falsely accused (no surprise there!)

[Saffron]

Ha! my 83 year old grandpa who suffers from alzheimers was burgled over Christmas while he was away at our home. the burglars took everything of any value, left the things that looked expensive but weren't, left a HUGE mess and even took the pillowcases off the beds to carry their loot in. he has carers who visit him 3 times a week to make sure he is OK. Allegedly they are CRB checked, but everything about this break-in points to someone who knew what was valuable and what wasn't, and who knew he was going to be away for a while. the stuff they took has been in our family for literally hundreds of years, some of it dating back to Georgian times.

the mess was discovered when my mum took Grandpa back home after New Year. she called the police immediately, but they were unable/unwilling to send out a SOCO (Scene Of Crime Officer) or in fact anyone for four days!

now, my point is this: if this had been a rape allegation, i doubt very much that the police would have waited 4 days before taking statements, or forensics.

so in answer to your question, no, the police don't chase allegations of all kinds, only the ones they know they have a good chance of gaining a prosecution on. and after all, prosecuting an alleged rape is in the Public Interest, isn't it? Especially if the "victim" is kind enough to furnish them with the name and address of the "attacker"...

[Rights Fighter]

It's these damn targets you see! The same as in the family courts SS have adoption targets to reach - hence the horror stories in the media of new born babies being taken from their mothers for no reason other than the mother had problems in her life and might neglect the child.

[RFLH]

I'm very pleased to say that they've now dropped the adoption targets with a lot of help from John Hemming MP

http://www.westmidslibdems.org.uk/ne..._welcomed.html

[Rights Fighter]

It's only a proposal at the moment. Well done John Hemming though! He's worked damn hard for this - he deserves a medal.

[lemming]

read the link, rflh, and it looks good, kudos to mr hemming.

i'm not worried - i've got jon redwood fighting my corner (cringe)

saffron, i'm sorry to hear about your grandpa and yeah your right the police ain't all that interested in things like that - it's just a ballache for them to even do the paperwork. i've been lucky enough to work in pretty rough areas, and in my career i've been spat at, punched, had a knife pulled on me, my eyes clawed out, it'd be an effort to count the times i've had glasses thrown at me or attempts to insert shards of 'em in my face and don't get me started on the threats to find out where i live and smash me up et al... (er... i'm sure there were good times too!). in every instance the police were supremely disinterested, and once even tried to convince me not to press charges (the one and only time i ever have) cos it would be too much effort! - not for me, all i had to do was make a statement.

let me rephrase the question: would the police in different regions of the country have variations in the way they conduct investigations? ie would london plods, given their resources, volume of cases and case-hardened people bucking for promotion, be more inclined to "go for the jugular"; as opposed to, say, yorkshire plods who would not have the budget or experience of cynical investigating, lacking the pressure to meet government targets unlike their london counterparts would conduct an more even-handed investigation. (that example was purely for illustration, based on no knowledge on how it works)?

i mean i can't get my head round how government policy (based on what? angry lobbyists causing kneejerk reactions, or voter-pleasing policies) could cause such a skewed state of affairs. surely there must still be decent people conducting fair open-minded investigations SOMEWHERE. the OIC isn't getting a bonus for each conviction! and presumably if figures exist, then so do league tables. admittedly the figures i've seen are slightly ludicrious, and twisted to whatever the person wants it to be. but i guarantee there's a worst geographical area for the percentage of rape allegations/charges that lead to convictions. and people can argue either the cases are handled poorly resulting in rapists getting off (the most popular one, natch), or that the cases are handled evenly resulting in minimal miscarriages of justice/distress, or that the pesky innocent until proven guilty stuff makes it difficult to convict, or that the figures are meaningless and therefore no conclusions can be drawn from them. but someone MUST be making comparisons between the other regions/police forces in the country. that's what i meant by "postcode lottery"...

another random question or two:

if as you say i'm likely to go to trial, what's the deal with bail if charged? would it be usual for someone in my position to get bail (the issue is consent for a single instance - not threatening, assaulting, detaining her etc)? i gather they have to give their reasons for granting bail, it's not automatic.

and am i being naive in hoping that at the end of this bail i'll at least know what's gonna happen? is the case sooo complicated they'll need even more time? do they just keep rebailing indefinitely?

no worries about giving me false hope or dashing them down, just an idea of what normally happens would be better than not having a clue...

thanks for the help!

