worried mum- about our chances

[angstman]

comment deleted...

[Rights Fighter]

We are now living in a new age of judgemental, Victorian self-censorship, where we are all too terrified of putting a whisker out of place, lest it be determined as constituting an infringement of somebodies liberties.

That made me smile!

One last thing...IF common sense prevails, you say your son has been charged with two counts of rape with two young women over the age of 16 and one count of assault (sexual assault?) on a minor. A good question is why was a minor at a party in a student hostel? A minor's parent has a responsibility for the safeguarding of their charge. To permit a minor to be in a situation where their safety is put at risk, is a dereliction of parental responsibility. A good solicitor should be able to point this out. It would not be unreasonable to suggest that your son had no reason to doubt that any attendee at a student party, was over[under] the age of consent...

Pointing out a parent's faults with regards to "dereliction of duty" is unlikely to be put before the court. The parent(s) is/are not on trial. Pointing a finger away from the defendant to the parent(s) supposed negligence would only result in the Crown telling the jury in their closing speech that this is merely a red herring to detract attention away from the defendant's "offending".

The defence might ask the parent(s) where they thought the 13 year old was that night, but criticising them in front of a jury won't help them with the question: "did he assault her?"

Could be that the parents of the 13 year old had no idea she was at the party. She may have told them she was at a friends doing homework.

Good point about attendees at the party, if his defence is that he believed that everyone there was over the age of consent, given it was a student party in a student hostel. Hopefully he has photographs of the 13 year old (maybe taken from Facebook and other social media) which suggest that she looks much older than 13.

Even if she does look older, and that was his belief that she was older, that does not do away with the charge itself. It only helps in mitigation for sentence should there be a conviction.

I note the charge on her according to the OP is "assault" - not sexual assault. If it is only a physical assault as opposed to sexual assault, then what I said above with regards to age, won't come into it, of course.

[angstman]

Pointing out a parent's faults with regards to "dereliction of duty" is unlikely to be put before the court. The parent(s) is/are not on trial. Pointing a finger away from the defendant to the parent(s) supposed negligence would only result in the Crown telling the jury in their closing speech that this is merely a red herring to detract attention away from the defendant's "offending".

The defence might ask the parent(s) where they thought the 13 year old was that night, but criticising them in front of a jury won't help them with the question: "did he assault her?"

Could be that the parents of the 13 year old had no idea she was at the party. She may have told them she was at a friends doing homework.

No, I was really thinking about the possible charge of statutory rape on a minor. The main issue here is of course is the accusation of rape itself, but assuming that can be overcome, as you say, mitigation might be sought on the basis that a 13 year old kid simply shouldn't be at a student party, mixing with 18+ young people. If it were a case of a 23 year old gatecrashing a 15 year old's party, that would be different of course.

I can't help feeling that a 'real world' view is missing in the current climate of immediately reaching for the sledgehammer of the law. Young people do dumb things all the time and often under the influence of alcohol. Once upon a time folk seemed to accept that and a good deal of bad behaviour was simply written off as 'experience'. I'm getting old I suppose, but the idea of putting a drunken 23 year old in the dock for jumping into bed with 3 drunken females at a student party, seems absurd to me. Of course I don't know the details, but if I had a young son I would be permanently terrified for him.

[Rights Fighter]

1 charge of rape women over 16
1 charge of rape women over 16
1 charge of assault female over 13

now on bail

magistrate court soon

At the moment there doesn't seem to be any count relating to rape/sexual intercourse with a minor, it seems to be an "assault" unless the OP has misunderstood something.

It's either a sexual assault (not USI) or a physical assault. We won't know until the OP comes back to us on that one.

I can't help feeling that a 'real world' view is missing in the current climate of immediately reaching for the sledgehammer of the law. Young people do dumb things all the time and often under the influence of alcohol. Once upon a time folk seemed to accept that and a good deal of bad behaviour was simply written off as 'experience'.

