Accused of rape

[friday]

sorry saffron, it seems i always disagree with what you are saying! not intentional at all.

i just wanted to say something in response to snoopy's comment about rape victims feeling like they are on trial and your response that about that not being the case.

that is not my experience at all. when i was in court i felt like i was on trial. it was suggested that i was "horny" at the time i was raped (not a word i would use and not appropriate for court) and that that some how meant i was lying. there was no evidence to say that was how i was feeling and i felt the whole way through the trial his barrister was trying to humiliate me by "suggesting" things. he also had a really nasty tone and was completely insensitive. i have trouble saying the names of parts of the body cos i associate bad memories with them but he kept insisting i say them, even though it was obvious what was meant since i had said it before (eg when i said inside my pants and inside me he felt it necessary to try make me say the place even though i had said it before and he was just rehashing what i said)

he also used my transcript from my video interview and took words out of place to change their meaning
eg i said "he tried to make me perform oral sex but i said i didnt want to and pushed my head up and then...um..i was like...ok" but he didnt read what was my next words "to stay there with him cos i though he understood" which obviously changes the meaning completely but since i didnt have a copy of the transcript i couldnt correct him.


it was also suggetsed i enjoyed it and had an orgasm (it seemed like they were saying my injuries were fun for me when actually my back took over 2 months to heal)

my mental health was brought up and it was suggested i was delusional (they had no evidence from a doctor, they just read out the dsm iv definition of my condition which includes all possible symptoms, of which not all are necessary for a diagnosis) and neglected to acknowledge i went into hospital AFTER the rape as a response to it.

so yes, i felt like i was on trial and now not only have nightmares about the rape but also the trial.

and the guy who did it? he's free (on bail again) whereas i have had to leave my home which i am still paying rent on because i am terrified.
i definetely feel i got the unfair deal. even if i got compensation it would be reduced by a hell of a lot because i drunk alcohol and smoked 2 joints as well as cos my mental health problems were only made worse rather than caused by the rape. a few thousand pounds for a lifetime of fear, loss off virginity, the problems it causes for my relationship....i definitely got a heavy sentence whereas he walks away free. yup, the victim is definetely on trial.

[Saffron]

I don't want to argue with you, nor do I want to belittle what you have suffered. You can only speak from your experience, and I from mine. Like I have said before, our "justice" system is riddled with injustices from both sides, and is largely a postcode lottery.

My experiences were completely different to yours. I speak from mine and you from yours, that doesn't make either of us "wrong".

[Saffron]

Hi Friday

I just wanted to put a few things across from my experiences.

During my husband's trial, we were not allowed to ask her about her 3-in-a-bed experiences with various other colleages, or about her recreational drug use; about her supposed heart condition that meant she shouldn't have been drinking; about her previous relationships (varied and multiple) about how she boasted that very evening that she was being unfaithful to her boyfriend with a wealthy tax exile; or about her prolific recreational drug use.

By contrast, my husband was interrogated about every minute aspect of his sex life - how many partners he'd had, how we met, whether he had ever been unfaithful in previous relationships. His statement was picked apart by the prosecution, much like yours was. The complainant had originally stated that she was raped by my husband, yet after a week, she decided that he hadn't raped her at all. He had indecently assaulted her, apparently. Yet this was all explained away by her saying that she was "confused". I'm sorry, but she was a sexually active person, who'd had many many partners - surely she would have known the difference between rape and digital touching? but our barrister was not allowed to ask her this question. Her original statement started saying "Iam here bcause a colleague forced me to have sex with him against my will".

You know, I have been through this so many times, and I am so so tired. I *know* that some people will always claim the victim is on trial, not the accused, and I *know* that each experience is different. But that is not what I saw. She was treated with the utmost deference and respect - the judge even consented to clear the public gallery while she walked to the witness stand, immediately giving her "victim" status - and then she hid behind her screen. While my husband, a loving, kind man, stood in the dock, automatically being given "guilt" status, and had his basic human right (innocent until proven guilty) pulled away from under his feet, and was subjected to humiliation and disgust.

