Oxford Union President arrested on suspicion of rape.

Scroll to see replies

On the issue of anonymity for defendants, don't you think that if they are convicted, additional victims can then come forward as his name will be released upon being found guilty? They will still be victims after he's been convicted, there's no reason I can fathom why additional victims must come forward during the first trial.

to be honest I don't really like the argument for it allowing more victims to come forward I think it's a sloppy excuse for not putting measures in place to encourage that in the first place.

Reply 81

MostUncivilised

Original post by redferry

I guess it just makes me lose faith in the world the number of rapists that are just walking around, and knowing there is a predatory teenage boy living around the corner for me that could hurt other people and there is nothing I can do about it. Having to sit in the same restaurant as him and his family, and see them walking down the road. It's just sick.

That's awful. Have you considered bringing a civil suit against him? It would have a lower evidentiary standard (balance of probabilities rather than beyond reasonable doubt)

Reply 82

Chief Wiggum

Original post by MostUncivilised

I am in favour of anonymity for those accused, but perhaps those opposed to it would suggest that additional people coming forward initially would help secure a guilty conviction in the first place?

Reply 83

Georgie_M

Original post by MostUncivilised

In our society, if someone is acquitted then they are deemed to be innocent (innocent until proven guilty, which they have not been)

It depends what you mean by in our society because innocent until proven guilty is an American concept and is NOT part of the Magna Carta and therefore was not part of our legal system for a long time. However the EU human rights convention does say innocent until proven guilty (of which we are subject to).

I think people are forgetting the personal costs to the accused, yes career is important but it must be a really awful emotional experience to go through, it breaks up marriages ruins friendships, it is destructive and hurtful.

I think all involved should have their anonymity protected as much as is possible.

Reply 84

Huskaris

Original post by MostUncivilised

I'd certainly be interested to hear if they have any rebuttal to it. I honestly cannot see what the problem would be, if they are convicted their name is made public and additional victims can come forward.

If they are not convicted then they don't suffer the reputational damage. I can only assume that many of the people who are arguing against anonymity believe that the reputational damage is a form of punishment itself, so that people they see as rapists don't "walk away Scot free".

They genuinely don't seem to think there is such thing as an innocent man when it comes to a rape allegation. Perhaps they believe that, in a broader moral sense, all men are rapists or complicit by dint of their gender?

I think it's a case of "so many of them get away with it, so by naming them all, at least they will suffer somehow, and nevermind the innocents."

This goes directly against what I believe in, to paraphrase John Fortescue "one would much rather that twenty guilty persons should escape the punishment of death, than that one innocent person should be condemned and suffer capitally"

Reply 85

MostUncivilised

Original post by Chief Wiggum

I am in favour of anonymity for those accused, but perhaps those opposed to it would suggest that additional people coming forward initially would help secure a guilty conviction in the first place?

I think it's a false economy and slightly underhanded to try to secure a conviction by bringing additional charges, that the seeming weight of multiple offences will cause the jury to think worse of the defendant. Those are the kinds of legal tactics we see in the US.

What we have seen, in fact, is that tacking weaker charges onto more serious ones can actually result in across-the-board acquittal; when the weaker charges fall apart, the jury looks less favourably on the stronger charges.

Reply 86

MostUncivilised

Original post by Georgie_M

I'm sorry, but I must point out that you clearly don't know what you're talking about. The presumption of innocence is an absolutely fundamental element of our legal system, it has been called the "golden thread" that runs through English justice.

I think you're under a misapprehension about what innocent until proven guilty means, but I should have thought that it is what it says on the tin. A defendant is under no obligation to prove their innocence, it is incumbent on the prosecution to prove guilt because you are innocent until proven guilty. You should read Lord Sankey's judgment in Woolmington v DPP

Throughout the web of the English Criminal Law one golden thread is always to be seen that it is the duty of the prosecution to prove the prisoner's guilt subject to... the defence of insanity and subject also to any statutory exception. If, at the end of and on the whole of the case, there is a reasonable doubt, created by the evidence given by either the prosecution or the prisoner... the prosecution has not made out the case and the prisoner is entitled to an acquittal. No matter what the charge or where the trial, the principle that the prosecution must prove the guilt of the prisoner is part of the common law of England and no attempt to whittle it down can be entertained - Lord Sankey

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 87

redferry

Original post by MostUncivilised

That's awful. Have you considered bringing a civil suit against him? It would have a lower evidentiary standard (balance of probabilities rather than beyond reasonable doubt)

I think it would just be too much for the victim (it was not myself).

