can anyone advise please

[apat]

Five months ago, my friends 25 year old son, was arrested and interviewed concerning an allegation of rapeing his ex partner. They had split up, but ended up in bed. Just before intercourse took place, she changed her mind. He went and slept on the settee. A few hours later, he was woken by the police, arrested, taken to the station and questioned. Eventually he was bailed pending enquiries. He has answered bail every four weeks, without being charged. The police say the delay is due to a back log at the lab of dna tests.

I have read through many posts here and taken note of the advice given which he is finding very helpful. My question is, is it likely the police are playing games? Trying to pressure him until he admits his guilt? Or perhaps believing if they wait long enough he will rape again? I do not understand the delay and wonder if he can use it to his advantage?

I have known this lad all his life and know from the bottom of my heart there is no way he commited this crime.

Can anyone advise please?

[LS]

Hi Apat, welcome to the site. As you said she changed her mind before intercourse, so I guess intercourse didn't take place, so what dna results are they hoping to get a result from?

As you've no doubt seen from many posters here, waiting is the order of the day so I don't feel they're making him wait. However much I dislike the police and the system, they're normally more blatant when there's a sly motive.
It usually is down to so many cases being prioritised, and it seems there isn't much to your friend's case so it's probably just a matter of waiting for someone at the cps to deal with it.

[Rights Fighter]

There's a long queue of rape/sexual offence cases and I doubt very much that the police are playing games. I very much doubt that they could in this situation because there are just too many.

The majority will be genuine cases but I would say it's a large minority that are false allegations.

It sounds like this might have been a set-up on the part of the ex. Try not to get too complacent as although he says that intercourse did not take place, that doesn't mean no DNA will be found. Semen leaks out in "pre-ejaculate" prior to climax.

If this was a set up she could well have used that to (I'll be polite) "anoint" herself.

How long between the alleged rape and making the complaint? I'm thinking if immediate then sheets and other bedding should have been seized. Was it?

[apat]

The lad went to sleep on the sofa and was woken by the police and arrested, so there could only have been a couple of hours between her saying no and the arrest. Yes the police seized bedding and clothing as far as I am aware.

Strangely, the young lady, text the lads mother two weeks later to ask if she could stay the night, while her baby was spending time time with his dad! All seems iffy to me. Years back, she would have been termed highly strung, very emotional girl.

Its a dreadful situation. I am fully aware that many guys deny when they are guilty, don't want to say anything to indentify myself, but I have come across guys in denial, am educated about emotional problems suffered by rapists and I am still as convinced as I can be this lad really is innocent! I hadn't considered the fact that a female can plant dna to support her case! Thats scarey!

[Rights Fighter]

I heard about a case where a woman used a turkey baster after having consensual sex with a guy who insisted on using a condom.

Warning bells are ringing loudly - no member of the family should have this baby to stay as the mother could then claim that the baby has been molested by him/family member.

[apat]

That has crossed my mind too. The problem is, the baby is two and very attached to his dad, who desperatly wants to see his child.

The ex girl friend, plays games with access, eg, one occasion granny was due to take baby home at 10 am, then received a text stating mum wouldn't be home until five as she had gone out for the day! Dad works long hours and gran was supposed to be going on holiday, so that went for a burton!

I have advised they keep all text communication, take photos of the baby in the bath each evening and while dressing in the morning, as nowdays, photos are dated and timed automatically, to cover themselves incase of accusations of violence to child.

Two weeks before the accusation was made, the ex told grannny that she wanted a way to get the guy out of her life, as the relationship was on and off and distressing to her, although it was at her instigation. Caught in bed with someone else, then begged ex to go back to her continually.

Any other advice? How could dad keep the relationship going with his child, while protecting himself until all this is over?

Thanks for your support. It is a great help.

[LS]

Just be careful taking pics of the little one in the bath. It's a very fine line between cautionary photos to protect yourself and indecent ones.

[apat]

I know!!!!!!!! What a mess! These girls have no idea of the trouble and pain they cause. I have lots of pics of my children bathing and running around naked, years ago mothers could take pics just for the famly album.

Granny worked as a nurse for ten years and now holds a responsible position within a university. She has dealt with students, many vunerable, so I am sure that any allegations wouldn't stick.

[Saffron]

I wouldn't recommend taking pics of the little one at all. There are some sick minds out there that can make the most innocent picture appear indecent.
Instead, (just a thought) perhaps you could keep an email log....email a "diary" to a trusted person, things like "Child had a bath at 18.30 hours. No marks on her body, child happily playing" and so on. Make sure Dad has another party present at bathtimes and napppy-changing times. Ideally this should be someone with no "side" to take.

I don't know if I am being over cautious, or even if I am giving good advice. But I would definitely advise against taking pics of child in the bath, or naked, no matter how innocent. Julia Somerville (I think that was her name, I believe she is dead now) was a respected television News Anchorwoman. She took some entirely innocent photos of her kids in the bath and when she took them to Boots to be developed, they called the police about them. (this was before digital photos and home printing). She was eventually exonerated, but she went through hell.

So, please please be careful about taking pics. diseased minds can read all sorts into the most innovent of pictures.

[Rights Fighter]

Just be careful taking pics of the little one in the bath. It's a very fine line between cautionary photos to protect yourself and indecent ones.

I was just about to whizz in with a big fat "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!" but you beat me to it.

This is going to sound revolting but I will say it - as there are some really evil people in this world and the following does happen.

One guy who spent nearly 9 years inside for something that never happened - his was pay-back time for helping to put her into prison for physically abusing her son.

She told him that she would have him done for sexually abusing his daughter who was then about 3 months old. He pointed out that there would be no injuries and she said

"yes there would be because I'd stick my fingers up her XXXX and there would be plenty of injuries".

She didn't do that, she waited for the girl to grow up (as evil as she is) and got her to make the false allegations which put him inside.

So my advice is - no photographs please!!! Just make sure he is not left alone with the baby under any circumstances - not because he would do something, but because then you would have bona-fide witnesses who would say that there was never any opportunity for him to abuse the baby.

[apat]

That sounds sensible advice! I didn't realise such an innocent thing, could be interpreted as so twisted! Will past this information on to gran. Her and her son have not realised how deep and complicated this could become, I had some idea, but by christ, I didn't realise how suspicious the world was and how easy it is to go to prison for a crime you didn't commit.

Thank you all here for opening my eyes!

[LS]

Julia Somerville isn't dead. But here's a snippet of Wikipedia relating to the incident.
"Somerville and Dixon (her partner) were interviewed by police in 1996, when concerns were raised by Boots the Chemist staff over photographs of their seven-year-old child in the bath. No caution or charges followed the investigation."

[LS]

It's good advice from RF about not doing photos, but getting a 3rd party in to make sure no accusations can start.

[apat]

It is great advice. I should have realised that we can not know how far these women will go! I am taking all this on board, to repeat back. Shame the family are not on line, will try and harrase them into it! lol