It doesn't look likely that this was rape, certainly it doesn't look like there's enough evidence to suggest he did rape her so we should perhaps let him get on with his life until such a point arrives (if it does arrive) where it's shown that he did. Likewise with her I don't think we have enough evidence to think this was a malicious false accusation ... it may have been but we can't really say that it was or treat her as though that's what she was doing.

Reply 6

CIitYeastWood

Original post by callum_law

It would lead very silly people to that assumption.

Bit of an ad hominem there.

Pray, do tell us why?

If I've had sex with a girl and she is sending me pictures of her naked and/or sexting me, I would assume all is going well and there is consent. She had the choice to send these pictures/texts.

Only if she said 'no' or showed through negative body language would I respect her wish.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 7

Lawliettt

Original post by callum_law

It would lead very silly people to that assumption.

Why would continuing to sext/send nudes in addition to frequently sleeping with him afterwards not make it likely that consent was given?

I feel like she's only pressing for this charge because her boyfriend found out and she doesn't want to get in trouble with him. After all those additional sessions in the bedroom, she suddenly pulls a 180 and points to a specific case where he 'raped' her then stops seeing him because she doesn't want to continue cheating on her boyfriend. It all seems so sketchy. But that's just my opinion

Edit:

Original post by callum_law

Before she was DTF afterwards does not mean she consented in the moment, especially if she was too drunk to consent.

And this is ridiculous too. He was most likely also drunk. It's unlikely that she was drinking and he wasn't. Maybe he more drunk than her. How do we know how drunk they both were? At what point is she too drunk to consent? Could he even consent? Did they both rape each other?

Her case is poor. Using your logic, he should counter charge her

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 8

limetang

Original post by callum_law

It would lead very silly people to that assumption.

Care to explain how? Looking at this case I'm yet to see any substantial evidence that there wasn't consent, beyond her saying there wasn't to which he says there was (which isn't anything substantial to go on).

The only safe way for me as an individual to go about assessing ANY crime is to only believe that someones guilty if there has been sufficient evidence given to suggest they committed the crime.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 9

callum_law

Original post by Lawliettt

Why would continuing to sext/send nudes afterwards i addition to frequently sleeping with him afterwards not make it likely that consent was given?

I feel like she's only pressing for this charge because her boyfriend found out and she doesn't want to get in trouble with him. But that's just my opinion

Consent is giving prospectively not retrospectively. Her consent and willingness after the event are irrelevant. A wife might scream no, no, I don't want to! as her husband penetrates her, but a week later she might seduce her husband and have passionate love with him. The latter does not cancel out the former.

Reply 10

Little Popcorns

What's it to you OP just let the jury decide. Get on with your life TheCitizenAct stop making new accounts.

Reply 11

Lawliettt

Original post by callum_law

The latter does not cancel out the former.

Never said it did. And no, what happens after the event is not irrelevant in the court of law. Fact that she sexted him RIGHT AFTER then continued to sleep with him makes it LESS LIKELY that she was forcibly penetrated in the first place. He's simply trying to prove that he's innocent. As it stands, the odds are against her and rightly so. All evidence points to her just throwing this case out there to get forgiveness from her BF or out of embarrassment. She has no valid evidence to warrant ruining this guys life. False rape cases happen every day and this is most likely one of them.

Also, read my edit.

Reply 12

Reue

Original post by callum_law

It would lead very silly people to that assumption.

I disagree. It would certainly lead me to question whether it was rape beyond reasonable doubt.

Perhaps I am silly? But then I'm not a legal expert... just like the jury aren't.

Reply 13

stirkee

Certainly looks to me like it wasn't rape but who knows.

Reply 14

Reue

Original post by Little Popcorns

What's it to you OP just let the jury decide. Get on with your life

Do you misunderstand the purpose of a news and current affairs subforum? If not for people to create threads on current news and offer their opinions.. what else is it?

Reply 15

doodle_333

I can certainly see why it would undermine the case. However I do think it's explainable in terms of the girl being raped, people are raped in relationships where they have consented to sex previously and often consent to sex at a later date, sometimes the person isn't able to process what has happened and denies it or tries to convince themselves it was okay or they wanted it by continuing a relationship.

Reply 16

CIitYeastWood

Original post by callum_law

Except this scenario isn't as black and white, is it.

You're ignoring the fact that they continued to have (consentual) sexual between the first time and when the pictures were sent.

"Richardson said they continued to sleep together ‘very frequently’, adding: ‘I thought it was going well.’ They called each other ‘darling’, and in one Facebook message, she told him: ‘I’ll let you spank me.’ "
And that the alleged rapist potentially received texts from the boyfriend, disguised as the girl.

"Richardson said he then received a text from the woman saying that she had not sent the messages, and adding: ‘He wrote it.’ Asked what he made of the online conversation, he said it seemed as if the woman’s boyfriend was ‘intervening’."

This all seems to me as an instance of "regret" and "backtracking" from the supposed victim.

Reply 17

callum_law

Original post by Reue

I disagree. It would certainly lead me to question whether it was rape beyond reasonable doubt.

Perhaps I am silly? But then I'm not a legal expert... just like the jury aren't.

I think in the setting, were you a member of the jury, you would be explained the seriousness of the endeavour you've undertaken and told in considerable detail exactly what questions you are being asked. Further, you'd be in full possession of the ascertainable facts which is more than what the Daily Mail can offer you as a member of the public. Whilst you would question whether consent was present at the time of the alleged rape, you'd be expected to do that because that's the job a juror. Whether it would cause you to believe that the complainant was not raped, I do not believe any reasonable person, in that setting, would form such a judgment.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 18

limetang

Original post by Little Popcorns

What's it to you OP just let the jury decide. Get on with your life TheCitizenAct stop making new accounts.

I can't speak for the OP, but personally I find topics like this interesting and worth watching, because it seems like rape cases are a pioneering area (for lack of a better phrase) for the protections of the presumption of innocence, the burden of proof etc. to be under attack. It stems from what I can only hope are well meaning attempts to deal with the fact that rape is very very difficult to prove and so people wish to shift things like the burden of proof further to the accused, again for good reasons, but doing so is fundamentally wrong it provides wholly inadequate protection to innocent people and makes wrongful conviction oh so much easier.

Reply 19

Reue

Original post by callum_law

Whether it would cause you to believe that the complainant was not raped, I do not believe any reasonable person, in that setting, would form such a judgment.

Perhaps not 100%, but (and excuse my limited legal knowledge) isn't it innocent until proven guilty? So if they are not certain either way... the guy is let off?