Rape - Guilty until proved Innocent

HelterSkelter

Hi everyone,

I have been reading the news story about a Big Brother contestant who has been accused of rape (http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-13534367,00.html). It is front page news on the Sky News website.

Does anyone else have a serious problem with this type of reporting. This guy has been accused of rape, nothing proven, yet the police saw fit to leak the info to the media who in turn published it. If this guy is proved innocent he will still never clear his name, he will always be known as the guy who was accused of rape.

I really think the media should be punsihed for publishing stories like this and secondly there should be consequences for the police officer/s who leaked the story to the media.

What do you think?

seamus

I'm not sure if it was leaked. Often the police will mention that a person has been arrested, which is not a leak. Some simple investigative reporting can uncover the details behind the story.

Since the Sky News story is second-hand from the Sun, there's not a whole lot of evidence to go on there about the source.

Zombrex

HelterSkelter wrote:

Does anyone else have a serious problem with this type of reporting. This guy has been accused of rape, nothing proven, yet the police saw fit to leak the info to the media who in turn published it.

The police didn't leak it, the girl came forward to the Sun (or the Sun found her, not sure) and told how horrific it is that he is now a famous celebraty while her life is ruined. The Sun article pointed out that charges had been dropped by the police due to lack of evidence, thought the girl had gone straight to the hospital to have a rape exam done after the aleged rape.

No one apart from the girl seems to be claiming he definiately raped her, and the Sun interviewed his family while he was in the BB house who put forward his side of the story, claiming he never raped her and she is just causing trouble.

Its up to people to make up there own mind, if they actually care that much. Which I doubt.

Dades

I assume she's not claiming he did it while he was in the house...

HelterSkelter

Ok, but my point is the media shouldn't be allowed publish stories that have not been proved as they can ruin the accused's life (assuming he/she is innocent). If this is the case what's to stop some girl who doesn't like me making a false alligation or rape that cannot be proved and going to the media with it. Next thing a story appears in the paper and my reputation is in tatters.

Sleepy

I think he should still have a case against the girl and The Sun.

I'm sure their lawyers have learnt from experience by now to have ensured the article was written in a fashion which would protect them from defamation law but associating a man who never even went before a court for the charge with the label rapist can't in all common sense be anything but defamation of character (not that common sense has anything to do with the law).

Zombrex

HelterSkelter wrote:

Ok, but my point is the media shouldn't be allowed publish stories that have not been proved as they can ruin the accused's life (assuming he/she is innocent).

It has been proven she made a claim of rape, the Sun checked with the police.

HelterSkelter wrote:

If this is the case what's to stop some girl who doesn't like me making a false alligation or rape that cannot be proved

Nothing, beyond the fact that is it illegal, just like there is nothing to stop me claiming to the police that I saw you brake into my house and steal my DVD player.

HelterSkelter wrote:

Next thing a story appears in the paper and my reputation is in tatters.

Define "reputation in tatters" ... what ever reputation Sezer has seems to be doing fine.

Zombrex

Sleepy wrote:

I think he should still have a case against the girl and The Sun.

Only if they alledge that he actually did it.

Which they went out of their way to make sure they didn't.

HelterSkelter

Wicknight wrote:

It has been proven she made a claim of rape, the Sun checked with the police.

Proof that he raped her, not proof she made a claim

Wicknight wrote:

I
Nothing, just like there is nothing to stop me claiming you broke into my house and stole my DVD player.

I think an alligation of rape is a little more serious.

Wicknight wrote:

I
Define "reputation in tatters" ... what ever reputation Sezer has seems to be doing fine.

Not specifically talking about Sezer, I'm talking about anyone who is accused of rape. People are always going to talk about it even if the accused is innocent.

Sleepy

Wicknight wrote:

Only if they alledge that he actually did it.

Which they went out of their way to make sure they didn't.

If he was never found guilty of the offence why should a paper report it? Why should the public need to know this? All this will have done is damage the guys reputation, made the girl a few quid for selling her story and given the gutter press something to fill their pages.

