News CLICKY

I'd fully support this move.
An old next door neighbour of ours was getting divorced from a gold digger.
She knew that if she got sole custody of their daughter, she'd get a bigger cut when the finances were dished out by the courts. So she invented kiddy fiddling allegations. It took a very long time for him to clear his name. The only reason the truth came out was because she double crossed the woman who was helping her frame him, so she confessed the plan to the police.
You can imaging the stigma of those sort of allegations!

Long story short, I know of a LOT of instances where women and kids have falsely accused men of all sorts. And if the police have been doing their job, it's gonna get looked at every time that bloke so much as gets stopped in his car...

I only know of one such case personally, but that's one too many. The little girl involved lived with her mother and younger sister. Her mother worked from their nice suburban home as a prostitute, and it was very clear that the children were learning things they shouldn't. Including how to fit up their neighbour, who was forced to move out of the area.

That was quite a few years ago. It wouldn't surprise me if the girls are now helping with the "family business", assuming they're not all locked up.

I'd agree with this as well, we operate a system of innocent until proven guilty in the UK, but the way public perception / the media work on sex cases means in effect that anyone accused automatically becomes a social pariah

They should get anonymity until convicted.

Surely you mean if they are convicted?

I echo the above remarks and certainly there was one patient who was being accused of doing things to his daughter, none of which were true but the mother had certainly "educated" her daughter. I've also seen cases where a man has lost his job and hence his income, car, house etc all because on the whim and word of a woman without a shred of evidence. Once tainted, it's very hard to get your name clean and this should not be the case.

It is unfortunate that some women choose to cry "rape" for personal gain.

Yes if they are acquitted then or course they should maintain their anonymity.

I've said this for years.

I've always thought this should be the case too.

me to

I wonder if there is any data to support the theory that anonymity would prevent rape victims from coming forward?
I'm just curious because it wouldn't have stopped me, I also wonder if anonymity for the victim should be offered as well? I got an incredible amount of stick from his mates when he was brought up on charges, he at least had the protection of being in custody, I had nothing.

Why would it do so? Surely it'd make it easier because it removes those attempting to ruin someone's reputation by crying rape?

I agree the "victim" needs protection but at the same time you can't have someone make an allegation against you without knowing who it was. How could you defend yourself?

There could be a news blackout at least.

To be honest, I thought there already was something like that.

Well there are the standard contempt of court rules, so the press is quite limited as to what it can say once someone is charged with a crime (any crime). However that doesn't stop them naming someone who has been charged, which in cases like rape or child abuse is often enough to ruin someone on it's own.

I find this a very difficult line to draw. In principle, justice should happen in public. It is as important for justice to be seen to be done as for it to be done, for everyone. The problem arises when you have people who don't understand the difference between 'accused' and 'convicted', and feel that certain crimes are so vile that they have a right to take the law into their own hands. It also isn't helped that the various press continue to push a line about how 'soft' the justice system is even though in general it isn't - it's just the case where it does appear to be lenient that get the headlines. Nor does it help that we've recently had a major politician who seemed only to shy away from pushing the line that all men accused of rape must be guilty only because it would have made her look like a fool (even though such was actually little in doubt anyway).

Rape is a hard crime to prosecute but it doesn't help anyone if innocent people have their lives ruined on the assumption of guilt rather than the proof of guilt.

Was that MP Dianne Abbott? It sounds like the kind of retarded [LIFTED] she'd come out with.