Woman sues footballers for raping her.

[MaximumJed]

BlackLabel said:

In light of this decision I wonder if the prosecution service will look at the case again?

Regardless of another thread on what constitutes consent/rape, my concern is how they can now be found (and reported as) rapists when the CPS dropped the case?

I'm never very happy with the idea that a civil case can be brought against pettier crimes which have not been pursued, but surely the evidence demands for something as serious as rape would mean that you'd need the CPS to prosecute as well before you could award damages, especially of this size?

[Munter]

heebeegeetee said:

It's not illegal to drink one's self to oblivion

Being drunk and incapable can see you arrested and fined. So yes it is illegal.

Which doesn't excuse anybody having sex with (or in any other way taking advantage of), someone who's drunk and incapable. The law still applies to people interacting with someone breaking the law themselves. But being that drunk in public is an offence.

[Borroxs]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Yup, I never had to resort to having sex with women so drunk they couldn't give consent. And not only am I not at all good looking, but I also don't have a highly paid glamorous job.

I did once have sex with a woman who was a bit drunk, and had lost her glasses. This, combined with a dark nightclub, worked in my favour. Her being my wife also helped.

What an evening that was.

i hope she wasn't disappointed when she found her glasses!!!!

But yes, seriously, never been in a situation where something might later be considered rape by one of the people taking part. Sometimes a boring life is better.

[Dr Murdoch]

Borroxs said:

But yes, seriously, never been in a situation where something might later be considered rape by one of the people taking part.

Me too, although in my 'yoof' I have woken up in a strange bed with no recollection of the events from the night before.

[Oakey]

MaximumJed said:

Regardless of another thread on what constitutes consent/rape, my concern is how they can now be found (and reported as) rapists when the CPS dropped the case?

I'm never very happy with the idea that a civil case can be brought against pettier crimes which have not been pursued, but surely the evidence demands for something as serious as rape would mean that you'd need the CPS to prosecute as well before you could award damages, especially of this size?

Because the burden of proof is lower in a civil case. David Hunt and Aaron Coghlan are just two recent examples where a civil case has gone unfavorably against them despite neither having any criminal convictions.

[brrapp]

Dr Murdoch said:

Borroxs said:

But yes, seriously, never been in a situation where something might later be considered rape by one of the people taking part.

Me too, although in my 'yoof' I have woken up in a strange bed with no recollection of the events from the night before.

I very much like to think I've never done anything remotely close to rape, but I'd struggle to remember the details from 30 odd years ago let alone defend myself if someone did suggest it.

[Dr Murdoch]

brrapp said:

I very much like to think I've never done anything remotely close to rape, but I'd struggle to remember the details from 30 odd years ago let alone defend myself if someone did suggest it.

I was suggesting that I could of been toyed with.

It was only as a suggestion, as I know (without knowing) that I would have been loving it, possibly similar to some female of the species.

[Tryke3]

Kinderpup said:

NO, NO, NO and just in case anyone isn't sure, absolutely bloody not. If she made the choice as a mature, intelligent (?), consenting adult to drink enough alcohol to impair her judgement then she has no right to blame others for her bad decisions. Woman as well as men must take responsibility for their own actions, we scream bloody equality on everything else and expect, no DEMAND to be treated the same as men, yet when we make a bad life decision we expect to be able to blame someone else, usually the man involved. This is wrong and should be thrown out of court.

Sorry rant over, this type of behaviour make my blood boil.......

Only when this happens to your daughter, mother or sister you have the right to have a idiotic rant on the internet

[FredClogs]

He raped Blackburn for a big transfer fee and £10s of thousands a week and all...

Goodwillie is a fat, useless .

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Tryke3 said:

Kinderpup said:

NO, NO, NO and just in case anyone isn't sure, absolutely bloody not. If she made the choice as a mature, intelligent (?), consenting adult to drink enough alcohol to impair her judgement then she has no right to blame others for her bad decisions. Woman as well as men must take responsibility for their own actions, we scream bloody equality on everything else and expect, no DEMAND to be treated the same as men, yet when we make a bad life decision we expect to be able to blame someone else, usually the man involved. This is wrong and should be thrown out of court.

Sorry rant over, this type of behaviour make my blood boil.......

Only when this happens to your daughter, mother or sister you have the right to have a idiotic rant on the internet

Actually, I think he has the right to have an idiotic rant whenever he wishes. There's no law against stupidity.