A perfect example of why the tabloids should be done away with if you ask me...

Zombrex

HelterSkelter wrote:

Proof that he raped her, not proof she made a claim

They didn't report he raped her.

HelterSkelter wrote:

I think an alligation of rape is a little more serious.

But the principle is exactly the same.

HelterSkelter wrote:

Not specifically talking about Sezer, I'm talking about anyone who is accused of rape. People are always going to talk about it even if the accused is innocent.

People are always going to talk about everything. That is not a reason to say that the news can report on a public person being arrested for a crime but not if that crime is rape.

He was arrested for rape after a woman made an allegation. He was then released due to lack of evidence. That is public record. The sun reported both sides of the story, made clear that he was released due to lack of evidence, and even published a short interview with his brother.

If Sezer wants to sue the woman for making a false claim against him he can go ahead. I doubt he will as this doesn't seem to be having an adverse effect on him or his "career" of being a celebraty.

Zombrex

Sleepy wrote:

If he was never found guilty of the offence why should a paper report it? Why should the public need to know this?

I doubt they "need" to know, but then do they need to know anything about the Big Brother contestants?

They want to know, and it would be pretty stupid of someone to go for BB and not assume that the tabloids and gossip mags aren't going to be interested in your past. We have already had the Leah and Imogen sex tapes on the internet.

Sleepy wrote:

All this will have done is damage the guys reputation, made the girl a few quid for selling her story and given the gutter press something to fill their pages.

True. Such is life for a "celeberity"

Sleepy wrote:

A perfect example of why the tabloids should be done away with if you ask me...

Personally I think it is a perfect example of why I can't understand how anyone would want to go on Big Brother. But obviously people do.

Kell

Wicknight wrote:

People are always going to talk about everything.

Which should lead you to the conclusion that the majority of people talk utter shíte. You dont have to listen to shíte nor be upset by it.

Pity instead the dumb asses that read the report in a rag or wherever and are too prone to come to a logical conclusion on their own.

Never worry about the press, worry about the state of the public that digests this crap and thinks its real. When I frequently find rags such as the sun/star on lavatory floors I think that people should wipe their arsés with them rather then read them.

K-

spurious

The fact that he had previously been accused of rape in his pre-'famous' days was presumably what made the quality journalists at the Sun believe the story was worth running.

Zombrex

spurious wrote:

The fact that he had previously been accused of rape in his pre-'famous' days was presumably what made the quality journalists at the Sun believe the story was worth running.

A "celebraty" famous for being chocky and arrogant about women who was arrested for rape 2 years ago. If I was the Sun editor I would run that story ... cha-ching!

But I'm not ..... someday wicknight, someday!

aidan24326

Wicknight wrote:

Nothing, beyond the fact that is it illegal, just like there is nothing to stop me claiming to the police that I saw you brake into my house and steal my DVD player.

Even if it's illegal for a girl to wrongly accuse someone of rape, they rarely get anything more than a slap on the wrist for it. While the guy in question is left with the stigma that comes with being someone accused of rape. Even if you're proven totally innocent, that one sticks to you like glue, so it's a hell of a lot different to just being accused of breaking into someone's house. After all rapists are probably the second most hated criminals after paedophiles, so it's a very grave accusation to make.

The penalty for girls who falsely make that terrible accusation should be more serious than what it currently is, especially where they're subsequesntly found to have just made the whole thing up, which does happen. Though we don't know in this case whether the girl is telling the truth or not.

pH

Surely you can see the other side of this-

Justice has to be done openly and transparently. That is members of a society have a right to know who the police are arresting and what they're charged with. Also remember we (and the UK) can keep untried(innocent) people in jail on remand, making it doubly important.

Having secret arrests is a very bad idea for very obvious reasons. Yes to some extent people who are charged with a crime (and later found innocent) suffer some damage to their reputation, but this a small price to pay for the ability to scrutinise the actions of police and our judiciary.