[Rights Fighter]

Bail: no hard and fast rules although if there was an element of intention, aggression, and if you know her witnesses CPS might say that you could try to interfere with them.

Plod can remand you into custody but that has to be with the permission of a superintendent I think (not sure - I know it's somebody higher up in office).

You've not had similar complaints made against you and I don't think she alleged physical assaults, you don't seem to be the type (from what you say and how you say it) to interfere with witnesses so I would be surprised if you did not get bail.

However, if she lives near you it is possible you would have to live out of the area with conditions not to go/travel into the area. Hopefully you have friends and family who can offer a suitable bail address.

Good luck! I will PM you.

[lemming]

thanks rf,

from what i've read it would be the magistrates court who decide whether bail is granted if i'm charged - presumably with plod making a recommendation one way or another..?

there was NO physical aggression alleged, her position is that she was too trusting of me (evil predatory beast that i am), and then passed out. not that she couldn't remember bits from the night due to alcohol, but that she was unconscious/incapable. er, i disagree!

still very green about all this, so can't figure out what witnesses the prosecution would have. all people from that night could do would be to confirm whether she refused offers of a lift home, how drunk/capable she was when they left her and bits like that. these are the people, excepting one, the police have yet to interview... what other witnesses would they be able to use?

but i can deal with any conditions of bail, just so long as i get it! if i have to move then it would be to my parents, since already decided i'll have no choice but to tell them about the situation only if/when i get charged - and it would be a bit harsh on them to do it over the phone!

can't quite believe i'm chatting about details of bail for rape. last year the worst thing i could have imagined would be to lose my job, but in the end it was just an incidental thing that happened. least i know i'm adaptable. funny old world...

[Rights Fighter]

Well, if she still maintains she was unconscious then as Saffron pointed out, how would she remember the short convo when she is supposed to have had with you?

the police asked if i remembered saying to her "if you want me to stop, i'll stop" (later i found out that apparently she replied either "you might as well carry on" or "would it make a difference if i said no?",

Also, being a bit of a pi**-head myself I know that once I've reached a certain limit I think to myself "I ain't gonna remember anything else".

For somebody whose a bit merry and then had a spiked drink she remembers far too much. There would have come a point where a short while (an hour or so) before she was drunk/drugged (allegedly) would be wiped from her memory. You could ask the sol to instruct an expert in those matter.

[RFLH]

Can I butt in at this point? You'll have to remember that when you answer to bail it'll be at the court where you are living now. We moved almost 150 miles away and its a long trip to make every 6 weeks for 15 months until the trial date.

Good luck with telling your parents, its an awful thing to have to tell them.

RF - a bit of one?!!!!

[Rights Fighter]

Are you inferring I am more than a bit of a pi** head? Cheek!!!!

I think he means his parents live not too far away so they won't have that problem. Hopefully!

[lemming]

unfortunately i don't have any answers. the quotation was put to me by the police, so definitely forms part of her statement.

they also asked me many questions relating to her participation leading up to and during the encounter, my memories were patchy and at the time fragmented (you'd think being arrested and left the stew for hours concentrates the mind, but my thoughts were like quicksilver), so i couldn't give a blow-by-blow account, but could give a few specific examples of her actively participating. in one instance, when we were talking about how we got into the bedroom (what she's saying about it i don't know) the police asked if it was "implied consent". and i was like, it wasn't implied, it just was. i didn't infer that she wanted sex because she was willing to go upstairs, i inferred it because she wanted sex. bear in mind all my statements were choked out in between sobs - i wasn't sitting there being cocky!

if somebody walks into a shop, looks at the drinks fridge, picks up a can of cola and goes to the counter with money in hand the cashier will infer that person wants to buy it. and then they do buy it and the transaction is complete. if the cashier is questioned about the purchase, what reasonable explanation can they give as to why they assumed there was no problem with the transaction? it may transpire the customer actually wanted a dfferent flavoured drink that wasn't available, or that they they weren't thinking straight because of their blood sugar levels and would have had a bottle of water in different circumstances, or they'd seen an advert for cola in the shop and were influenced by it, or that that were really casing out the shop and planned to rob it.

regardless, why is that the cashiers problem? the customer never expressly consented to buying the drink, nor were they asked, they just implied it by their actions.

