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

Rape hysteria - Oxford Union 'rape victim knew her claim was false' Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Link to article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...was-false.html


    Of course she has to keep her anonymity :rolleyes:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Ridiculous. Name and shame the dumb sloot
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Burn her at the stake :mob:
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    I wonder what the feminist that advocate we should reduce the need for burden of proof in rape trials have to say about this.
    I read earlier that WAR are furious about this news. Not because of what she did, but the fact that it has been reported in the media. They say this will make women less likely to come forward after rape and it should have been kept secret.
    I dont know what the accused man would say about this.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    I think she should definitely spend some time in prison
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Can we just be clear here, that no one has been charged with false rape allegations. The reason ben got off was due to a lack of preponderance of evidence, in order to charge anyone for rape or false rape allegations the standard of evidence has to be pretty high. I don't like how people are implying that this principle should be undermined. So if there is not enough evidence to charge anyone, then no one should be shamed. The evidence being presented in the media was not strong enough to swing this either way so the best thing to do is just move on. Unfortunately in these cases of one persons word against another, no one is punished when clearly a crime on the part of someone has happened. Yes this is far from ideal, but the alternative would be to prosecute an unacceptably high number of people with a crime they did not commit.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mindless Behavior)
    I think she should definitely spend some time in prison
    She hasn't been charged, so this sort of response is not reasonable. The legal system has examined the evidence and concluded it is not strong enough to push this either way. Obviously the standard of evidence has to be very high to prosecute those that make false rape allegations, because the last thing you want to do is inprision a rape victim even if it doesn't happen very often. Our justice system is not ideal, but please lets stick with 'innocent until proven guilty' to all concerned.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QuantumOverlord)
    She hasn't been charged, so this sort of response is not reasonable. The legal system has examined the evidence and concluded it is not strong enough to push this either way. Obviously the standard of evidence has to be very high to prosecute those that make false rape allegations, because the last thing you want to do is inprision a rape victim even if it doesn't happen very often. Our justice system is not ideal, but please lets stick with 'innocent until proven guilty' to all concerned.
    I understand that but in this case, if the conversation reported in the article did happen, I think she should go to prison. That conversation is strong enough evidence for me to form my opinion.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QuantumOverlord)
    Can we just be clear here, that no one has been charged with false rape allegations. The reason ben got off was due to a lack of preponderance of evidence, in order to charge anyone for rape or false rape allegations the standard of evidence has to be pretty high. I don't like how people are implying that this principle should be undermined. So if there is not enough evidence to charge anyone, then no one should be shamed. The evidence being presented in the media was not strong enough to swing this either way so the best thing to do is just move on. Unfortunately in these cases of one persons word against another, no one is punished when clearly a crime on the part of someone has happened. Yes this is far from ideal, but the alternative would be to prosecute an unacceptably high number of people with a crime they did not commit.
    I largely agree, but let's not forget that Ben Sullivan was shamed in the press, despite this lack of evidence that you acknowledge.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mindless Behavior)
    I understand that but in this case, if the conversation reported in the article did happen, I think she should go to prison. That conversation is strong enough evidence for me to form my opinion.
    Well we don't know much about this conversation other than it appeared in the paper. And even if it did happen, in of itself it still might not be strong enough evidence; I'm sure there are reasons why such a conversation might happen if the victim was telling the truth. This is the problem, a crime has been committed but no one can be punished because doing so incurs to great a risk that we get it the wrong way round. So in light of this, the legal position deems both parties innocent unless there is new evidence. Incidentally this is one argument that those that do get charged with false rape allegations should get the 'book thrown at them' to act as a deterrent when the evidence is strong enough to do so.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chief Wiggum)
    I largely agree, but let's not forget that Ben Sullivan was shamed in the press, despite this lack of evidence that you acknowledge.
    It wasn't so much shamed, as simply informative. The law dictates that suspects may be named, the rationale behind this is that it encourages other victims to come forward. This is an interesting debate topic, because there are strong cases either way. In this whole nasty affair, the only people that we can really point the finger at, are those that jumped to conclusions and potentially perverted the course of justice.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    They admitted they lied, so why not throw them in jail? Also jail the one who revealed the guy's name, I heard it wasn't the police who revealed it.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Now. Let's not do the very thing oh so many people did with the Ben Sullivan thing. Defaming him and calling for his resignation before he'd even been charged.

    The presumption of innocence applies to this person as well. And I will defend her right to be treated as such and will only stop if a jury of her peers finds her guilty.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    One high retweeted tweet on twitter claimed that "Of course Ben Sullivan didn't rape her. He's too attractive to rape anyone". The way people discuss rape in this country is ridiculous at times. I think the accused should be granted anonymity until he is actually charged with an offence.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    Arghh, just realised how old this thread is!
 
 
 
  • 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
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
  • 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

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