It's a lottery. Like I said, I can't imagine the pain and anguish of your ordeal. And I can tell that you can't imagine mine, either.

[friday]

i believe both victim and defendant are on trial. of course the balance will shift depending on the barritsers, judges etc and i have only ever been in a court for that trial so i have no idea whether i was just unlucky or if thats standard treatment.

regarding clearing the public gallery. thats for a good reason. for example i am terrified of his family knowing what i look like in case they decided they want revenge and since my home is very near to where they work its a very valid fear.

i do not believe her drug use should have been brought up but neither do i believe your husbands sex life should have been. the only relevant information in a courtroom is about what happened when the crime is reported to have been committed and the arrest (for example if someone gives a false name). i also believe if a person skips bail then the jury should know but it seems that would influence their decision so its not allowed.

i think screens are a brilliant idea. without them many people would be unable to give evidence and wouldnt be able to go through with the trial. i know that had i not been allowed to use my video statement i would have had to let him walk free on day two when it became apparent i was unable to say what he'd done to me on the stand.

currently waiting for the retrial (as if a week wasnt long enough)
his barrister dragged my cross-examination out for three days and i swear it was so the jury would make a decision on friday afternoon with little thought because they didnt want to have to come back on monday. it worked

in my case the jury were basically told they had to be 100% sure and that can never be possible. but i really dont think there could have been much more evidence except cctv.

i think the judge gets far too much control and can basically tell the jury how to vote when in my opinion the only way to have a fair trial would be to make everyone say their side of the event alone in front of the jury and neither side be allowed to see the others statement. of course that would have its flaws too, such as people not realising what points are important and not being able to answer to what other people happened but this current system sucks.

[Saffron]

It seems I was amending my post while you were also posting, and I have lost what I took ages to write!

I understand that clearing the public gallery can be necessary in some cases, but in our case, the accuser lies in Manchester and we live over 200 miles away.

While he was being interogated (sorry, i mean *interviewed*) by the police, they would frequently switch off the tape recorder and say things like "you know you raped her, why don't you admit it? Is your wife ugly, is that why you did it? admit it, and we'll let you go". He was forced to strip, and stand in a dirty room with the door open so everyone walking past could see in, while a forensic officer swabbed and scraped his penis and testicles. He suffered PTSD, self harmed, and attempted suicide.

I also acknowledge that screens are generally used so that the witness/complainant does not have to face their attacker. In which case, why not screen off the accused instead? Somebody giving evidence from behind a screen automatically gives them victim status, and bears credence to what they are saying.

It seems we were also the victims of a Friday Afternoon Jury. the trial was concluded at 1pm on a friday afternoon, and the judge said he would not hear a verdict until at least 2pm. The jury returned their verdict at exactly 2pm. After a 3 day trial and a 45 minute summation by the judge, do you honestly think that they genuinely considered every single point in the space of an hour, while they had their lunch/toilet breaks/cigarette breaks?

You are right that her drug-taking and sexual partners do not necessarily mean she was lying. My problem is that in cases where consent is contested, the credibility of the witness is everything. So for one person to be interrogated on everything, while the other person is not surely makes for a biased and prejudiced court?

A relative of mine has actually done jury service, and was appalled. some of the comments she witnessed from fellow jurors were: "he must have done it, he's black" and "I'll go with the majority because I would quite like to play golf this afternoon".

After the jury delivered their devastating blow, my husband was sent to a prison 160 miles from our home for 12 months. While he was there, he was on the Vulnerable Prisoners Wing, surrounded by paedophiles and genuine rapists. He was too frightened to stick photos of our son on his notice board in case another inmate saw them and "used" them. He witnesses beatings and other things. the inmates who worked in the kitchen pout used plasters and metal screws in the (out of date) food for the VP wing.

While he was away, some vigilante broke into our garage and trashed it while my son and I slept upstairs. The local newspapers splashed it everywhere, and people pointed at us in the street.

I imagine that many of the things I suffer are similar to you - rage, injustice, horror, flashbacks, fury, fear. My family and I are permanently damaged by the treatment we have suffered at the hands of our "justice system".

I wish you well in the retrial, and I hope you find the closure and justice you are looking for. I hope the person who raped you is put away for a very long time.

[Saffron]

I also forgot to mention that while my husband was in prison, his accuser told anyone who would listen, and all of his ex-colleagues, that he had been convicted of rape, (a lie) that during the trial it had "come out" that he had been accused before, but there hadn;t been enough evidence to make it stick (another lie) and that he had been sentenced to 5 years in prison (?? 12 months!)

Strangely, since he was released after serving 6 months, she has been very quiet....of course, it is rather strange that a sex attacker who was convicted to 5 years in prison should be allowed out after a mere 6 months.

[friday]

its unfortunate you recieved such awful treatment from the police. and i know i was also unlucky in the treatment i received from his barrister (although the judge did pull him aside and tell him he was out of order, but only after he had ripped me to shreds). the reason screens cover the witness rather than defendant is that they also prevent the public seeing the witness and of course the public often includes the family of the defendant. yet i couldnt have my boyfriend sit in the public gallery because if he had i would not have been able to see him in the breaks, which naturally were the times i most needed him.

hopefully his barrister wont be able to drag it out for a week this time and then hopefully i wont fall victim to friday afternoon jury again.

the thing that drives me mad is that i am not allowed to know what he has said in case it influences the retrial but had i sat through his evidence (which i obviously didnt cos i would have been sat with his family) or had it been reported in the press then i would have been able to.

it just drives me mad that my mental health can be used to try make me seem uncredible because unfortunately a large number of people still believe the ancient and out of date picture of someone with a mental illness in a straight jacket, having electro convulsive therapy and boucing off the white padded walls and yet the fact he skipped bail, turned up about 2 hours late for court because he "got on the wrong bus" (yes, this was on day 3) and frequently breaks his bail conditions cant be mentioned because it would influence the jury.


and your husbands treatment was horrendous, unfortunately there is still a hell of a lot of stuff that shouldnt happen that does with the police. my boyfriend got extremely badly beaten by some ex-armies on a bus in kent and when he reported it to the police (after being in hospital for some time) they said it was his own fault because of the way he dressed (wears mainly black and had a mohican). not to mention cases of men strip searching women. i dont for one second believe the police are perfect.

the main thing i feel is that this has all been in vain. ive had to go through a trial with the man who stole my virginity only a few metres away, dragging up all the memories, creating new horrific memories of the trial, being undermined and treated like a lunatic, having to watch my step in case he sees me and decides to do anything, having to leave my home because the police dont think im safe yet not being allowed to know why they dont think im safe and yet after all of this the chance of a conviction is tiny and the chance of any real sentence is even smaller. im so tempted not to go through with the retrial because it may just kill me and he will probably still walk free. and i dont doubt he has raped before and will rape again.

[Saffron]

I am really surprised that your mental health was allowed to be brought up. We asked for the medical records of R's accuser to be passed to us, (due to her claimed heart condition) and this was denied. You should also be able to request that any previous convictions or accusations made against him are disclosed to the jury. this is a relatively new piece of legislation which was brought in after Roy Whiting raped and murdered Sarah Payne.

I appreciate that it will be traumatic for you to go through the trial process again, but at least your rapist didn't get a Not Guilty verdict, so some of the jury were obviously convinced as to his guilt. I would also like to say that I think you are very courageous.

