£80000 for civil rape conviction

[MB140]

Not sure how I feel about this.

Man sued for £80000 damages in civil case after being found not guilty in criminal case.

WTF. I hope he appeals and wins.

How long before there are more fictitious claims for a quick payout.

Woman wins £80,000 in damages from man cleared of raping her in St Andrews

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-ea...

[Jasandjules]

The burden of proof in each is different.....

[xjay1337]

So hang on, bloke can be named and thus ruined but the woman is not named for legal reasons?

[Derek Smith]

What's the problem? She made a claim for damages and won. Isn't that what the civil courts are for?

Why do you hope he wins, especially when he wasn't cleared of rape as you suggest.? The criminal court found the case 'not proved'.

Good on her. She's got nothing out of this evidently, other than a sense of justice.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Derek Smith said:

What's the problem? She made a claim for damages and won. Isn't that what the civil courts are for?

Why do you hope he wins, especially when he wasn't cleared of rape as you suggest.? The criminal court found the case 'not proved'.

Good on her. She's got nothing out of this evidently, other than a sense of justice.

+1

[anonymous-user]

xjay1337 said:

So hang on, bloke can be named and thus ruined but the woman is not named for legal reasons?

Nothing to do with gender.

The victim of a sexual offence is automatically granted anonymity.

[KungFuPanda]

Derek Smith said:

What's the problem? She made a claim for damages and won. Isn't that what the civil courts are for?

Why do you hope he wins, especially when he wasn't cleared of rape as you suggest.? The criminal court found the case 'not proved'.

Good on her. She's got nothing out of this evidently, other than a sense of justice.

She got nothing except a sense of justice and £80k.

[Derek Smith]

KungFuPanda said:

She got nothing except a sense of justice and £80k.

Best to read the article before posting.

[carinaman]

KungFuPanda said:

Derek Smith said:

What's the problem? She made a claim for damages and won. Isn't that what the civil courts are for?

Why do you hope he wins, especially when he wasn't cleared of rape as you suggest.? The criminal court found the case 'not proved'.

Good on her. She's got nothing out of this evidently, other than a sense of justice.

She got nothing except a sense of justice and £80k.

In the article she says she's unlikely to see much of that due to legal costs.

[MB140]

Derek Smith said:

What's the problem? She made a claim for damages and won. Isn't that what the civil courts are for?

Why do you hope he wins, especially when he wasn't cleared of rape as you suggest.? The criminal court found the case 'not proved'.

Good on her. She's got nothing out of this evidently, other than a sense of justice.

Guilt is a binary subject you either are guilty or aren’t guilty. Not proven is not guilty. Proven is guilty. You can’t be partly guilty.

[FredClogs]

David Goodwill always seemed something of a misnomer, if you ask me.

The Scottish system of "not proven" should not be misunderstood and I think it would be a good idea to adopt in in the rest of the UK, especially for rape cases.

[vonhosen]

MB140 said:

Derek Smith said:

What's the problem? She made a claim for damages and won. Isn't that what the civil courts are for?

Why do you hope he wins, especially when he wasn't cleared of rape as you suggest.? The criminal court found the case 'not proved'.

Good on her. She's got nothing out of this evidently, other than a sense of justice.

Guilt is a binary subject you either are guilty or aren’t guilty. Not proven is not guilty. Proven is guilty. You can’t be partly guilty.

Whether you are in fact guilty or not has nothing to do with a trial.
All the trial determines is if you are proven guilty in the eyes of law, not guilty in fact.

[singlecoil]

carinaman said:

KungFuPanda said:

Derek Smith said:

What's the problem? She made a claim for damages and won. Isn't that what the civil courts are for?

Why do you hope he wins, especially when he wasn't cleared of rape as you suggest.? The criminal court found the case 'not proved'.

Good on her. She's got nothing out of this evidently, other than a sense of justice.

She got nothing except a sense of justice and £80k.

In the article she says she's unlikely to see much of that due to legal costs.

And that's if he actually has £80,000. Not many 23 year old blokes can put their hands on that kind of money.

[MB140]

singlecoil said:

carinaman said:

KungFuPanda said:

Derek Smith said:

What's the problem? She made a claim for damages and won. Isn't that what the civil courts are for?

Why do you hope he wins, especially when he wasn't cleared of rape as you suggest.? The criminal court found the case 'not proved'.

Good on her. She's got nothing out of this evidently, other than a sense of justice.

She got nothing except a sense of justice and £80k.

In the article she says she's unlikely to see much of that due to legal costs.

And that's if he actually has £80,000. Not many 23 year old blokes can put their hands on that kind of money.

I’m sure they would put a claim against any future earning he makes so he will pay it one way or another.

[poo at Paul's]

"during the evening she drank four cans of cider, a bottle of rose wine, a bottle of champagne and three glasses of sparkling wine mixed with vodka"


That's a serious amount of booze for anyone, never mind an 18 year old. So on the one hand court clearly believed she was not competent to consent....? And yet able to remember the details to be seen as "cogent, compelling and persuasive".

Unsavoury episode indeed. No mention of the amount of booze he had consumed. If he was similarly ratarsed, could that be used in mitigation of straightforward defence? Was it used in such a way at the criminal trial?

As the father of a daughter, I shudder at the thought of her drinking so much in one sitting so to speak. I'd be paralytic after the cider and bottle of rose!


