Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by james22)
    Can you provide any evidence at all for this? I have never seen any cases of this innocent until proven guilty thing you are talking about.
    R v Evans would be an example, I'm sure I could find more if I really could be bothered to look


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Redemption?)
    Can there ever be a 'happy' (poor choice of word but I'm hoping it will be seen in context...) medium in rape cases? One of the hardest crimes to prove and one where it's impossible to set the boundaries at a point that seems fair to all, given that a lot of the time men fail to understand what the impact of forced sex can have on a woman psychologically.
    The only happy medium I will accept is this: The presumption of innocence, and the requirement of the accuser to prove beyond reasonable doubt to the satisfaction of a jury of your peers that the accused is guilty of the crime they're accused of, we most certainly should not budge an inch from that.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wade-)
    R v Evans would be an example, I'm sure I could find more if I really could be bothered to look


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    R V Evans seems a very clear case of lack of consent.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wade-)
    Haha your legal knowledge is very bad. If that was that case how would anyone ever be found guilty of rape? Their defence would simply tell them to keep their mouth shut and unless it was recorded there would be no evidence that the complainant didn't consent.

    In real life the complainant would say she didn't consent and the defendant would have to attempt to convince a jury that she had, the judge would direct the jury to find the defendant guilty unless he could reasonably convince them that the complainant had consented.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    That's really not true.

    The prosecution has to state why it was rape beforehand. Even though silence for example is not consent, they have to say something along the lines that the victim was scared etc. At that point the defence has to prove how that could not prove it was rape.

    It's the same as in any other case, however simply using one persons word over another is unusable to find someone guilty. There has to be other evidence, unless you can discredit the defendants statement.

    Straight off the CPS site concerning prosecution for rape.

    " the prosecution must always prove the defendant's guilt. Cases may fail because a jury cannot decide between what the victim says and what the defendant says. This is why it is essential to obtain all possible forensic and scientific evidence as soon as possible. The earlier a rape is reported, the higher the chance of this being done, and the higher the chance of building a strong prosecution case."

    Most people don't realise that most rape cases will never reach court because the vast majority rely on one persons word over another.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theDanIdentity)
    look mate.

    all you're advocating is that average joes' like me leave the house with a breathalyzer, a lawyer, triplicate consensual sexual forms; a camera at my house for video purposes (even though in a court, all this is all nonsense; as it: STILL WOULDN'T HOLD UP!!!!!)

    after all, you cannot tell me that females do not at some point in the night drink some form of alcohol (e.g. they ALL go for pre-drinks). that means that; if they claim rape they have the evidence (as you know - breathalyzers); so where's the justice in that?

    how come it is that in every other fact or facet of life a drunk person is held accountable for their actions, but in this they aren't?

    '..very few people..' mate, you do not leave your house much, do you? money is the goal here. and the rules? to get it by any means.

    '..friends would've probably seen you..' what friends..? the ones that already had some form of drink that night? how would that help their testimonies in the witness box in any way shape or form?
    I'd say something but you called me mate.

    I'm not your mate.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by james22)
    R V Evans seems a very clear case of lack of consent.
    Exactly my point, he had to prove his belief of her consent was reasonable, the prosecution wasn't forced to prove she hadn't consented

    (Original post by DanB1991)
    That's really not true.

    The prosecution has to state why it was rape beforehand. Even though silence for example is not consent, they have to say something along the lines that the victim was scared etc. At that point the defence has to prove how that could not prove it was rape.

    It's the same as in any other case, however simply using one persons word over another is unusable to find someone guilty. There has to be other evidence, unless you can discredit the defendants statement.

    Straight off the CPS site concerning prosecution for rape.

    " the prosecution must always prove the defendant's guilt. Cases may fail because a jury cannot decide between what the victim says and what the defendant says. This is why it is essential to obtain all possible forensic and scientific evidence as soon as possible. The earlier a rape is reported, the higher the chance of this being done, and the higher the chance of building a strong prosecution case."

    Most people don't realise that most rape cases will never reach court because the vast majority rely on one persons word over another.
    They say she didn't consent or couldn't reasonably have consented and then it's essentially up to the defendant to prove she did.

    Well if it never gets to court then, legally, no rape has occurred


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    In October of 2014, I was out during Freshers Week and got very drunk.

    I don't remember meeting this older man, but he convinced my friend, who wanted to stay out but I was too drunk, that he lived on our Halls and that he would pay for a cab home for me. I have no recollection of this.

    I have faded memories of us being in my room, then black.

