UK: Innocent student wrongly accused of rape calls for anonymity for sex assault defendants until they are found guilty.

DennistheDutchie · 2017-12-18T13:38:25+00:00

[permanently deleted]

Infrah · 2017-12-18T18:52:17+00:00

[permanently deleted]

serial_crusher · 2017-12-18T15:20:05+00:00

I think the trouble would be keeping people close to the investigation from talking to the press. It's fine if the police don't release your name, but when they ask your friends and coworkers a bunch of questions about you, your friends and coworkers are going to talk. I'm not sure there's much they can do without hurting freedom of speech.

unbannabledan · 2017-12-18T16:45:07+00:00

How is this not a law? False rape allegations ruin lives.

spencerjustin · 2017-12-18T20:37:11+00:00

there should be anonymity for all crimes, all people, until a guilty verdict

SaphirePanda · 2017-12-18T15:12:43+00:00

It's crazy that this isn't already a thing, but in Canada, they're even taking away a man's legal ability to prove his innocence.

baggyrabbit · 2017-12-18T17:48:19+00:00

Why isn't she being arrested for the false accusation?

Since no rape happened then she should have her anonymity removed too.

CountVonVague · 2017-12-18T15:47:45+00:00

you know what's worst? there's a number of people who consider his reaction practically admission of guilt

2017-12-18T17:08:52+00:00

[permanently deleted]

2017-12-18T18:10:03+00:00

There is no reason to be against this. If your goal is to protect the "victim" you may wanna wait until you know who the victim is before you post names and pictures.

And even if that were the case it's bull because the moment a man claims secxual assault his name is plastered all over still.

kragshot · 2017-12-19T05:23:33+00:00

You know...I'm reading this thread and the one thing that stands out is that all of these people have these amazing reasons why we "should not" grant anonymity to people (men) accused of sexual crimes. But none of them can come up with an equally amazing way to protect men from the fallout from an accusation, especially if it turns out to be false.

Basically, all of these "first amendment heroes" have nothing to say to men like the guy in the article except "sucks to be you, but we have to protect the women." Why don't you all just quit with the platitudes and own up to not giving a damn about men in this predicament.

Really...cease and desist.

TheDevils10thMan · 2017-12-18T20:37:09+00:00

Is this the guy who was almost convicted because the police sat on clear evidence of his innocence?

McFeely_Smackup · 2017-12-18T22:42:44+00:00

Keep in mind that his accuser, now recognized as a false accuser, is still anonymous to this day. She is a criminal, not a victim, yet her identity is still protected.

BrianPurkiss · 2017-12-18T19:18:57+00:00

I’ve seen stories of innocent men accused of sexual assault plastered al over the media by the woman who admitted to lying about the assault still isn’t even named, let alone pictured.

Absolutely maddening.

Innocent until proven guilty means little these days, by the courts and court of public opinion.

doublemenumbers · 2017-12-18T18:24:55+00:00

There are a lot of people saying reasons why this shouldn't be in place, reasons such as it won't work..

This is currently in place in the Republic of Ireland which is stated in the article.

It works for Ireland.

azazelcrowley · 2017-12-18T14:54:54+00:00

I'd be fine with anonymity unless a warrant can be obtained by having a judge agree it's likely to produce further evidence, same standard as a search warrant and stuff.

So if there's like, the Jimmy Saville shit, they can go to a judge and say, "Look, we've got a bunch of evidence this happened and we want to print his name to call on others to come forward, seeing as he used his celebrity status to do this."

papadondon · 2017-12-18T16:41:52+00:00

cant they name the bitch? shes not a minor

2017-12-18T20:20:19+00:00

Seems reasonable to be honest. They try to hard to protect the innocent victims (as well as the false accusers), it seems like the innocent victims of false accusations) as well as the actual perps should have anonymity until found guilty.

ZombieP0ny · 2017-12-18T16:35:03+00:00

"Innocent" student. We all know that only misogynistic mass rapists would want anonymity for misogynistic mass rapists. He literally just confessed his guilt.

/s

chadwickofwv · 2017-12-18T17:11:08+00:00

[permanently deleted]

GhostlyTJ · 2017-12-19T00:28:48+00:00

Here in the US people take freedom of the press for granted. Because of the way technology has advanced and our ability to instantly and ubiquitously release information, it has put our right to press at odds with our right to a fair and impartial trial. I for one feel that the individuals rights here outweigh the publics right, especially when it's perfectly possible for that information to be released as a story after the dust has settled. I also think it's down right criminal that booking photos are posted on websites. That information has absolutely no business being made public until guilt is established.

Savv3 · 2017-12-18T19:34:26+00:00

Follow the German example!

PowerPCNet · 2017-12-18T22:08:14+00:00

All of this should be innocent and anonymous until proven guilty. Too many news outlets publish stories about accusations and frame them in a way that assumes complete guilt, only adding ‘alleged’ as an afterthought to not get in trouble.

chambertlo · 2017-12-18T22:46:42+00:00

Agreed. No man should have his life ruined due to the lies of a vindictive woman.

