Umm, no Telegraph, no

Eleanor de Freitas rape case: victim wrote of her ‘disbelief’ at prosecution

The entire point of this is that Ms. de Freitas was not either “a” or “the” victim. She was, in fact, the accused.

29 thoughts on “Umm, no Telegraph, no”

  1. “was not either “a” or “the” victim.”

    –>

    was neither “a” nor “the” victim.

    There, my english teacher would be proud of me.

  2. What gives with this case?

    The Met’s Sapphire Team seems to have gone full retard, demanding she not be prosecuted for perverting the course of justice despite not seeing the evidence gathered by the victim’s private detective or even actually undertaking an investigation of their own!

    Usually, they piss & moan about the COS not charging people, yet they have fallen over backwards to excuse this one.

    Is it because she was young & pretty? Because she was nuts?

    Because they’ve been infected with the ‘#IBelieveHer’ virus?

  3. “Miss de Freitas’ family said in a statement that the approach taken by Miss Saunders could lead to victims deciding not to go to police after being raped.”

    No, it might surely rather lead to non-victims deciding not to go to the police after not being raped.

    ““Anyone who has worked with rape and domestic abuse victims knows that many victims behave in ways both before and after attacks that may, at first blush, suggest that they must have consented at the time.
    “Thus they may positively seek and encourage the sexual encounter beforehand and they may maintain what appears to be positive contact afterwards.”

    Men are in serious trouble if they can find out, post-hoc, that they committed rape against a woman who “positively sought out and encouraged the sexual encounter”.

  4. Julia, I think it’s because they hate it when a member of the public shows them up by doing a better job than they can and so it’s a defensive measure. Pretty common across all the useless morons in the public sector in all countries.

    Just been following a thing in Singapore where some internet group outed a crooked electronics seller where the state organisation that is supossed to deal with them had done nothing for years. The state went after the internet group for harassment rather than arrest the crook.

  5. Tragic outcome’ but the moment the Cps makes a prosecution decision based in any way whatsoever on how the accused will take the news.. it will become useless.

  6. My guess is that this was a vengeful accusation after realising that the bloke was a cad. He wanted some fun, had some fun for a few days and dumped her. Hence why it took her over a week to go to the police. Throw in bipolar disorder where people’s emotions tend to swing further than most.

    Her family are effectively libelling the guy involved here. They’re not naming him, but people will know who was involved. If they want to make an argument about prosecuting people with mental illnesses, fine, but you can’t go around calling someone a rapist based on one person’s account after they’ve been cleared by the courts.

    It sounds like not only did he not do it, but that all the evidence strongly suggests that she lied about it. Her family remind me of the people whose tattooed son commits an armed robbery and are like “my Billy? He’d never do that.”. But because she’s a pretty, blonde, upper middle class girl, she’s to be believed.

  7. “Anyone who has worked with rape and domestic abuse victims knows that many victims behave in ways both before and after attacks that may, at first blush, suggest that they must have consented at the time.
    “Thus they may positively seek and encourage the sexual encounter beforehand and they may maintain what appears to be positive contact afterwards.”

    This is fucking insane. They are arguing that the definition of ‘consent’ should be whatever a woman says it is, at any time, before, during of long after the event. It is a vehicle for arbitrary denunciation of people based on nothing but their gender.

    Coming to a court near you soon.

  8. What BIG and Rob said x 1000.

    I don’t think I have ever heard a madder thing said than ‘Thus [rape victims] may positively seek and encourage the sexual encounter beforehand and they may maintain what appears to be positive contact afterwards [and still be rape victims].’

    It makes no sense at all, until you start to consider that the hardcore left wants to destroy all relationships between men and women, between families, in fact any relationships between people which are not sanctioned and controlled by the State.

  9. Rob, a charity representative on the radio yesterday complained about letting a very bad man out of prison due to “a technicality”. The nature of that ‘technicality’ being that he had served his sentence.

    We do seem to be entering a time where people are arguing that the law should be whatever the bien pensant think it should be at any particular moment.

  10. Ex post facto revocation of consent has long been the dream of radfems. They have the fabled shore in sight but have not yet managed to land there. The growing awareness of people of the bogus nature of the rape “industry” may yet turn the tide or at least see them trapped on a lee shore.

  11. This is fucking insane. They are arguing that the definition of ‘consent’ should be whatever a woman says it is, at any time, before, during of long after the event. It is a vehicle for arbitrary denunciation of people based on nothing but their gender.

    The Mackinnon Doctrine.

    http://www2.law.columbia.edu/faculty_franke/Certification%20Readings/

    This file-

    catherine-mackinnon-feminism-marxism-method-and-the-state-an-agenda-for-theory1.pdf

    If you can’t be bothered to plough through the post-marxism (though reading the thing as a whole is instructive if you’ve the time), in a nutshell it is that the idea of objective facts in a legal process is a male trick, since the legal system is an articulation of patriarchal society, and thus rape must be defined as the subjective appraisal of the accuser.

    As feminism’s primary legalist, Catharine Mackinnon “wrote the book”, literally. What we are seeing is the implementation of her doctrine across the Western world.

  12. Whether or not a woman is a tart isn’t relevant. What is interesting is the apparent sequence of events: she told friends that he had raped her, he went to the police to report her for harrassment, they arrested him for rape. Apparently.