    Then I remember the smell of him and the weight of his body on top of me, then black.

    Then he asked for my number, I hand him my phone, then black.

    I wake up a couple hours later, my phone/debit card was stolen and I self harm viciously to punish myself for being so stupid, allowing myself to be put in that position.

    At this point, I didn't want to believe I had slept with this man, of which I wouldn't even be able to point him out on the street.

    Those flashbacks haunted me, and I refused to press charges against him for rape/sexual assault because I felt ashamed of myself, because I felt society would too feel ashamed of me, as just because I was drunk, does this mean I am not able to consent?

    I do NOT remember saying yes.

    I had NO intentions of going back with someone that night, or sleeping with anyone.

    I do NOT remember who initiated it.

    But this man took advantage of the fact I was a little drunk fresher in a vulnerable position, and not only did he sleep with an intoxicated girl who was unable to consent, he stole my belongings as well!

    So, I think it is about time rape victims were not blamed by society, and the rapists should have to prove the women DID consent as a posed to women feeling like we are under scrutiny, being too scared to come forward and press charges.

    This man is still on bail, and can still do this to other women, all because I have to PROVE I didn't consent, as if I would happily ruin a mans life. Theft is one thing, rape is another.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    But... these are just prosecution guidelines. They don't change anything about what happens in court.

    If someone accuses you of a crime, you were present, there's no other reason why you couldn't have done it, and you can't reasonably show that you didn't, prosecution seems fairly reasonable to me.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wade-)
    They say she didn't consent or couldn't reasonably have consented and then it's essentially up to the defendant to prove she did.

    Well if it never gets to court then, legally, no rape has occurred


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    No, the prosecution has to prove she didn't consent. If they provide that the defense obviously can attempt to undermine this. It's pretty much the same with any witness produced by the prosecution in "any" legal proceeding.

    If a murder does not get convicted has no murder occurred? There's between a false claim and being unable to prosecute. Legally a rape happens before any court proceedings start, do you understand how laws work?
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jennywbu)

    This man is still on bail, and can still do this to other women, all because I have to PROVE I didn't consent, as if I would happily ruin a mans life. Theft is one thing, rape is another.
    How terribly unjust that you must actually prove that someone committed a crime before they are sent to jail.

    I'm sorry, the state can't punish people because you think they might, possibly, have committed a crime against you which you're too drunk too remember properly.

    And I'm not saying there's anything wrong with being drunk. This is clearly a difficult situation. But it's just not acceptable to say it should be resolved by sending people to jail without proper evidence. Why on earth should a man be condemned and have his liberty taken away from him when you don't even know that he did anything wrong?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    How terribly unjust that you must actually prove that someone committed a crime before they are sent to jail.

    I'm sorry, the state can't punish people because you think they might, possibly, have committed a crime against you which you're too drunk too remember properly.

    And I'm not saying there's anything wrong with being drunk. This is clearly a difficult situation. But it's just not acceptable to say it should be resolved by sending people to jail without proper evidence. Why on earth should a man be condemned and have his liberty taken away from him when you don't even know that he did anything wrong?
    I know for a fact it happened because I found the condom the next day, my point is that I was too ashamed to tell the police this, because of the way society reacts to rape victims. I wouldn't even call this rape. I didn't open up about this to the police for a while, all because I was worried about what my family/friends would think of me.

    I know the implications of pressing charges, but I did't even want to mention the sexual side of the crime. He stole my phone and debit card, theft was all I wanted him to go down for, and even that hasn't happened. The police pushed for me to press charges for sexual assault because they have seen this type of criminal so many times, taking advantage of drunk women on the seafront in Brighton, taking them home, sleeping with them and then stealing their belongings, why should he be able to do this to more young girls? In hindsight, I should have allowed them to examine me, but I felt pure shame and guilt and wanted to pretend it didn't happen, then I asked myself WHY.

    I know its incredibly hard to prove it either way now, because I refused to be examined the next day, all because I was too ashamed, THAT is what needs to change! Women/Men should NEVER be made to feel like they are under scrutiny when something like this happens.

    They wanted to examine me, EVERYWHERE, take my clothes, my underwear, cordon off my bedroom, go through EVERYTHING and I was scared and panicked and said no. THAT is what needs to change.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jennywbu)
    In October of 2014, I was out during Freshers Week and got very drunk.

    I don't remember meeting this older man, but he convinced my friend, who wanted to stay out but I was too drunk, that he lived on our Halls and that he would pay for a cab home for me. I have no recollection of this.

    I have faded memories of us being in my room, then black.