i don't know how to explain it without sounding like a pig, but i don't know how to describe consent in this instance. i didn't expressly ask her if she'd mind terribly if we had coitus, or pull out a consent form, i gathered it from the way she was fumbling with my belt buckle while kissing me, the consent wasn't an issue! (nor did it become an issue during the action, i hasten to add)

i don't have a clue what her official version of events is! remember that most of what i've heard is from other people, so i don't actually know what she's told the police. how long do the effects of the drugs last? was i such a superstud i was still going when she came out of her stupor? did she even tell the police she thought she'd been drugged? perhaps she only told them she couldn't remember, and only elaborated on it to other people after giving her statement? perhaps she's changed her mind when the tests, if done, came back negative?

bear in mind that there are other examples of consent other than the above, my defence will not hinge on the fact she walked up the stairs! though i suppose it might come in handy if she says she passed out...

[utterlydestroyed]

God, Lemming I really feel for you!

I know what you mean entirely by actions indicate 'it just was' ....is it 'implied' consent, if someone asks for a particular type of condom, takes off their own cloths...

...its sort of reached 'you fancy a shag then'? without having to ask...hasn't it?b

...and I had eye-witnesses in the room, who gave written statements supporting me!

You have now gained the status of a 'mushroom', police will keep you in the dark and feed you on 'bullsh*t'.

You must stop thinking of the police as being fair or impartial. Their sole aim & objective is to gather enough evidence to enable them to present a case to the CPS to proceed with a prosecution. Police have 'RAPE' targets to reach and they really, really don't care if give a flying f**k if you are innocent or not!

RF & rflh, know their onions regarding preperation etc. Saffron is a darling for emotional support. Me, I've just been through it (still going through it emotionally in some ways), I had people who KNEW (since they were there, at the time, in the room) I was not guilty. I cannot imagine going through it alone, which is why I post here, to be a mate, plus I'm still damn bloody angry furious with my local CORRUPT (homophobic) police force still!

I doubt I'll ever trust a police officer again as long as I live!

good luck

UD

[lemming]

think i've been cursed with being able to see all sides of the argument. mum always said i was a trusting, sensitive child...

not sure i can switch off that empathy fully enough, so i guess that's where a bullish solicitor comes into play...

what everyone's posted makes complete sense, and, ud, your latest one has crystallised things in my mind, spot on in fact... but... and please don't get offended 'cos it most definitely is not intended to be (my life as an adult has taught me to take things with a pinch of salt. i was always told that only true things are robust enough to withstand any argument or attack, but on the other hand, that - and you'll appreciate this saffron - the truth can be "twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools"), in order to appreciate all the questions i've been asking, understand that i've yet to get proper legal advice, so and have been unable to find "impartial" advice:

• my friends and associates support me unconditionally. their support has turned out to be vital in every way. put it this way: the plods forgot to take a mouth swab for dna, so when the DC who was with the OIC came round the next day to do it (by appointment, not harrassing) and basically told me chin up, i told him the damage had been done already ie my hard-won reputation in tatters, the shame etc. so yeah it's important to say the least. their support is unconditional, but their advice regarding the case is pretty much useless
• opinions on prosecuting rape are extreme. visit other websites on rape and you find everyone complaining about their mistreatment by the police as a victim, that the evil rapist walk out of court as a free man laughing his head off etc. their main point being that the police and cps do nothing about dealing with rape allegations and don't care. these are recent comments about recent cases.
• other websites bang on about their mistreatment by the police and the cps as the accused. no need to give examples, methinks...

already i'm cringing as i read the last the point there (sorry sorry), but it needs to be cold to get across my point that everyone who has a strong valid opinion on rape issues will also have an axe to grind. (ive met people who just have opinions that they shout about, and they're normally the same people who drink on their own. opinions must be validated by knowledge or experience otherwise.. well, you could always become a politician lol). rf, you see injustices on a daily basis (and your dedication is amazing); saffron and rflh, your experiences have already been discussed on other threads; ud, ur the pink presence, 'nuff said.

for one side to win the other has to lose. i'm quite sure my accuser's father will be livid if i get anything less than 8 years. i'm equally sure my father will be a lot closer to his first heart attack, regardless of what the result is. everyone's viewpoint is tainted by virtue of it being their viewpoint! so while it would be comforting for you to lie and tell me everything will be fine that's not why anyone of us is here, and you're quite right to prepare me for the worst, it's essential in fact.