    So from that it seems she didn’t go to the police to report a rape, but had spread the allegation in their social circle and he brought it to the attention of the police, they charged him with rape, and then she couldn’t back out of it presumably.

    So first off, we have the problem of her spreading the allegation in their family and social circles. Then you have Plod assuming his guilt and not actually investigating the allegation before the rape charge.

    It still does appear to come down to a tragedy of her own making, whatever way you look at it.

  13. I know Bumfluff’s link is to the DM and this guy is loaded so he will be well coached but perhaps if this:

    It would be another two tortuous months before he was told there was ‘insufficient evidence’ to proceed

    [my amphasis] had been “no case to answer” then perhaps it could have all been sorted.

    Insufficient evidence can always be read as “we know you did it, you bastard, and we’ll be watching”, which is how some seem to have taken it.

  14. BwaB-

    The problem is, or was, that she’d apparently told people in general that he’d raped her, so the only way to clear his name in his social circle was going to be demolishing her story in court. Which is a general problem with false accusations of this degree of gravity.

  15. From the Wail article:

    But the rumours were out: claims he had assaulted Eleanor, drugged her and wouldn’t let her escape from his flat had rapidly spread, not just among her friends, but among his too. Alexander decided to report her to the police for harassment.

    He went to Chelsea police station but was arrested and held overnight in a cell.

    Well done, Plod! It seems any time a pretty, middle-class girl might be in some distress they arrest the nearest male for good measure, perhaps stopping to get some facts a few weeks later, maybe. What a useless bunch of cunts.

  16. Tim Newman: “…perhaps stopping to get some facts a few weeks later, maybe.”

    Try ‘studiously refusing to look as anything so trivial as facts and sticking to their guns that they were right all along even when the DPP tears them off a strip for failing to investigate’….

  17. This is a guy with resources to clear his name. The top flight private detectives are not cheap, and they scours the stores for surveillance videos to prove his case. Now just imagine you are the accused by a mentally unstable ex-bedmate and you don’t have his kind of money to clear your name.

  18. I vaguely knew someone with bipolar who killed himself after being sent back to prison for stabbing someone in the arm- presumably they should stop charging people for stabbings in the light of that tragic case.

  19. I’m convinced there are a lot of women wandering around who have genuine mental health issues but who never come to the notice of the mental health authorities, or receive any treatment, because their erratic behaviour is excused just because they are women. Whereas if a man behaves in an unpredictable manner there is always the assumption he might turn violent, so the authorities get called in, and they often get sectioned as a result.

  20. I admit to to a great deal of cognitive dissonance on this one but instinctively I’m against torture, but accept that it works, eventually. And its that eventually that worries me.

    Sure, the average person is going to crack and probably quite quickly, but how often are we taking about the average person? That case in Germany appears to be a one-off. Mostly we are talking about jihadists and other fanatics who have a death wish, or so they claim. Maybe the foot soldiers won’t be as fanatical but they are the least likely to have the information we need.

    Leaving aside the 100% certainty that the person about to be tortured has the information that is needed ( or is it?), I wonder how far the advocates of torture would be prepared to go?

    In the case of the ticking time bomb the scenario is generally a bomb in a city and we are sacrificing our moral principles and one person to save a lot of lives.

    The problem is that the person we are torturing only needs to last as long as the clock has to tick and they can bring themselves relief by giving false information. Sure, we can get back to them and start all over again but as I say, they just have to survive until the bomb goes off. Or by giving the wrong code the bomb goes off. The other problem is that as we slowly increase the torture there is an increasing chance of them dying before we get the information.

    So, wouldn’t be better to torture, say their son, daughter, mother, brother, sister or someone else close to them? We could even assure the person with the information we seek that the torture of their loved ones will continue long after the bomb has gone off and they have died. OK, that’s assuming we can get hold of that loved one, but this is a thought experiment.

    Next we have the person who we know has important information that may or may not be time sensitive. Lets say a courier or senior person who knows the identity of the jihad leader or bomb makers. Now we have a bit more time, but it would be nice to know the information quickly so we can act.
    Now our person to be tortured is more likely to be a trusted and trained fanatic and who knows what they will do to hold out. It could be many months to get the information and in the meantime word will get out that they have been captured, or gone missing so therefore assumed captured. In this case the information they have becomes time sensitive, so same question: Why not torture their loved ones one at a time until they tell us what we want to know? Again we have the advantage of promising them the torture will continue even after their execution.

    Finally, the foot soldiers arrested on the battle field or even when trying to return to their home countries, which is what a lot of this seems to be about. They will claim to be low level operatives who know nothing. This is likely to be the case if they are low level operatives, but are they telling the truth? How far are we prepared to go to establish that truth? Maybe we can spend a year using enhanced interrogation but what if it turns out that they did know about the next 9/11 and we find out too late? Shouldn’t we have been more heavy handed earlier on?

    As I say I say, I have cognitive dissonance on this one but I am interested on how those who have more certainty feel about these approaches.

    Finally, if we are to have enhanced interrogation and torture and have hjard men like the Jack Bauers of this world protecting us then we need good oversight. We know what happens when human beings aren’t controlled. And in the event of something going wrong it is those who give the orders and have oversight who should be held accountable.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *