Groom cleared of raping his bride on their wedding night

In response to yesterday's thread
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2139074/Groom-cleared-raping-bride-wedding-night-allegations-trouble.html
It turns out the wench made up those allegations just to get him into trouble. How do you all feel now?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

The_Internet

What a bitch, if true. She should deserve the same punishment as a rapist would get. False allegations of rape are very serious and can destroy a person's life. It's only fair that the same happens to her.

That being said, I don't know why they were together. They're clearly dysfunctional

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 2

Anna150

Just because he wasn't convicted that doesn't mean that she was making it up. The husband was the one on trial not the wife.

The people who went straight to condem the husband were wrong to do so. But how are the people now condeming the wife any better?

Edit:
If you're gonna neg me at least explain why you think it's not wrong start condeming people for horrific crimes (either committing rape or falsely accusing someone of it), when we have little to no evidence?

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 3

S-man10

Original post by Anna150

Just because he wasn't convicted that doesn't mean that she was making it up. The husband was the one on trial not the wife.

That doesn't change the fact that he was proven innocent? :curious:

Reply 4

member520746

Oh I see, it's made up cause the geezer facing years in prison says it's made up, now it all makes sense. How silly we've all been

Reply 5

cardine92

No one was condemning him, all people were trying to do was argue that being married to someone doesn't mean you can have sex when you want, whether the other person wants it or not. I for one hope justice has been served.

Reply 6

Snagprophet

Original post by Anna150

But how are the people now condeming the wife any better?

Because the court, who has heard all the evidence, has kicked it out. I'm surprised it hasn't said what happens now. I wouldn't be surprised if he was denied the right to have his children as a result of the stupid sexist laws in this country.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 7

Anna150

Original post by S-man10

That doesn't change the fact that he was proven innocent? :curious:

What's your point?

The OP says "It turns out the wench made up those allegations just to get him into trouble. "

That's what i'm replying to.

Reply 8

S-man10

Original post by Anna150

What's your point?

The OP says "It turns out the wench made up those allegations just to get him into trouble. "

That's what i'm replying to.

the OP does have a point, it would obviously seem to be the case to get him into trouble.

Reply 9

Anna150

Original post by Snagprophet

Because the court, who has heard all the evidence, has kicked it out.

Because they have to be 100% certain that he is guilty to convict him. If they were 90% sure that the wife was telling the truth and was raped, they still would have found him innocent. That's just how the law works.

6.5% of reported rapes end in a conviction. That doesn't mean 93.5% of people who report being raped are liars.

Edit: The '6.5%' figure is from http://www.nus.org.uk. But someone pointed out that the conviction rates are actually more like 60%. The point remains.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 10

ckingalt

Original post by de_monies

No woman is likely to ever be prosecuted for making false rape allegations. Even if those allegations are proven to be false without a doubt. Women's groups would have a fit for fear of discouraging actual victims from coming forward. While I understand the desire to protect real victims, I believe our justice system should be sacred in its' pursuit of justice for all.

Reply 11

Snagprophet

I wonder why she hasn't been charged with harassment and false rape claims yet. Oh yeah, sexism towards men.

Reply 12

Ham22

Probably because there wasn't enough evidence? I.e it happened too long ago for any evidence to be 'collected', there were no witnesses etc.

Reply 13

The_Internet

Original post by Ape Gone Insane

Like how the Romans did it with Calumnia? I'd be for that.

TBH, I didn't actually read that article but I was thinking more on the lines of giving her the punishment that her ex husband would have got if he was guilty

Reply 14

Snagprophet

Original post by Ham22

I.e it happened too long ago for any evidence to be 'collected', there were no witnesses etc.

Or it didn't happen.

Reply 15

Ice Constricter

Original post by James82

Using that logic we should just label all men as rapists until they prove beyond reasonable doubt that they have never raped anyone.
A man accused of rape and found not guilty is no more of a rapist than anybody who has never been accused of rape, a legal tradition that I hope continues in this country, a shame that some people don't subscribe to this practice, but I guess mud sticks.

Is that how you honestly interpretated what I said or are you just desperate to put words into my mouth?
All I said was that in order to bring about a conviction of rape, it must have been proven beyond reasonable doubt that he committed the act. That's actually fairer on the defendent and rightly so because imprisoning 1 innocent person is worse than letting 3 guilty people go.

Original post by James82

Fortunately in this case it seems like both parties were given anonymity, something that should happen in all rape cases, either that or both parties should be named, it's completely unfair that in most cases the man is named and the woman receives complete anonymity.

I agree with this, if the man is named (and shamed) before he is even convicted that'd have disasterous consequences on his life. At least name and publicly humiliate them when they're proven guilty. Tbh I can't believe the legal system still operates like this, ****ing disgusting!

Overall I'm not defending either the man or woman, all I'm saying is that it's neutral.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 16

Anna150

Original post by Ape Gone Insane

100? What? It's just beyond reasonable doubt, isn't it...

Well yeah, but if they're only 90% certain then they must have doubts? Either way the burden of evidence is on the prosecution (as it should be). If i was sitting in that Jury i probably would have found him innocent aswell because i wouldn't want to send someone to prison and lable them as a rapist without more certain evidence. That doesn't mean i think the wife was making it all up.

Reply 17

Ham22

Original post by Snagprophet

I wonder why she hasn't been charged with harassment and false rape claims yet. Oh yeah, sexism towards men.

Just because he was found not guilty, doesn't mean she was making it up. If you fail to see how this is a possibility, you are an idiot.

Reply 18

Hype en Ecosse

Original post by Ape Gone Insane

Nah, because a jury which is placed there to judge him in the administration of justice and has seen all the evidence - found him not guilty

What evidence is there to offer in situations like this, though? What kind of stuff would he have to provide to be acquitted?

Reply 19

The_Internet

Original post by ckingalt

In all fairness, I thought that would be the case. It's a very sexist part of the law. If you make fake rape allegations, and are proven without a doubt to have made those allegations, then you deserve to go in to prison for the same amount of time that the other party would have gone in for, if convicted

EDIT: To the feminists, I'd argue the same if a man falsely accused someone of rape, though man on man rape seems to be rarer