many, to spare that of a few?

And it has to be either/or, because of the crimes we're discussing.

Love your current name, btw!

"What occurred to me was how much more valuable the lives and reputations of men are than those of women, in the sort of mainstream discourse that exists." YY. Really well put. Lots of rhetoric about all these men who've been falsely accused, but very little evidence of that. No thoughts to a woman who in all probability has been raped. They are disposable.