Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

"If recording my own rape isn't enough evidence, what is?"

224 replies

ReallyAngryNow · 09/04/2019 19:17

www.eveningtelegraph.co.uk/fp/young-woman-who-recorded-herself-being-raped-by-her-ex-slams-his-acquittal/?fbclid=IwAR0wquQcg11GhrXG2mR0zdeqXrLsW6SaagR_zcTVE4pB5t90sK3At9fvQQs

NC for this because it’s in my local area and don’t want my other very outing posts linked together.

I’ve had enough of this shit. Seriously. What can we do? I feel like every day we read about rapists and abusers walking free, and very rarely hear about them ever being punished.

OP posts:
MenuPlant · 09/04/2019 22:22

The man who wants us not no discuss this case brought it up and also implied that women who were taking about this case would be keen to see laws changed to imprison innocent men.

New day same old posts on rape threads.

MenuPlant · 09/04/2019 22:26

In fact rapists are very rarely convicted false reports are the same as other crimes.

This innocent men going to prison fear only works if you believe that currently justice is done and so any increase in number of men jailed would logically mean innocent men were going to prison.

This is so far from where we're at as to be laughable.

It's about men protecting each other. Many don't see eg 'date rape' with no additional brutality (ie the type of violence they see as violence) as really crimes at all.

MenuPlant · 09/04/2019 22:28

For lots of them there is fear around things they or their friends have done in the past.

It's all a bit grim really.

Don't worry chaps, for now you can do pretty much what you like.

LangCleg · 09/04/2019 22:28

Flowers Finn.

LassOfFyvie · 09/04/2019 22:29

V interesting article about not proven verdict in Scotland and a woman who won a civil case after not proven in criminal court

The not proven verdict has no bearing on the civil case. Not proven and not guilty both mean the Crown did not prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt. The burden of proof in a civil case is the lower one of on a balance of probability.

There really is no difference between not proven and not guilty. It should be done away with. It is confusing- no one seems clear what the point is but from the point of view of this case the Crown failed to prove its case.

MenuPlant · 09/04/2019 22:31

Was the man who was found guilty in the civil case but not guilty in criminal court, WRONGED?

conundrum that, innit.

Namechangeforthiscancershit · 09/04/2019 22:31

Only the jury heard all the evidence

How so? Surely there would have been journalists in Court?

MenuPlant · 09/04/2019 22:33

Huh?

Lass my main point was that he was not convicted in criminal court but was convicted in a civil one.

What you say about not proven is clearly covered in the article.

LassOfFyvie · 09/04/2019 22:40

Lass my main point was that he was not convicted in criminal court but was convicted in a civil one

He was not convicted in a civil court. Civil courts don't convict anyone.

She raised an action of damages and won because of the lower standard of proof but you're misreading it by a mile to call that a conviction.

pallisers · 09/04/2019 22:42

I'm not surprised.

There are hardly any circumstances in which I would advise a woman to report a rape. I did think that I might report it if it happened to me right now (50ish, very "respectable", professional, married, unlikely to be drunk at a party etc.) but watching the testimony of that utter heroine Christine Blasey Ford at the Kavanaugh hearings changed my mind on that too. She ticked all the same boxes and was ignored (they all believed her - they just didn't think it mattered).

Averageman is sadly just that - an average man with average male socialisation, opinions and critical thought. Which is why women are raped and men get away with it and the average man thinks it is all hunky dory right?

LassOfFyvie · 09/04/2019 22:42

Was the man who was found guilty in the civil case but not guilty in criminal court, WRONGED?

He was not "found guilty" in the civil case.

MenuPlant · 09/04/2019 22:44

The court found in the balance of probability that she was telling the truth.

Ie he had raped her

There is no misread there and I really don't think it's a good idea to undermine the few women who have pursued men through the civil courts and won.

ZebrasAreBras · 09/04/2019 22:45

What's it called when they award damages then, Lass? Just so we can make sure we're using the correct terminology, and avoid any nitpicking over language.

Found in her favour?

ZebrasAreBras · 09/04/2019 22:46

Presumably the civil court must have thought she was telling the truth about being raped. Or did they just award damages because they like her?

MenuPlant · 09/04/2019 22:47

This reminds me of the criminal compensation people who said of victims of child sexual exploitation that the men were guilty in law but not necessarily in fact.

Weasel words.

Civil court found balance of probability was she was telling truth ie he had raped her.

Oh no says poster, you can't say he's guilty! God forbid.

Wtf do women have to do. Goes back to original question in op I suppose.

Civil court means nothing now, even though for strong angry women with money it was all there was left.

LassOfFyvie · 09/04/2019 22:52

What's it called when they award damages then, Lass? Just so we can make sure we're using the correct terminology, and avoid any nitpicking over language

Some of you are showing a profound misunderstanding of the law by talking about being "convicted in a civil court "/ "being found guilty in a civil court". If you think that's "nit- picking" so be it.

I guess the oft repeated mantra that words are important and one can't change the meaning of words gets ditched when one does want to change them.

Found in her favour? She was the pursuer in the action and the court found in her favour. The case would have been heard in front of a judge only.

MenuPlant · 09/04/2019 22:53

I mean it will mean nothing if some people have their way.

Let's not go there.

Civil court found on balance of probability she was telling the truth.

Ie he raped her. That makes him a rapist.

Feel for that woman so much.

MenuPlant · 09/04/2019 22:54

'She was the pursuer in the action and the court found in her favour. The case would have been heard in front of a judge only.'

And what was it they found in her favour about, again?

elasticfantastic · 09/04/2019 22:54

It went to court . The jury decided the verdict. The jury is members of public. Members of public didn't find him guilty. The same members of public who also moan about the courts and police "not doing enough ". It's disgusting.

MenuPlant · 09/04/2019 22:55

Sorry elastic you've lost me.

LassOfFyvie · 09/04/2019 22:57

Presumably the civil court must have thought she was telling the truth about being raped. Or did they just award damages because they like her?

On the balance of probability the judge favoured her version. That still does not make him guilty or that he was convicted. There will be criminal record following the civil decision.

Words have meaning- you (general you) can apply guilty if you want but statements like "he was convicted in the civil court" are nonsense.

ZebrasAreBras · 09/04/2019 22:57

Found in her favour? She was the pursuer in the action and the court found in her favour. The case would have been heard in front of a judge only.

So the Judge found in her favour then? Was that your answer.

To find in her favour, do you think the Judge believed she had been raped?

MenuPlant · 09/04/2019 22:57

Elastic which case are you talking about, the one in the op or the one we are in the middle of discussing?

Have you read the thread and the article?

You think women on a forum discussing rape convictions are disgusting, or have I got the wrong end of the stick.

I find both of the situations, the op link and the civil court woman, upsetting. Does that make me disgusting?

elasticfantastic · 09/04/2019 22:58

@MenuPlant I'm saying that the police/cps/court are under constant criticism generally but it's like people forget that the people who make the decisions... the jury... are members of public.
I'm not talking specifically about this case only, but the court system and especially rape verdicts in general.

MenuPlant · 09/04/2019 22:58

Lass yes so what did the judge find in her favour about?