    Then I remember the smell of him and the weight of his body on top of me, then black.

    Then he asked for my number, I hand him my phone, then black.

    I wake up a couple hours later, my phone/debit card was stolen and I self harm viciously to punish myself for being so stupid, allowing myself to be put in that position.

    At this point, I didn't want to believe I had slept with this man, of which I wouldn't even be able to point him out on the street.

    Those flashbacks haunted me, and I refused to press charges against him for rape/sexual assault because I felt ashamed of myself, because I felt society would too feel ashamed of me, as just because I was drunk, does this mean I am not able to consent?

    I do NOT remember saying yes.

    I had NO intentions of going back with someone that night, or sleeping with anyone.

    I do NOT remember who initiated it.

    But this man took advantage of the fact I was a little drunk fresher in a vulnerable position, and not only did he sleep with an intoxicated girl who was unable to consent, he stole my belongings as well!

    So, I think it is about time rape victims were not blamed by society, and the rapists should have to prove the women DID consent as a posed to women feeling like we are under scrutiny, being too scared to come forward and press charges.

    This man is still on bail, and can still do this to other women, all because I have to PROVE I didn't consent, as if I would happily ruin a mans life. Theft is one thing, rape is another.
    While what happened to you is terrible, you yourself have stated

    You do not remember saying yes.

    And you do not remember who initiated it.

    You pretty much have to prove how drunk you were, either by your friend or by his own admission.

    The statement "I had NO intentions of going back with someone that night, or sleeping with anyone." is a moot point seeing you could argue prior intention is not the same as deciding in the heat of the moment to have sex or not.

    Also being drunk does not automatically mean rape, there are many women out there who resent the fact many people feel free to decide for them that any sex while intoxicated is rape. Also many people's memory is affected differently while intoxicated, I can't remember most of a party on saturday night, but I've been told I wasn't noticeably too drunk by around 4-5 and even then was still capable to cook 2 pizza's and play video games for another 2 hours.

    I'm not arguing that you were not too drunk too consent, more as in all this creates a massive storm of issues that are not universal and the prosecution and courts need to know before you can even approach the issue on whether you were too drunk to consent.

    Also having to prove someone else consented is just as hard as having to prove that you did not yourself. Contrary to popular feminist belief most people do not verbally consent during sex, the only way guys can defend themselves is if A) They tape at least the consent portion or B) Get written consent.

    (Original post by Jennywbu)
    I know its incredibly hard to prove it either way now, because I refused to be examined the next day, all because I was too ashamed, THAT is what needs to change! Women/Men should NEVER be made to feel like they are under scrutiny when something like this happens.

    They wanted to examine me, EVERYWHERE, take my clothes, my underwear, cordon off my bedroom, go through EVERYTHING and I was scared and panicked and said no. THAT is what needs to change.
    The problem is they need that evidence to even have a chance of prosecution seeing there's no other evidence apart from your word vs his.

    I know it's a massive physiological issue to go through all that, but what alternative would you suggest?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DanB1991)
    While what happened to you is terrible, you yourself have stated

    You do not remember saying yes.

    And you do not remember who initiated it.

    You pretty much have to prove how drunk you were, either by your friend or by his own admission.

    The statement "I had NO intentions of going back with someone that night, or sleeping with anyone." is a moot point seeing you could argue prior intention is not the same as deciding in the heat of the moment to have sex or not.

    Also being drunk does not automatically mean rape, there are many women out there who resent the fact many people feel free to decide for them that any sex while intoxicated is rape. Also many people's memory is affected differently while intoxicated, I can't remember most of a party on saturday night, but I've been told I wasn't noticeably too drunk by around 4-5 and even then was still capable to cook 2 pizza's and play video games for another 2 hours.

    I'm not arguing that you were not too drunk too consent, more as in all this creates a massive storm of issues that are not universal and the prosecution and courts need to know before you can even approach the issue on whether you were too drunk to consent.

    Also having to prove someone else consented is just as hard as having to prove that you did not yourself. Contrary to popular feminist belief most people do not verbally consent during sex, the only way guys can defend themselves is if A) They tape at least the consent portion or B) Get written consent.



    The problem is they need that evidence to even have a chance of prosecution seeing there's no other evidence apart from your word vs his.

    I know it's a massive physiological issue to go through all that, but what alternative would you suggest?
    The fact I don't remember saying yes or who initiated it is what led me to keep quiet and take it as consensual sex but the police saw through it, and pushed for me to tell them that I did not remember consenting.