Tell me about it. I grew up for the first nine years in a children's home. We played "doctors and nurses" and also "mummies and daddies" (sad given that I was in a children's home - but that's what we did).

No way on earth would I go to the police to ask them to find the older children who partook of the same game. It's something that happened. I don't feel abused or upset by it in any way at all.

The "real world" disappeared out of the picture when previous Governments decided to set targets for rape convictions. The real world also disappeared when "compensation" courtesy of the tax payer, was put in place, as an incentive to lie about such matters, and using current alcohol or drug problems as a basis to lie.

Some accusers will cite that they are abusing various substances "because of the abuse" and they've only just realised (due to counselling) why they were doing that - conveniently within the last two years to they can claim courtesy of the tax payer.

It's amazing how some accusers find themselves unable to claim sick benefits while misusing substances, and/or they want to shoot up the housing queue, so out comes the "I was sexually abused as a child" routine, the sympathy card, so they get what they want. I see this frequently when reviewing a trial file for appeal against conviction.

In the instant case the youngest seems to be "over 13" so 14+.

[TotalNightmare]

Unless your son is 6' 10" and built like Arnold Schwarzenegger, I find it difficult to believe he could have raped 3 females in one go. Ten years ago this might have made an amusing story, alas not any more. The whole thing sounds utterly ridiculous to me - he raped three women, single handed, one after the other? Is he part Viking? No, nobody will laugh at that jest anymore, it's a sorry state of affairs.

Hard as it might be, I would try and forget it, I'm sure it will go nowhere. As for educating young men men as to what constitutes consensual sex, I think it might be an idea to educate young women on the dire consequences in making accusations of rape.

I thought this when I read he had 3 contemporaneous accusers.

Unless something extremely sinister happened like bondage or something, how can it be possible to rape 3 women at the same time?!

Sounds like a case of girls accusing rape retrospectively in order to save their reputation. Seems like a lot of FAs tend to withdraw consent months if not years after the event.

If he had a foursome with them, but it was rape, they will look less "slutty" by claiming it was forced on them than if they had done it willingly. The social media boast suggests that is the motive for the accusations.

[angstman]

Yep, well, if I ever get over my current predicament, I think there's a good deal to be written about this whole issue. I've got a few essays, I'd like to write at the present.

As the dad of a 25 year old daughter, I've had many ear-bashings on the subject of women's rights and many of the arguments, I agree with. However, there is a whole raft of discussion on the role of personal responsibility, which is never really entered into.

Complicated stuff and complex arguments, but there are issues here which need to be brought into the public arena and properly debated.

[TotalNightmare]

Yep, well, if I ever get over my current predicament, I think there's a good deal to be written about this whole issue. I've got a few essays, I'd like to write at the present.

As the dad of a 25 year old daughter, I've had many ear-bashings on the subject of women's rights and many of the arguments, I agree with. However, there is a whole raft of discussion on the role of personal responsibility, which is never really entered into.

Complicated stuff and complex arguments, but there are issues here which need to be brought into the public arena and properly debated.

Indeed, I love women dearly - I am the only brother to female siblings.

However, we are unfortunately at this stage due to the pressure of third-wave feminism. When those rape statistics were published the other day, articles were flying up instantly in an assortment of rags by feminists stating how this "proves" we live in a rape culture in the UK, where rape is accepted and objectification of women is normalised.

They reached this conclusion on the basis that rape reports have increased, but conviction rates have not!

Who cares about treating things on a case by case basis? Who cares about proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt? As long as there is a claim, there must be guilt!

They equated "reported rape" to "actual rape".

[Rights Fighter]

..............However, there is a whole raft of discussion on the role of personal responsibility, which is never really entered into.

Complicated stuff and complex arguments, but there are issues here which need to be brought into the public arena and properly debated.

We've discussed the issue of personal responsibility on here a few times.