To me, a better way of dealing with this would be to make sure that everyone is better educated about the justice system.

seamus

That's actually a very good point pH. I think everyone should ask themselves - If you were arrested, would you rather it was done publically, or would you prefer if you were whisked off in the middle of the night, without a trace of who took you or where you went?

Metacortex

aidan24326 wrote:

The penalty for girls who falsely make that terrible accusation should be more serious than what it currently is, especially where they're subsequesntly found to have just made the whole thing up, which does happen. Though we don't know in this case whether the girl is telling the truth or not.

The problem with that is that is has to be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt they they were lying in the first place or else you could end up charging a genuine victim with lying if the accused has been found 'not guilty' in a court due to lack of evidence or some other reason.

Zombrex

aidan24326 wrote:

Even if it's illegal for a girl to wrongly accuse someone of rape, they rarely get anything more than a slap on the wrist for it.

You are basing that assertion on what exactly?

aidan24326 wrote:

The penalty for girls who falsely make that terrible accusation should be more serious than what it currently is

What is it currently?

aidan24326

Wicknight wrote:

1.You are basing that assertion on what exactly?
2.What is it currently?

1.I am basing it on the facts of cases I've been aware of.
2.Nothing really. A caution and a slap on the wrist.

Zombrex

aidan24326 wrote:

1.I am basing it on the facts of cases I've been aware of.

Which are?

How many cases of false rape claims are you currently aware of?

Carcharodon

Wicknight wrote:

Which are?

How many cases of false rape claims are you currently aware of?

Very childish question to ask someone, even if they are pretending to know actuall cases, they can easily search for some on the net!! Its pointless to ask people to back up their opinions with facts

I think the point is that if someone can be proven to have made a false rape claim they should be given an equally long sentance as an actual rapist.
Your destroying someones life either way...

If someone is found guilty for lack of evidence, then fair enough their will equally be a lack of evidence to prove the alleged victim is making a false claim.

But in a case where someone can be proven to be making a false claim, just as in the cae where someone is proven to have raped someone, then the sentance should be just as severe.

Nevyn

Look the way the law is in this country unless it is a clearly aggrevated rape with assualt which can be seen on the victum to the extent of bodily harm,
the case hinges on the matter of consent.
As such the victum is merely a witness to the act and the defense works to discredit them at everyhands turn.
Phyiscal evidence can prove sex occured but the issue of consent is a lot different.
There are cases which the dept of public prosecution chooses not to proceed with, and the allegeded victum should then face condemnation because the system is screwed up ?
The lack of a conviction does not mean a rape did not take place.

In this case the person who has been the subject of such an article can and should persue slander/liable charges.

pH

The fact is this is a sensitive issue which has been debated for a while, and has serious implications for a woman's ability to bring forward a rape charge.

An oft quoted figure that 2% of rape charges are false, puts it firmly in line with other crimes (in terms of false reporting)

However figures of 40%-60% have been produced in the US, which rightly have been attacked by women's rights groups as if these figures are accepted then every woman who accuses someone of rape will herself be accused of falsification.

http://www.americandaily.com/article/5075

vibe666

Carcharodon wrote:

Very childish question to ask someone, even if they are pretending to know actuall cases, they can easily search for some on the net!! Its pointless to ask people to back up their opinions with facts

think thats perfectly reasonable to be honest. if people plan on making claims as to what happens to people who make false claims they should be able to back it up ith some kind of evidence.

going off on a bit of a tangent here, but if we're quoting facts and figures then have a bit of a chew on these.

what about the 4 out of every 10 rape victims who are actually brave enough to go to the police? and what about the lower than 50% of those that end in a conviction?

based on my very simple grasp of mathematics that's 8 out of 10 rapists getting away with it.

how is that fair?

where do i get my figures from?

the level 2 qualified police officer that interviewed me and my (now ex) girlfriend after she was raped by a work colleague 10 years ago. he was on of those 8 out of 10 when we heard what it would take to convict him in the UK. 18 months+ of court appearances with every inch of her sexual history scrutinised whilst his is inadmissable even if he's been accused of rape 10 times before without conviction.

having to convince 12 people beyond any reasonable doubt that he did what he did, whilst all he had to do was put reasonable doubt into the mind of one of them. out of 12 people what are the chances of getting one of those 8 out of 10?

the chances of a conviction are infinitely better if you go to the police straight away, but the majority of the time all she will want to do is clean herself of the incident, with it quite often taking days or weeks before she can even come to terms with it, by which time there is nothing but hr word against his.

if this girl is telling the truth, i hope sezer gets what's coming to him. if she's lying then i hope she gets whats coming to her because its people liek that that make it so hard for genuine victims to get a conviction.