    I have had battles with myself in my head about this whole situation, I know neither you nor the courts know me personally, but I would NEVER cry rape just because I regretted it!

    I know this is a mess but all I am saying by sharing my story is that,
    if rape victims weren't made out to be the ones in the wrong, for 'being too drunk' or 'dressing provocatively' then more women would come forward and I would have the proof, also people should be taught to NOT take advantage of people who are vulnerable.

    If I thought society would understand me, and not put me under a microscope, scrutinising everything I say, maybe I would have allowed them to examine me and get proof, but I was too scared of what people would think of me, and not what they would think of him.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jennywbu)
    The fact I don't remember saying yes or who initiated it is what led me to keep quiet and take it as consensual sex but the police saw through it, and pushed for me to tell them that I did not remember consenting.

    I have had battles with myself in my head about this whole situation, I know neither you nor the courts know me personally, but I would NEVER cry rape just because I regretted it!

    I know this is a mess but all I am saying by sharing my story is that,
    if rape victims weren't made out to be the ones in the wrong, for 'being too drunk' or 'dressing provocatively' then more women would come forward and I would have the proof, also people should be taught to NOT take advantage of people who are vulnerable.

    If I thought society would understand me, and not put me under a microscope, scrutinising everything I say, maybe I would have allowed them to examine me and get proof, but I was too scared of what people would think of me, and not what they would think of him.
    The main problem is while it's not you're fault for getting too drunk, the main complexities of the case would of been bypassed if you hadn't.

    Having both friends and relative on both sides of the criminal systems in this regard, once reported they actually have a duty of care. Rape victims are certainly not made out to be in the wrong, more how quite simply a momentary lax in moderation can cause issues in the horrendous case that somebody does take advantage. This isn't to 'attack' the victim, more to warn others of the dangers of the real world.

    Also I think around 99% of the male and female population know that not only rape and theft is wrong, so is taking advantage of intoxicated people.

    Tbh it sounds like you do need to see either a psychiatrist or someone via the support offered via the police.

    Also I never suggested you're crying rape, but the courts have a duty to make sure the conviction is correct and supported by evidence.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jennywbu)
    I know for a fact it happened because I found the condom the next day, my point is that I was too ashamed to tell the police this, because of the way society reacts to rape victims. I wouldn't even call this rape. I didn't open up about this to the police for a while, all because I was worried about what my family/friends would think of me.

    I know the implications of pressing charges, but I did't even want to mention the sexual side of the crime. He stole my phone and debit card, theft was all I wanted him to go down for, and even that hasn't happened. The police pushed for me to press charges for sexual assault because they have seen this type of criminal so many times, taking advantage of drunk women on the seafront in Brighton, taking them home, sleeping with them and then stealing their belongings, why should he be able to do this to more young girls? In hindsight, I should have allowed them to examine me, but I felt pure shame and guilt and wanted to pretend it didn't happen, then I asked myself WHY.

    I know its incredibly hard to prove it either way now, because I refused to be examined the next day, all because I was too ashamed, THAT is what needs to change! Women/Men should NEVER be made to feel like they are under scrutiny when something like this happens.

    They wanted to examine me, EVERYWHERE, take my clothes, my underwear, cordon off my bedroom, go through EVERYTHING and I was scared and panicked and said no. THAT is what needs to change.
    (Original post by Jennywbu)

    I have faded memories of us being in my room, then black.

    Then I remember the smell of him and the weight of his body on top of me, then black.

    Then he asked for my number, I hand him my phone, then black.

    ...

    I do NOT remember saying yes.

    I do NOT remember who initiated it.
    This has been dealt with above. You don't seem to me to know that you were raped at all. Perhaps, as you say, an examination would have revealed evidence that you were, but without that evidence the state can't just throw someone in prison because you think he might have done something wrong. If you remember being raped, please correct me. But a condom doesn't prove that.

    The police pushed for me to press charges for sexual assault because they have seen this type of criminal so many times, taking advantage of drunk women on the seafront in Brighton, taking them home, sleeping with them and then stealing their belongings, why should he be able to do this to more young girls?
    Well, sleeping with drunk, consenting women is not against the law. As for stealing their belongings, theft is against the law. Those are different matters.

    I don't know exactly whom you're blaming, or really for what, to be honest. Yes, it's unfortunate that you couldn't provide the necessary evidence without being 'scrutinised'. But that's just because of the situation. It is not the police's, or anyone else's, fault. As for 'everything you say' being scrutinised, that's because, in this country, you're innocent until you're proven guilty. Not until someone says they think you might be guilty. Until they prove it. And that is perfectly right. The police should scrutinise every claim made against someone.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jennywbu)
    In October of 2014, I was out during Freshers Week and got very drunk.