[del mar]

She said

"She felt her life had been destroyed".

Rape is wrong and those guilty of it should be punished accordingly, but neither a prison sentence for the guilty or £100,000, will repair her life to where it originally was.

A very hard lesson learnt , don't get so drunk you don't know what you are doing, but this happens every weekend up and down the country. She has to live with this for the rest of her life.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11056...

[VolvoT5]

Unless I am missing something I think it is very wrong that any compensation has been paid out for an alleged criminal act without a trial and guilty verdict by a proper court. This could pave the way for gold diggers (and not genuine victims) to sue any rich man they have had sex with...

[Borroxs]

VolvoT5 said:

Unless I am missing something I think it is very wrong that any compensation has been paid out for an alleged criminal act without a trial and guilty verdict by a proper court. This could pave the way for gold diggers (and not genuine victims) to sue any rich man they have had sex with...

Plenty of cases that have gone to civil court like this. It's odd isnt it, but it happens.

[gazza285]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I did once have sex with a woman who was a bit drunk, and had lost her glasses. This, combined with a dark nightclub, worked in my favour. Her being my wife also helped.

What an evening that was.

You shagged your wife in a nightclub? Chapeau!

[Oakey]

VolvoT5 said:

Unless I am missing something I think it is very wrong that any compensation has been paid out for an alleged criminal act without a trial and guilty verdict by a proper court. This could pave the way for gold diggers (and not genuine victims) to sue any rich man they have had sex with...

As opposed to what? Those jokey pretend courts?

[Derek Smith]

VolvoT5 said:

Unless I am missing something I think it is very wrong that any compensation has been paid out for an alleged criminal act without a trial and guilty verdict by a proper court. This could pave the way for gold diggers (and not genuine victims) to sue any rich man they have had sex with...

He has paid out for the injury caused to the claimant in exactly the same way you can claim from a neighbour who drove into your wall. So perhaps you are missing something. She's been injured, she's claimed, she's been paid out.

The evidence from the third party seems clear enough. She was incapable of giving consent.

The chap has not been found guilty. Civil courts are proper courts.

As others have pointed out, with his money and his job, if he has to predate on drunken women then he's feral.

[Einion Yrth]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Tryke3 said:

Kinderpup said:

NO, NO, NO and just in case anyone isn't sure, absolutely bloody not. If she made the choice as a mature, intelligent (?), consenting adult to drink enough alcohol to impair her judgement then she has no right to blame others for her bad decisions. Woman as well as men must take responsibility for their own actions, we scream bloody equality on everything else and expect, no DEMAND to be treated the same as men, yet when we make a bad life decision we expect to be able to blame someone else, usually the man involved. This is wrong and should be thrown out of court.

Sorry rant over, this type of behaviour make my blood boil.......

Only when this happens to your daughter, mother or sister you have the right to have a idiotic rant on the internet

Actually, I think he has the right to have an idiotic rant whenever he wishes. There's no law against stupidity.

Actually, unless my reading comprehension is seriously awry, "he" is in fact "she".

[popeyewhite]

TTwiggy said:

seems to be a male POV.

Could have equally well been written by a woman I think.

[TTwiggy]

Einion Yrth said:

Actually, unless my reading comprehension is seriously awry, "he" is in fact "she".

I've tried to clear this up, but got no response. He (or she) seems very 'keen' on this subject though. Ten posts to date and 2 of them concern 'false rape' issues!

[popeyewhite]

Einion Yrth said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Tryke3 said:

Kinderpup said:

NO, NO, NO and just in case anyone isn't sure, absolutely bloody not. If she made the choice as a mature, intelligent (?), consenting adult to drink enough alcohol to impair her judgement then she has no right to blame others for her bad decisions. Woman as well as men must take responsibility for their own actions, we scream bloody equality on everything else and expect, no DEMAND to be treated the same as men, yet when we make a bad life decision we expect to be able to blame someone else, usually the man involved. This is wrong and should be thrown out of court.

Sorry rant over, this type of behaviour make my blood boil.......

Only when this happens to your daughter, mother or sister you have the right to have a idiotic rant on the internet

Actually, I think he has the right to have an idiotic rant whenever he wishes. There's no law against stupidity.

Actually, unless my reading comprehension is seriously awry, "he" is in fact "she".

For heaven's sake don't point out the anti feminist-zealotry overtones that was a central point to the post as well.