Metacortex

vibe666 wrote:

18 months+ of court appearances with every inch of her sexual history scrutinised whilst his is inadmissable even if he's been accused of rape 10 times before without conviction.
.

Thats one thing that has always sickened me.
It should be that its either its all ok for court or none of it is.

Zombrex

Carcharodon wrote:

Its pointless to ask people to back up their opinions with facts

Is that supposed to be ironic?

Carcharodon wrote:

I think the point is that if someone can be proven to have made a false rape claim they should be given an equally long sentance as an actual rapist.
Your destroying someones life either way...

Not quite sure I follow how being raped by someone is the same as someone making up an (albet it vicious) rumour about you.

Seezeer, the guy who this thread is about, doesn't seem to have had his life ruined. In fact his life is doing a lot better than the girl who made the claim.

Carcharodon wrote:

But in a case where someone can be proven to be making a false claim, just as in the cae where someone is proven to have raped someone, then the sentance should be just as severe.

But isn't that saying that lying about something is the same as raping someone.

One of the corner stones of the legal system is that the crime should fit the punishment. I agree that making a false statement to the police in an attempt to blacken a persons name is a very low thing to do, and should be detered with treat of punishment. But I'm not quite sure how anyone can claim it is the same a sexually assaulting someone. Why not just claim that all crime, no matter what it is is all equally bad and be done with it

aidan24326

Wicknight wrote:

Which are?

How many cases of false rape claims are you currently aware of?

I'm not getting into details here. Find out for yourself and you'll see.

In my saying that provable false accusers should be more severely punished, I'm in no way trying to take the side of rapists here. Hardly. I just think it should work both ways. Girls who make totally false accusations are trivialising a very serious crime and doing a huge disservice to the women out there who genuinely have been victims of rape.

Though I agree with you that the punishment should hardly be the same as for the guilty rapist (as was suggested by carcharodon). But even the threat of a year in prison would be enough to make most girls think twice.

Carcharodon

Vibe66 made some good points and i know i put my point across a bit awkwardly.
Totally agree with what people are saying here but in regards to the point that someone made that is making a false claim the same as being sexually assaulted, well its obviously not, but i do believe that they are turning somones life upside down, with far reaching consequences with their partner, family, friends, work etc

Maybe giving them the same punishment is a bit extreme but sure the punishment a rapist gets is not half as long as it should be anyway in my opinion.

Dont know the exact punishment, differs for every case i know but some seem to get out extremely early

vibe666

one of the biggest problems with people making false claims of sexual assault isn't just that they blacken the names of innocent people (for whatever reason) its that each time someone does this it makes it harder for genuine victims to be taken seriously. if the number of peopl making false claims were to fall dramatically it would make it a great deal easier for genuine claims to be taken seriously.

i don'tthink it would be too much of a stretch tp say every false claim lets one genuine rapist free to rape again. and that makes it a very serious crime in my book.

its not just the person who is raped who suffers, it's their whole family. given the choice at the time i'd have rather died than let that happen to the person i loved the most.

Zombrex

vibe666 wrote:

if the number of peopl making false claims were to fall dramatically it would make it a great deal easier for genuine claims to be taken seriously.

Is there much evidence that the number of women making false rape claims is actually high though?

vibe666

its high enough that the general consensus points to it being high, if that makes any sense. a self fulfilling prophecy if you will.

it has to be a regular enough occurance for people to see something like the sezer story and have doubts as to whether he raped her or if she's just looking ro attention and/or cash.