Whatever you may feel, and whatever the verdict, this will not have been in vain. Even *if* the retrial results in a Not Guilty verdict, the arrest and charges will remain on his file forever. This means that if/when he rapes someone else, the chances of a conviction are that much higher. And the very fact that you are prepared to stand up and give evidence once more will be very convincing to the jury. And the fact that the CPS have pressed ahead with the retrial must mean that they believe they have a realistic chance of conviction.

I don't doubt that for genuine survivors like yourself, a trial is a deeply disturbing ordeal, and I have nothing but respect for your courage. I wish you well, and hope that the outcome is the one you are hoping for.

[friday]

i refused to have his barrister delve into my medical files (i was sectioned not that long after it happened) but since the person who saw my injuries was a nurse who found them in a routine examination for eating disorders she did include a bit about why i had the examination in her statement as well as stating my condition deteriorated after the event. because it was mentioned he was then able to mention it and just read out the dsm-iv which is not a fair picture of my condition, only a list of possible symptoms.

do i have to ask for them to check if he has any previous convictions or charges or do they do it automatically? and would they necessarily tell me if he had, or could they use it in court but not tell me? can any charges be brought up or only ones of a sexual nature?

also do i have the right to call witnesses cos it seems that only their statements were read out when i believe a real-person testimony would be much more detailed and effective.

sorry so many questions its just that the police have been really odd and told me to leave my home because it wasnt safe but never told me why. it could just be because it is so close to his familys business but i still find it odd.

i think there were a lot of things that made the trial run less smoothly such as problems with the sound on the video, having to get permission from the minstry of justice to use the video, losing the tape of a 999 call i made (in relation to a crime i witnessed earlier in the evening which confirms my location), me talking too quietly and having panic attacks, not speaking in enough detail, it over-running etc
so hopefully the next one will run smoother and allow more time for the jury to reach their decision.

[Saffron]

Hi Friday

I'm afraid I don't know very much about the experience of court from a victim's/witness's perspective. As far as I am aware, your barrister should be able to ask for any previous convictions to be made known to the jury, and they ought to do this as a matter of course. It sounds to me as though the prosecution barrister at the original trial was not exactly competent (another thing we share - I swear our defence barrister was half-drunk most of the time, and he kept referring to the "victim" by a boy's name! Don't think he really endeared himself to the jury).

Unfortunately you do not have the right to call witnesses, only a barrister can do that. This is also true for the defendant. A barrister will only call a witness if s/he thinks it is advantageous to the case. The judge will only allow a witness to give evidence if it is relevant to the case - "Hearsay" evidence is not admissable. It is true that Real Person testimony is far more compelling than a statement being read out in court.

You should also have been appointed a Court Liaison Officer who should be able to keep you updated on procedures so that you know exactly what to expect.

Panic attacks are a horrible thing to experience, but you need to be aware that if your mental stability is being questioned, suffering a panic attack in court is only going to make the jury think you are a nutter. I mean that in the best possible way; I am not judging you by any means. I know that panic attacks are totally out of your control, but there is medication that can help. My friend suffers from them, and has been precribed Betablockers, which really help - they regulate her heart rate, and therefore her breathing is more controlled and she doesn;t suffer the painful spasms that come with the over-breathing. Maybe before the trial you could visit your GP, explain what is happening, and that you need to remain calm when you are giving evidence. If you feel calm, you are more likely to be able to speak clearly and get your point across.

I would also suggest that you contact rapecrisis.org for advice prior to the retrial. Victim Support will also be able to help you in terms of explaining the procedure to you. If you can, I would recommend taking as many people as possible with you to sit in the public gallery. I know this may be uncomfortable for them, but it is important for you. The jury will notice that you have lots of support.

I hope some of this is helpful, and I wish you all the best. One of the reasons that those falsely accused find the experience so traumatic, is that they abhor rape, and consider it as one of the most repellant crimes there is. I wish you well and am sending you lots of stength to get through this.

[Rights Fighter]

Friday, you can instruct the prosecution barrister (and the police) to call witnesses. If these witnesses are considered to be unsuitable then this should be explained to you as to why.