RoseElise · 2017-12-19T00:29:08+00:00

I agree with this point and for all crimes. There is no real reason that someone should feel fear about anonymous reporting; what are they going to do, assault you in the middle of your report? That'd be the most unwise move, the police are all the people that you need to know about your potential attack, reporting it to news outlets at best incites a well meaning lynch mob which is indirect and probably is going to fuck something up somewhere. It's also insanity; you want to point your finger at someone, as if in Rome, and have populist zeal savage them for nothing?

Even if he was proven guilty, no-one wants to touch that shit anymore. He's got an invisible brand on his head now, everyone's judging him in a situation that he has no reason to be in, it'll affect his life in ways people can't help, that's not justice, it's a miscarriage.

our_account · 2017-12-19T01:09:46+00:00

I do feel there should be some middle ground here. In the US you are supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Splashing your name and face all over the papers can ruin your life if you are innocent, no matter what the crime. It always pisses me off when booking photos get published before the verdict.

2017-12-18T15:44:22+00:00

That's a solid policy and should be implemented on both directions

IVIaskerade · 2017-12-18T16:36:22+00:00

I'd be fine with them having to state that "This person has been arrested" but not being able to release the nature of the arrest until conviction. This ensures that the government can't just arrest people secretly while also strengthening the foundation of "innocent until proven guilty" that the law rests on.

2017-12-18T22:19:43+00:00

This would be excellent, as it would allow us to fully support accusers as well as not throw everyone accused under the bus.

smeata · 2017-12-18T23:24:51+00:00

I've been saying this almost my whole life, ever since I first heard about the whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing.

kristarian · 2017-12-19T00:01:16+00:00

Completely agree. I think this should be standard for criminal charges/accusations. Complete anonymity until someone is actually convicted. No more live televised trials either. People nowadays are judge, jury and executioner solely based on an accusation.

joshafool · 2017-12-19T10:31:51+00:00

Why don't we just throw every accused person in the river with rocks tied to their feet. If they float they're guilty if they sink they die innocent. God will sort them out...

2017-12-19T18:00:14+00:00

'Anonymity unit found guilty?'

It's already the law. When men are accused they are automatically guilty so their names can be published.

How about we get rid of the accusation = guilt.

sikskittlz · 2017-12-18T17:39:08+00:00

But then how can they be made guilty and be crucified in their trial by media.

GreatBayTemple · 2017-12-18T22:02:20+00:00

I'm torn. Too many rich people get away with it. Then again false accusations are the absolute most heinous thing to happen to someone. Ive been accused of rape and it's no laughing matter.

2017-12-18T19:10:06+00:00

this is another case of progressive gynocentrism backfiring. add this guy to the list of people who were unaffiliated, probably not political in and of themselves, who got pulled into what is, essentially, a culture war.

List (for me) so far: Jordan Peterson, Bret Weinstein, James Damore, Cassie Jaye, and now this guy. I hope he keeps going with this.

Ted8367 · 2017-12-18T18:18:31+00:00

A stark reminder to not ever stick your dick in crazy. The poor guy has had years of hell for banging crazy. :’(

-bluewave- · 2017-12-18T17:39:15+00:00

Is there any reason, by this logic, that we wouldn’t make everyone accused with a crime anonymous until proven guilty?

2017-12-18T18:24:14+00:00

I go Univiersity with this guy. Huh.

duxie · 2017-12-18T20:37:54+00:00

When the press comes in to the court room the will see who the defendant is

guard123 · 2017-12-18T21:41:27+00:00

This shit is already done in san freancisco, make it nationwide

Step-Father_of_Lies · 2017-12-18T22:07:46+00:00

I don't see any reason why not. I would even argue this helps the victim in the case of a legit accusation because less of a media frenzy will happen which can affect justice being served

Humes-Bread · 2017-12-19T00:19:00+00:00

Sounds reasonable.

TellanIdiot · 2017-12-19T01:12:10+00:00

Simple solution, If a person is found innocent he can sue any press agency that had any discussions about their guilt or innocence or implied any such guilt.

aazov · 2017-12-19T03:56:48+00:00

The identities of both parties should be concealed until after the verdict, after which the guilty party's name can be revealed. If the accusation is false, or fails, the accuser's name should be made public.

viperex · 2017-12-19T10:07:24+00:00

It only makes sense

2017-12-19T16:30:48+00:00

In May 2010 the coalition government agreed to reintroduce anonymity for rape suspects, after it was removed in 1988. Following widespread pressure, the government dropped the idea five months later, citing "insufficient reliable empirical evidence". From The Guardian

2017-12-18T18:26:20+00:00

If he thinks he had a hard time after being wrongly accused of rape

wait till the feminists get their hands on this!

timeforknowledge · 2017-12-18T18:26:11+00:00

The logic behind the current system goes against all common sense. Every person in the UK should have a right to a fair trial.