    I don't remember meeting this older man, but he convinced my friend, who wanted to stay out but I was too drunk, that he lived on our Halls and that he would pay for a cab home for me. I have no recollection of this.

    I have faded memories of us being in my room, then black.

    Then I remember the smell of him and the weight of his body on top of me, then black.

    Then he asked for my number, I hand him my phone, then black.

    I wake up a couple hours later, my phone/debit card was stolen and I self harm viciously to punish myself for being so stupid, allowing myself to be put in that position.

    At this point, I didn't want to believe I had slept with this man, of which I wouldn't even be able to point him out on the street.

    Those flashbacks haunted me, and I refused to press charges against him for rape/sexual assault because I felt ashamed of myself, because I felt society would too feel ashamed of me, as just because I was drunk, does this mean I am not able to consent?

    I do NOT remember saying yes.

    I had NO intentions of going back with someone that night, or sleeping with anyone.

    I do NOT remember who initiated it.

    But this man took advantage of the fact I was a little drunk fresher in a vulnerable position, and not only did he sleep with an intoxicated girl who was unable to consent, he stole my belongings as well!

    So, I think it is about time rape victims were not blamed by society, and the rapists should have to prove the women DID consent as a posed to women feeling like we are under scrutiny, being too scared to come forward and press charges.

    This man is still on bail, and can still do this to other women, all because I have to PROVE I didn't consent, as if I would happily ruin a mans life. Theft is one thing, rape is another.
    The change in the prosecution guidance should assist cases like yours. Essentially the police have got themselves bogged down with the possible investigation of your case and the result has been that you were unwilling to press charges.

    If you take this from first principles; the police always had a good chance of proving that you were incapable of giving consent due to intoxication based on independent evidence from your friend. Why otherwise did someone have to escort you home?

    If you were incapable of giving consent, really what you said or did was irrelevant save as a foundation for the accused's belief. How did the alleged perpetrator believe you were consenting? Was that belief reasonable given that he had picked you up because you were unfit to go home alone?

    However, I must take issue with "as if I would happily ruin a mans life". You have blamed yourself, even to the point of self-harming, for something that it appears, you had no responsibility for. Other women may blame the man for for no better reason than that it is easier or more convenient.

    I don't think that there are any statistics for false allegations of rape. How many are fantasists? How many are seeking revenge? How many find it easier than admitting the truth to family? How many false accusations are really accusations by family rather than by the "victim"?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DanB1991)
    No, the prosecution has to prove she didn't consent. If they provide that the defense obviously can attempt to undermine this. It's pretty much the same with any witness produced by the prosecution in "any" legal proceeding.

    If a murder does not get convicted has no murder occurred? There's between a false claim and being unable to prosecute. Legally a rape happens before any court proceedings start, do you understand how laws work?
    How would you ever prove a woman didn't consent? No ones going to admit that. I really don't know why you're arguing when you clearly aren't legally educated.

    If you're never found guilty of something you can't be addressed as though you are. If you're not found guilty of rape then you can't be called a rapist and thus the woman was never raped, legally speaking.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I kind of dislike the notion that women are sex dolls during sex and everything comes from the man.

    This idea of consent, what the hell? Who 'gives consent'? Is consent pulling each other closer and seeming enjoying being ****ed? Does it always have to be spoken or written contracts? Jesus the way people talk about consent they make it seem like it must be spoken when that's not even how sex works. They do this to catch out innocent people for no reason.

    California has a backwards law which requires some kind of autistic-style consent.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Wade-)
    Exactly my point, he had to prove his belief of her consent was reasonable, the prosecution wasn't forced to prove she hadn't consented
    Yes, it was and yes it did: to the satisfaction of everyone on the jury, it demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that she lacked capacity to consent.

    Only at this point does it become up to the defendant to say why any mistaken belief in consent was a reasonable one. McDonald managed that without too much difficulty, but Evans unsurprisingly failed.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by unprinted)
    Yes, it was and yes it did: to the satisfaction of everyone on the jury, it demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that she lacked capacity to consent.

    Only at this point does it become up to the defendant to say why any mistaken belief in consent was a reasonable one. McDonald managed that without too much difficulty, but Evans unsurprisingly failed.
    No that isn't what happened, how do you prove beyond reasonable doubt someone was too drunk to consent especially considering she didn't actually drink much.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.