A few years back I was told off by the forum owner because I had the temerity to suggest that in order to help prevent us ladies from putting ourselves at risk, and thereby making ourselves vulnerable, it might be a good idea to watch our alcohol intake, maybe dress a little more conservatively if we are likely at any stage during an evening out to find ourselves alone, and to watch our behaviour so that it cannot be misconstrued.

One of the moderators took exception to that and "reported" me to the forum owner, which resulted in me getting "a tap on the shoulder". He tried to make an allowance for the way I posted!

We all have bad days - I assume that was written when you were letting off some steam. Don't worry about it - we all do it!

And

This is an emotive site. Emotions, feelings and tempers etc can sometimes run quite high. People on here can get very much involved and can sometimes write stuff that others may get quite upset by.

And

Your post was deleted because one person raised an objection, the mods debated it and were split on what to do, so I made a decision to delete. I am sorry if this upset you. It wasn't anything personal, just a judgement call.

He thought I was upset because in my response I said:

Think about it. If you were on a train using you iPhone and you needed the loo, would you leave it in full view on the seat, along with your wallet? I know I wouldn't.

We cannot assume that everybody around us is honest and decent - which is where personal responsibility and personal risk assessment comes in.

I wasn't letting off steam but 'speaking' my honest view.

And

What I wrote was utter common sense and many others have agreed. I reiterate it was not written in any dark mood or anger.

Would you allow your daughter to go out on the tiles dressed in next to nothing with the intention of getting plastered, without suggesting she thinks again and warn her of the possible consequences? or would you say, 'oh that's ok love, you look lovely with everything hanging out, have a banging time, doesn't matter how much you drink because it is not your responsibility for keeping yourself safe? Every man/boy knows how to behave and you'll be perfectly safe?'

I certainly wouldn't.

Things died down a bit after that. However , more recently we've had the same discussions and this time most people actually agreed with what I had said, I hadn't changed my view on the matter.

I contacted the mods at the time and I found out it was only the one who took umbrage. The others assured me that they were behind me and "voted" in my favour - and they weren't "split" according to them. It comes to something when one member takes exception to something that other people are perfectly fine with, and instead of approaching me personally they acted like the school sneak going straight to the headmaster.

And then of all things, to have a "vote" about it, in the mod section, well that beggared belief! I left these forums for a time as it was getting rather childish.

Feminazis seem to think that women should be able to behave as we like with absolutely no consequences whatsoever. According to them though, conversely, men have to do the opposite. It's as though we should have no sense of personal safety and therefore responsibility and we leave that to the male of the species.

In Utopia maybe we should be able to drink, dress and behave as we feel like. We don't live in Utopia. This is the real world.

In nazifeminism, in their idea world, men would look the other way when they see a half dressed female out on the pull, drunk and flirting. But they don't. We live in the world we live in. End of.

[lia]

I note the charge on her according to the OP is "assault" - not sexual assault. If it is only a physical assault as opposed to sexual assault, then what I said above with regards to age, won't come into it, of course.

more precisely speaking in charges were: towards the youngest girl- sexual assault -indecent touching between her legs
towards other 2 girls 1 count of rape (traditional sex)
and 1 count of rape (oral sex)

how old is the youngest girl I don't know - just saw in the police papers definition -female over13

[Rights Fighter]

So it's a sexual assault (touching between the legs) of a person over the age of 13 years, so could be 14 or 15.

Do you know if digital penetration is alleged? If not, was the touching on top or underneath clothes?

In her case this would have the "aggravating feature" that she is under-age. Would he know how old she was? I appreciate that this was a student party in a student hostel, but she could have been invited as a friend of one of the partygoers.

In this case, to prove the offence there are three parts for the jury to consider:


Actus Rea = did it actually happen

Mens rea = knowledge - (in this case) did he commit the act knowing that she was under age knowing that this was wrong / illegal

Recklessness = did he know she was not consenting and yet went ahead anyway - although technically she cannot consent due to her age.



Before anyone here can advise you you need to check exactly what the offence(s) against the female over 13 years is/are.