My boyfriends aunt is in a similar situation where her rapist lives round the corner from her as well :frown:

She had DNA evidence, went to court and everything. He was found not guilty because he claimed it was consentual. How anyone believed a perfectly normal middle ages woman would be like 'oh yeah I'll just have sex with this 20 year old with learning difficulties' is beyond me O-o.

Reply 88

Le Nombre

Original post by redferry

Given I know people accused of rape within university circles who faced no repercussions I'm going to need some evidence of people having issues as a result of being accused I am afraid.

Could end up on an enhanced DBS check. Some professional organisations will google it and not let you in, guy a couple of years above me got rejected from Law Soc student enrolment because he'd been accused of an indictable crime. Appealed it quite far apparently but didn't get in.

Reply 89

MostUncivilised

Original post by arson_fire

Each case is (and should) be judged on it`s merit. The defendant isn`t on trial for "being a rapist" - they`re on trial for one specific offence against one specific person. The number of other people who claim to have been a victim does not affect whether the specific crime took place.

Very well said, I entirely agree

Reply 90

bertstare

Lol the guy who wrote the original Tab article was in my Chem class at school

I find it weird how seriously Oxford take their student politics, this is pretty cruel on the guy

Reply 91

Le Nombre

Original post by redferry

Everyone who is acquitted is clearly not innocent. There have been numerous cases of rape victims committing suicide when their attacker walks away deemed 'innocent'.

The conviction system for rape is VERY flawed. It is one persons word against another in almost 100% of cases which means if someone is acquitted that doubt will always be there, as I said earlier, as after all the jury must have 'no reasonable doubt' to convict someone. So any doubts at all that they MIGHT be innocent and they won't be convicted. When it's one person against another surely that doubt will always be there.

What's the alternative? The nature of rape is that is is a crime where it will be often a 50:50, who's more plausible sort of case? Do we make rape, in spite of carrying the life sentence, different to all other crimes, say 51% chance he did it and accept having significant numbers of innocent people in jail for quite long periods?

The civil system is still open to them as well, the criminal trial is not the end of it.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 92

MostUncivilised

@NatNinja (It doesn't seem to be allowing me to auto-quote you)

Do you mean the author, or Ben Sullivan, is your mate?

I'd read a bit about all these goings on, the Banter Squadron, but I find it hard to believe that anyone would have made this accusation as a result of the disputes in the Union.

Reply 93

bertstare

Original post by natninja

I bet you had fun :tongue:

he's a good friend of mine here.

To be fair, with that sort of allegation, it's hardly just political now is it?

Small world

Yeah I saw a couple other articles he wrote before about this Sullivan guy's involvement in a drinking society or something, and it struck me as a bit strange writing such articles about someone who you'd see around at university lol. But I think this particular one regarding the rape case is quite extreme, until he's actually proven guilty of what he's accused of. It can pretty much ruin both his social and professional life/reputation

Reply 94

MostUncivilised

Original post by Le Nombre

Excellent point.

And it has always seemed to me that the assertion that rape should be afforded some unique procedure, a dilution of the presumption of innocence, is not a justifiable position.

Why is being raped worse than, say, being stabbed 20 times but surviving? I can imagine if someone attempted to murder you, that would be just as traumatising, perhaps more so.

Reply 95

natninja

Original post by MostUncivilised

The author, though I have had dealings with Ben Sullivan.

I decline to comment on the situation.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 96

natninja

Original post by bertstare

I decline further comment.

Reply 97

redferry

Original post by Le Nombre

I actually read an interesting article about rebranding it non-consensual sex which I could genuinely see helping.

I don't know though, I never claimed to be an expert!

With the loss of legal aid most people won't have the money to take it to a civil system I imagine.

Reply 98

CEKTOP

Original post by MostUncivilised

How on earth can you assert that the police are unwilling to investigate anything to do with rape? We have charges laid even in cases where the victims did not consider themselves to have been sexually assaulted (re Nigel Evans)

In the past few years a number of investigations into the British police handling of rape confirmed that many of the forces almost ignore the issue.

Reply 99

CEKTOP

Original post by yo radical one

I don't understand how you can't see that only the people who are proven, in a court of law, to have committed a rape, are the ones who should be punished and have their reputations ruined