Since the beginning of 2005 evidence of a defendant's previous (proved) offending (if of "similar fact") should be brought into the trial.

Your medical history can be brought in without your permission via "a third party application" (could involve court proceedings) but this can be very long winded and expensive and it would be up to an independent barrister, if contested, to look at the medical evidence to decide whether it is prudent to bring them in.

I know of a similar application brought in during a trial in late 2004. Some of the information was allowed in and some not. It depends on the circumstances of the case and if it is absolutely necessary. If it is not, then it won't be brought into the trial.

If Friday can provide evidence that a panic attack is likely then I htink that this would be a case to apply for "special measures" - ie: giving evidence by way of video link. Again it really depends on the circumstances on the particular case.

I hope this assists.

[friday]

saffron-thanks for your help, i'll bear what you've said in mind.
hopefully the panic attacks wont be so bad this time, it was just an unfortunate case of his barrister messing me around and telling me i could go home and then being told i had to go in not only for the rest of the day but also for another day and the other was when i thought i saw him because i saw a man where the defendent stands but it wasnt him, just the person who stands next to them

can't take anything for the panic attacks cos im really sensitive to medication and would fall asleep! took them in the past. should be getting some new meds for bipolar which will hopefully help.

interesting about what you said about having support in the court room. i didnt have anyone in there because i want to be able to see my boyfriend in the breaks and it would be too difficult for my mum and sister to hear what happened. i can see how that would make a difference but cant think of anyone i would be comfortable with hearing what happened to me. all my friends know but none know the details and its the details that make it so much worse. even i was shocked by the pictures of my injuries, dont think my friends could hear what happened, it wouldnt be fair on them.

hearsay evidence is now allowed in court but it has to be the first person you could reasonably be expected to tell. thats why i may be allowed to have my friend give evidence even though i spoke to her about 12 hours later because i told her what had happened and she told me it was rape (at that point i was in denial and blaming myself for putting myself in the situation)
although i saw another man first the new law states that reasonable can exlude strangers eg in my case i stayed at a strangers house because i was a complete mess but it would not be reasonable to expect me to tell a stranger something as personal as what had happened.

rights fighter-reason im not doing it via video link is because the police think it may make the jury feel too detatched from me. i do have my video statement which is good but will have to get permission to use it from ministry of justice again cos i was in a 2 week period not covered by the law. typical!

[Rights Fighter]

Actually giving evidence via video link tends to lend support to the complainant's assertion that she is scared of the defendant, which is why the judge has to direct the jury that a witness giving evidence in such a way should not go against the defendant.

My guesss is the police want the jury to look at you as a "brave" complainant who is not too scared to give evidence against her alleged assailant.

It's all about strategy. I would say that it has nothing to be with you appearing to be detached from the jury or they from you.

If you really feel appearing in open court will cause you untold stress you can request to give evidence via video link or from behind a screen, if the police persuade you go into court.

I have known people in your situation (or claiming to be in your situation) who have not had to appear at all at trial and the prosecution has been run using the video interview and other witnesses.

[iansbrother]

You've gotta keep going ...

Hi Paul,
By way of introduction, i only found this site when my younger brother was falsely accused of rape by his wife (of 17 years !!!) - he asked me to help him. I re-visited this site tonight because i was so shocked the last time i was here .. I read your post, and it sent shivers down my spine ....

My brother was a very easy-going, simple-life kind of guy, who loved his 4 kids (like you do with your 2). I was the best-man at his wedding. I was also the guy who spread his ashes a few weeks ago in the Garden of Rememberance. He Hanged himself on the 24th of July. Put another way 24/7. I've had to watch my mum cremate my brother. And now his kids grow-up without a father. With the same of a false allegation.

As the subject says, 'you've gotta keep going'. Tomorow might be as **** as today, but the day-after might be better ....

I look forward to hearing from you .... Bry