[Bene]

Dear R.f)

I partially agree with you when you say that women should take responsibilities for themselves! However what about the men and their responsibility? Why should the burden fall only on women to dress a certain way, act a certain way. And not drink so much. Yet a man can go out and get completely drunk and it's acceptable. Please tell me if a man goes out and gets completely drunk and he's later rape, would the same rule apply to him? I doubt it.

Both sexes should act responsibly( drink sensible ) and conduct ourself with curtesy and respect for ourself and others. The way some young people act on nights out, you would think they were raised by wolfs. All common sense goes out the window!!

If I go out and get stupidly drunk( which I don't ) and some guy takes advantage of me. Yes I can hold the blame for drinking so much, I'm not to blame for someone else's action or behaviour) that's the problem of the society we live in. Nobody wants to be held accountable for their actions. It's always the woman's fault) we don't have to live in an ideal world for where a man to exercise self control) to turn to other way when they see a Half dress drunk woman.


Anyone can be a victim of rape regardless of there dress or act, you can be a nun, wearing Islamic clothing and get raped. How can you explain all the rapes that happen in Countries like India, Pakistan
Where women dress conservatively and most women don't go out clubbing, drinking yet they are still subjected to sexual assaults.

[Rights Fighter]

We don't want the thread hijacked. I was answering Angstman in context of the OP. Maybe you could start a fresh thread Bene.

[angstman]

If I go out and get stupidly drunk( which I don't ) and some guy takes advantage of me. Yes I can hold the blame for drinking so much, I'm not to blame for someone else's action or behaviour) that's the problem of the society we live in. Nobody wants to be held accountable for their actions. It's always the woman's fault) we don't have to live in an ideal world for where a man to exercise self control) to turn to other way when they see a Half dress drunk woman.

It's a complicated argument. If you go out and get drunk and drive a car, you are held responsible and may be convicted of drink/driving. You are not deemed to be capable of driving responsibly, you may put both yourself and others in a position of danger.

If you come out of a club and end up going back to a man's room, it could be argued that you are also not capable of making responsible decisions. The argument stands that whilst you are drunk, you are not capable of giving proper consent to sexual activity and therefore sexual activity is the responsibility of the third party. That's like saying that if you are drunk driving, it is the third parties responsibility to stay out of your way, isn't it?

So OK, if the bloke is sober and 'takes advantage' of the drunken you, that may stand as an argument - he should have known better - but if he's drunk too, is he any more capable of being 'responsible' than you are?

There's an old Sophie Tucker joke, having had a skinful the night before, Sophie Tucker wakes up one morning and finds an elephant in her bed, 'Gee' she says, 'I must have been a little tight last night', the elephant looks at her and waves his hand, 'so, so' he says...

Deliberately placing oneself in a position of danger can be considered as irresponsible. Bungee jumping carries a known risk, whether or not one chooses to do it, is a personal decision. Walking thru' a 'bad' part of town also carries a a known risk, but sometimes walking thru' a 'bad' part of town is unavoidable.

If one decides to go bungee jumping, one could not convincingly argue, that one has the 'right' to undertake that activity without carrying any risk. If one unavoidably walks thru' a bad part of town and is mugged, then a good argument can be made for reducing crime, installing better lighting and improving social conditions etc.

So where does deliberately getting uncontrollably drunk and wandering out into the night stand in that state of affairs? To argue that 'I have the right to get completely smashed' is surely only true, if one accepts that to do so, carries with it, an element of risk...

It's complicated stuff...

[heartbreaking]

I'm so sorry your going through this.

I hope this is laughed out of court as like state before. Unless your son is some sort of super human. It would be almost impossible

[Rights Fighter]

Keep posting Lia. Also, the more you post on other people's threads the more support you will get back.

At the moment, if he doesn't want to talk about it, then let him be. Only if (in this world of complete stupidity) he is charged, will he need to talk about it and put those boxing gloves back on.