what i'm lacking is any example, anywhere, of the authorities applying natural justice - and natural justice, to me, does not involve the stress of going to crown court, going through the minutia of that night and having strangers decide if i'm innocent or not. natural justice would occur a lot earlier in the proceedings... i can't just can't believe that it doesn't exist, dammit!

prepare for war, hope for peace... it's just hard to do that in what is essentially a vacuumm where there is little hope for "peace". does anyone have any good news stories where you're vindicated without waiting a year a year or so to even begin defending yourself? and i definitely dislike this idea of all or nothing - either you're innocent or you go down for a minimum 4 years? i can't see a possibility where there is no cause for reasonable doubt when the evidence is only another person's word. as a manager i've done investigations and disciplinaries (where you only need a reasonable belief) and i wouldn't have done anything if all i had was one witness statement. if i had, and it turned out i'd ignored other potential witnesses because they wouldn't have told me what i "wanted" to hear then any appeal would certainly have been won because i didn't act in good faith.

i need to stop these analogies and comparisons, all i'm doing is coming across as naive. all your advice is gratefully received and rest assured will be/ are being actioned. where my liberty is at stake i won't be taking any risks. hopefully you've waded through the superfluous waffle and understand that your advice is practical and wise based on knowledge of how the system works, but for me it's relentlessly cynical and slightly depressing. but if i have to suck it up for the next few months rather than not having the knowledge but having an abundance of time to regret it - well, the choice is obvious. so another shift in the way i think (so soon after the last one!) is required... expect the next post to be written in BLOCK CAPITALS WITH LOTS OF F***ING SWEARING!!!

ps almost just deleted that entire message (think i woke up grumpy today) but nah, it is what it is and nothing's changed that much in the last 20 minutes. it's probably that the last two days i've spent living a completely normal life and now i resent this sword of damocles hanging over my head indefinitely. SUBMIT

[RFLH]

ah you see - we all started out thinking that because we've done nothing, everyone else will believe it. Sadly as you're finding out its far from the truth.

I don't think I've come across anyone that hasn't had the charges dropped, I've known them to come out of court proclaimed innocent, but by then the damage has already been done - cos as we all know there's no smoke without fire.....

Now its Sunday morning - I wonder how many other poor blokes will be getting a knock on the door in the next few hours and the whole nightmare will begin for them and their families and friends. Not much thought is given to the ripple-effect by false accusers. It may seem a grand idea to get your own back on one poor sucker, but it never stops at the one person and life affected.

You've picked up well that its a battle - no-one is really interested in you as a person by the time you get to court - its winners and losers and you'll find that your sol/barrister really isn't that bothered either, its the money at the end for most of them. I've not really found out where truth plays a part in the whole proceedings on the part of the legal eagles and plod!!

I don't think we're axe grinding - just stating the actuallity as we've found it. It's better to be forewarned that blithely say that everything will be fine, cos unless she opens herself up to possible prosecution for perverting the course of justice - then chances are really really high that you're stuffed.

It's even possible that given a few months you'll end up just like us - now that's scary!!!

UD - loved the mushroom comment, I may well pinch it and use it later elsewhere!!

[Rights Fighter]

Hi RFLH

I heard to the mushroom comment from Martin sitting in HMP Albany the other week. And like a mushroom, it pops up everywhere.

With regard to axe-grinding - I also speak from the opposite side of the fence. I've had my feet in the other camp - so to speak.

When I'm reviewing papers for appeal against conviction I tend to make a start as though they are guilty and work my way from that standpoint. In the same way the jury is supposed to work from the view at trial that the defendant is innocent until proven guilt. (Rarely does that work of course due to the media banging on about lack of rape convictions).

So I am impartial to a certain extent. I hope!

If she is claiming you dragged her up the stairs (although there seems to be no violence alleged) then one would assume there would be marks where you grabbed hold of her in order to do that. No doubt she was examined thoroughly after the alleged attack and any bruises and/or abrasions duly noted. If there are none then there you have some rebuttal. If she's unconscious then she not going to walk up the stairs - she would need some assistance and even "gentle assistance" due to the fact she was "unconscious" would result in some finger marks I would have thought.