Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

"Falling" and "accidentally penetrating" somebody is a rape defence now.

199 replies

BertieBotts · 10/12/2015 18:40

WTAF?

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/i-fell-and-penetrated-her-by-accident-millionaire-rape-suspect-claims-a6767486.html

Hopefully - surely - this will never go down in court, right? How ignorant of basic biology would you need to be, exactly? I've heard of some ridiculous defences to rape before but this really takes the biscuit.

OP posts:
FreshwaterSelkie · 15/12/2015 19:46

What the...?

I can't believe that. I actually just can't believe anyone listened to that load of old bollocks and not only didn't laugh, but believed him and aquitted him. Something stinks there.

I could weep.

CultureSucksDownWords · 15/12/2015 19:48

What's with the judge hearing 20 minutes of evidence in private?

It's insane to suggest that tripping over someone would result in accidentally penetrating her. It's just not physically possible, it's just mad to suggest it as a possibility.

OneMoreCasualty · 15/12/2015 19:50

Judging by th artyjcle, it changed more to imply that semen on his hands might account for his DNA inside the victim.

FFS.

slugseatlettuce · 15/12/2015 20:56

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

AyeAmarok · 15/12/2015 21:32
Sad
AyeAmarok · 15/12/2015 21:35

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Doublebubblebubble · 15/12/2015 21:40

I've just read that he's bloody got off with it... Shows what having millions can do. Hope women steer well well clear!

OneMoreCasualty · 15/12/2015 21:41

It was up to the jury, not the judge, Aye.

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 15/12/2015 21:44

In private means the press and public are excluded. The defence and prosecution teams and the jury are still there. There may even be a nominated member of the press who can't however report. It's not the same as legal discussion in chambers

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 15/12/2015 21:46

I can't offhand think of a reason why he would be allowed to give evidence in private but the jury and the victim would have heard what he said and the Crown are entitled to cross-examine him.

AyeAmarok · 15/12/2015 21:51

It was up to the jury, not the judge, Aye.

Oh. In that case, I'm stumped.

Stumped and depressed. The combination of this and the AIBU thread where everyone is saying that men should be able to force women to take the MAP or else he should be able to absolve himself of any (financial or otherwise) responsibility for the unplanned child is just too much for me to process tonight.

OneMoreCasualty · 15/12/2015 21:53

Ah, really? Not sure I have the strength for AIBU now!

AyeAmarok · 15/12/2015 21:59

Oh it comes with a "the evil woman is trying to trap me, mummy" story, OneMoreCasualty.

I'd say stay away from it, although I seem to be reading a different thread to everyone else on it so maybe it's me losing the plot tonight!

annandale · 15/12/2015 22:12

Like slugseatlettuce, I will cling on to a thin thread of hope that the jury heard something we don't know about that made it clear that the 46 year old man's two different versions of what happened when he lay on top of an 18 year old with shorts on and penetrated her did not mean he raped her.

It can't be impotence slug, part of his second defence was both that he had semen on his hands from previous sex and that his penis was still erect. Or was that the first defence? Getting confused. It's so darn easy to get confused when you trip over house guests.

SixtyFootDoll · 15/12/2015 22:14

Money talks

WhoTheFuckIsSimon · 15/12/2015 22:24

Terrible. I wish there was some way the CPS could force a retrial.

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 15/12/2015 22:26

Are you suggesting he bribed the jury ?

OneMoreCasualty · 15/12/2015 22:28

I don't think anyone was bribed.

Clearly the jury felt there was doubt. I disagree strongly but I don't think the trial was corrupt.

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 15/12/2015 23:08

I was referring to SixtyFootDalls post.

ottothedog · 15/12/2015 23:10

I hope they check the jury for sudden windfalls

OneMoreCasualty · 15/12/2015 23:11

Me too, Lass, and the others referencing bribes.

ottothedog · 15/12/2015 23:14

Although i suppose it doesnt have to be bribery. People seem willing to believe any old story rather than rule an act 'rape'. That recent docudrama with the teenagers was eye opening :(

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 15/12/2015 23:42

Sorry onemore cross posting.

However the jury came to a decision I think you can rule out bribery.

originalmavis · 16/12/2015 07:06

Must be more to or but I can't for this life of me imagine what that could be. Maybe they just couldn't prove it?

That's why the scottish 'not proven' is such a good option.

sillage · 16/12/2015 07:15

I think what happened was plain old misogyny.

I've seen child pornographers who filmed themselves raping kids walk free because the misogyny of the jury was thick enough to locate the fault in the curfew-breaking 13-year-old girl victims.