Hugh Thesz Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Going back to 2005 or 2006 here but my (male) mate was one of many victims of multiple Asian men to sole male violent asaults that were happening in the west end of Glasgow at that time Upon waking up the next morning and then going to hospital he was advised to have an anal examination as many of these numerous assaults had involved male on male rape. Â Thankfully his case 'only' involved non sexual violence but they are two huge elements of hypocrosy to this story. The first was the minimal coverage these assaults received in the local press despite it involvinig violence, race and sexual criminality. The other were the amount of woman who asked if the victim was drunk. Â This is a genuine question; does alcohol consumption on alledged victims part play any account in whether cases of non sexual violence proceed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoKonjic Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 For sure, and I don't think anyone would dispute that. Â Loki mentions the scenario of drunken girl crying wolf is generally what happens, I'm not sure how someone can make that statement? Rape should be a complete victim first situation; it should be approached from the angle that the accuser is telling the truth. If there is not enough evidence for a conviction, then so be it. It doesn't mean accuser was bullshitting. Â The "when should we name the accused" argument is a tough one, especially in the case of celebrities. Naming them may encourage other victims to come forward, building a stronger case. I would probably side on not naming until convicted. Â Â Â This is a genuine question; does alcohol consumption on alledged victims part play any account in whether cases of non sexual violence proceed? Â There is no crime with a "o.k if the victim is drunk" stipulation. I think it can sometimes play a part when a victm is trying to claim compensation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 To be clear, the scenario that plays out every weekend around the country is that both parties are bladdered and neither can remember much about the night before. In those circumstances, how can anyone make a decision, legal or otherwise, as to whether rape occurred, it the two participants themselves can't remember? I'd like to hope that all drunk men don't turn into rapists by default. Â I guess what I'm getting at is that binge drinking obfuscates so many cases, and accusations made after heavy drinking have to be dealt with by a police force with limited resources, making it harder to pursue things like marital/partner rape, which is (I think Houchen might confirm) more prevalent than stranger rape? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoKonjic Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 If you wake up next to someone and cant remember much, I don't think the majority of people will think "I've been raped" Most will realise they got pissed and had a one night stand. In a case where a girl wakes up, and has whatever reasons it may be to suspect something has happened with out her consent she should report this. Â Your original scenario suggests girls were waking up knowing they were not raped but falsely reporting it as they regret the one night stand, for boyfriend/social reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 If you wake up next to someone and cant remember much, I don't think the majority of people will think "I've been raped" Most will realise they got pissed and had a one night stand. In a case where a girl wakes up, and has whatever reasons it may be to suspect something has happened with out her consent she should report this. Your original scenario suggests girls were waking up knowing they were not raped but falsely reporting it as they regret the one night stand, for boyfriend/social reasons.  That is correct, that is (according to my solicitor friend) a very regular occurrence - either personal embarrassment, or embarrassment at having to admit to a partner that you've got drunk and done the dirty.  Edit: I'd like to make it clear that I'm not suggesting for a minute that there aren't a worrying number of rape cases, and that it is hard to get them to court or prosecuted; I agree with everything Houchen says. It's just made even harder by the chaotic situation on the ground in police stations, due in large measure to binge drinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Duke Posted February 13, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted February 13, 2014 Since I'm mostly just questioning everyone at this point, Loki, did you solicitor friend elaborate on how she knew that's what they were doing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Because they admitted it whilst she was talking to them. People tell their briefs everything! Generally once the actual processing of a rape claim starts in earnest, they get cold feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoKonjic Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 And is that based on people withdrawing original accusations, or admitting they were telling porkies? Â Withdrawing doesn't prove anything; they could think the lack of evidence means there isn't any point in taking the matter further. It could be embarrassment, there is still a stigma attached to rape victims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators PowerButchi Posted February 13, 2014 Moderators Share Posted February 13, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Chris B Posted February 13, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted February 13, 2014 Because they admitted it whilst she was talking to them. People tell their briefs everything! Generally once the actual processing of a rape claim starts in earnest, they get cold feet. Â So your friend gets told that they're lying and in some circumstances continues with the trial anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Bifkin Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Rape is such an emotive crime that IMO the general public should just be kept out of it & anyone accused shouldn't be named until it goes to court. If you're a public figure your career can be killed regardless of the verdict. People with no information of the case chiming in, defending their fave actor/footballer because the character they portray is nice or they play for their team. On the other side people seemingly just wanting to fulfil some morbid desire to see someone fucked over with 'he probably did it #ibelieveher' bollocks. Both different cunty sides of the same coin. Â True. Although I have absolutely no knowledge of the case, I will be gutted if DLT gets let off. Â Sorry lads, I fucking jinxed it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Operation Yewtree is not having a good track record, is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Because they admitted it whilst she was talking to them. People tell their briefs everything! Generally once the actual processing of a rape claim starts in earnest, they get cold feet. Â So your friend gets told that they're lying and in some circumstances continues with the trial anyway? Solicitors have to do that, don't they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Maverick Posted February 13, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted February 13, 2014 If someone tells you they are guilty of a rape, murder or whatever then I believe you're supposed to advise them to get another solicitor as you can't proceed with that knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Chris B Posted February 13, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted February 13, 2014 Because they admitted it whilst she was talking to them. People tell their briefs everything! Generally once the actual processing of a rape claim starts in earnest, they get cold feet. Â So your friend gets told that they're lying and in some circumstances continues with the trial anyway? Solicitors have to do that, don't they? I'm under the impression that it's quite the opposite. If a solicitor has definite knowledge that their client is lying, it's professionally unethical to continue with the claim. So it's something they may do but shouldn't, rather than something they have to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.