Publicly convicting someone of rape before trial means stripping them of their job, their family and their friends.

The current system is infuriating and illogical.

NoMoreNicksLeft · 2017-12-18T18:54:27+00:00

There's a reason that we have the government announce who has been charged with crimes... so that you don't just disappear.

ZerefGodslayer · 2017-12-18T17:10:31+00:00

The comments there give me hope

tabbykits · 2017-12-18T18:31:32+00:00

We never would have heard about Trump, Cosby or Weinstain then. Because they will never see trial.

2017-12-18T18:03:17+00:00

While it would help one of the largest elements of fallout in these cases is the trial by social memedia.

The article does not call for any gag order and such a gag order would be nigh impossible to enforce well

orphancrippla · 2017-12-18T18:54:20+00:00

While this is common sense and should have happened decades ago, I highly doubt it will ever come to pass. Guarantee that if any efforts were made to do so, it'd be opposed on grounds of being support for rapists.

JonerPwner · 2017-12-18T19:33:44+00:00

What would it take for the system to actually function like this? I think the kid has a point.

2017-12-18T19:57:44+00:00

Obvious to the point of headsmacking. Why does someone need to even point this out?

ICantStopHelp · 2017-12-18T21:04:05+00:00

What the FUCK is that news article title about??? Am I the only one who thinks of r/titlegore?

2017-12-19T00:46:07+00:00

Doesn’t Germany do this

dregan · 2017-12-19T01:35:42+00:00

My only complaint with this is that it would make rich serial rapists and molesters effectively impossible to stop as their cases would never get to criminal trial. Maybe pair this rule with some kind of anti-settlement rule or just make it illegal for workplaces/schools to retaliate against the accused until they are proven guilty.

felonybars · 2017-12-19T04:29:52+00:00

Why would this not also apply to many others crimes where one could be wrongfully accused?

SentientDust · 2017-12-19T07:01:59+00:00

I've read the title 5 times now, I still have no clue what it says.

LedZeppelin1602 · 2017-12-20T03:51:30+00:00

What annoys me is the majority of people (at least from the comments and things I've read elsewhere) agree with this and would be fine with it being implemented but no politicians are calling for it and the few who advocate for anything that would help men are swamped by feminists when they try. So the people want it but not the government or justice system

ShiningConcepts · 2017-12-22T23:51:43+00:00

It should be until they are charged instead.

And honestly, this would be tough to enforce. Someone's going to notice that the suspect is missing and sooner or later it'll get out.

Gayestjew · 2017-12-18T16:37:56+00:00

Don't they only make the identity known if it's a white guy?

Fluffiebunnie · 2017-12-18T17:25:28+00:00

[permanently deleted]

HeyGirlYouSingle · 2017-12-18T18:59:43+00:00

All criminal cases should be anonymous participants until guilt has been "proven".

The defendant could be assigned a number that is given and copied at the local, county and state level. This could be a printed number on paper. A bar code like a credit card. Even an RFID chip. This number is given to your lawyer or legal reps and you can give it out to who ever you want.

The only way to link the number to a name would be through access to those databases that are also accessible at a federal level if necessary.

All information needed would be linked to the number. The number would be destroyed if the person was found guilty or innocent. Never to be recycled.

This isn't a revolutionary concept. It's done today with many other things, such as SSNs, professional certification numbers, driver licenses, court cases, even hospital patient tests.

bolomk35 · 2017-12-18T19:13:25+00:00

This sounds like a good idea but what if they're are other victims out there.How will they know to come forward and testify?

Yawgie · 2017-12-18T21:21:46+00:00

Yeah, but women (People) can't keep things to themselves. So, their name will still be all over the place.

ratbacon · 2017-12-18T17:46:18+00:00

Please tell me you can recognize that anonymous closed trials are a bad thing

atheist4thecause · 2017-12-18T19:04:03+00:00

I'm worried that making names private will be harmful to Democracy. The UK can do what it wants, but in the USA, I prefer that both the names of the accused and accuser are public rather than neither.

BullsLawDan · 2017-12-18T17:43:41+00:00

Terrible idea. Defendants in the United States are guaranteed a public trial for a very good reason, along with freedom of the press.

The last thing we want is more secrecy surrounding charges of sexual assault.

Title	UK: Innocent student wrongly accused of rape calls for anonymity for sex assault defendants until they are found guilty.
Author	furchfur
Upvotes	17408
Comments	469
Date	December 18, 2017 1:11 PM UTC (8 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/7kl44k/uk_innocent_student_wrongly_accused_of_rape_calls/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/uk-innocent-student-wrongly-accused-of-rape-calls.1173529 https://theredarchive.com/post/1173529

Comments