Sad case all round.

[Saleen836]

I guess the guy spends the rest of his life paying off the court order?
Will he have to go through the rest of his life filling out income/expenditure forms everytime his situation changes, if he has a child for example?
Guessing he will never be able to buy his own house so will spend the rest of his life renting, unless of course his parents are loaded and he can get them to pay the debt!

[cat with a hat]

This is bonkers in my opinion.

The story doesn't really make that much sense either. They were seen kissing, he was thrown out.. But some how she ended outside her flat with him and also couldn't remember anything from the night

[KungFuPanda]

MB140 said:

singlecoil said:

carinaman said:

KungFuPanda said:

Derek Smith said:

What's the problem? She made a claim for damages and won. Isn't that what the civil courts are for?

Why do you hope he wins, especially when he wasn't cleared of rape as you suggest.? The criminal court found the case 'not proved'.

Good on her. She's got nothing out of this evidently, other than a sense of justice.

She got nothing except a sense of justice and £80k.

In the article she says she's unlikely to see much of that due to legal costs.

And that's if he actually has £80,000. Not many 23 year old blokes can put their hands on that kind of money.

I’m sure they would put a claim against any future earning he makes so he will pay it one way or another.

Not sure if it's different in Scotland but in the UK, if you win your civil claim, the Defendant has to pay your costs too?

[anonymous-user]

MB140 said:

Not sure how I feel about this.



WTF. I hope he appeals and wins.

Didn't take long to find out how you felt about it .

Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 6th October 01:36

[MB140]

desolate said:

MB140 said:

Not sure how I feel about this.



WTF. I hope he appeals and wins.

Didn't take long to find out how you felt about it .

Edited by desolate on Saturday 6th October 01:36

Sorry I didn’t explain myself so well. What I meant.

I’m not sure how I feel about someone who is cleared in a criminal case ( not getting in to an argument of not proven so he isn’t innocent. I’ve expressed my opinion already) but is then dragged in to a civil court (as I understand has a lower burden of proof) to have a second bite of the cherry so to speak along with a chance of financial gain for something that has already been proven not guilty.

I hope he appeals because.

She took him home, she followed him out the club he was ejected from. He wasn’t found guilty in a criminal court.


ETA, I don’t want to downplay rape it’s a serious offence and I feel truly sorry for the victims but it seems the burden of consent is getting ridiculous. Soon you will need a signed contract before you buy a lady a drink to prove she is sober and consents.

Having seen the consequences of a vindictive woman falsely accusing my stepdad I am very wary of false allegations nowadays. As posted earlier by someone else. She drank a st load of alcohol, supposedly can’t remember leaving the club, can’t remember how she got to her home. But can remember and can be seen as believeable in a civil case. It just doesn’t add up. Also as said previously. Was he just as stfaced as her.


My step dads case:

1) My stepdad and his wife separated 20 years ago. They divorce she takes the cash he keeps the house. She disappears abroad and left my stepdad to raise their son.

2) He meets my mum 10 years ago and he moves from Crew down to Nottingham, his son wants to stay in crew as he has a job so he stays in my stepdads house free of charge.

3) Toyboy lover in Portugal turfs stepdads exwife out on her ass (she’s been playing around), so being penniless and homeless contacts her son who agrees for her to move in with him (my stepdads house).

4) Stepdad doesn’t mind as the son is stil living there free of charge but then son meets a girl and he gets offered a job down south so moves out.

5) stepdads Ex wife now deciders it’s her house, she was never compensated properly in the divorce and she’s not moving any ware.

6) 4 year legal battle ensues to the point a judge gives her 10% and must be out the house in x months after it’s sold (think it was 3 months). To which she agrees. 6 months later she isn’t going anywhere refuses to let estate agents in to the house (she’s living there rent free). Cue more legal ranglings until a judge has enough and gives her a definite date to vacate and as a kicker tells her that a market rate of rent will be deducted from her 10% for each month she is living there.

7) Three hours after the judgement she is in a police station accusing my stepdad of raping her some 30 years previously (remember back then you couldn’t rape your wife)

8) 2 years later. Multiple visits to the police ( whom my stepdad says from day one had decided he was guilty were nasty evil little vindictive bds (one even said while escorting him to the toilet once that he was sure he would get sent down and get raped inside himself). Multiple interviews £20k in legal bills his court date was here.

9) Opening day the judge ask my stepdads barrister if he was ready to start. “No I haven’t had the following bits of evidence disclosed from the cps”. More legal wrangling and cps are told to find the evidence before lunchtime. One being her medicle records.

(Remember the national news scandal early this year about certain cps cases with the cps withholding evidence, my stepdads case is one of the cases being reviewed as to why the cps had the evidence all along but never disclosed it)

10) Surprise surprise cps have all the stuff in a box they just happens to find down stairs. “Sorry judge”. Court proceedings delayed for 24 hours to allow barrister to read documents.

11) My stepdads barrister points out that from her medical records (she was diagnosed with mental health issues way before they divorced) that at the time of the alleged rape the ex wife was infact in a government mental health facility and drugged up to her eyeballs on all sorts of antipsychotic medications and had been for nearly theee months.

12) Case is thrown out, judge gives cps a right earful and apologised to my stepdad.

It was quite clearly from the start a vindictive evil woman trying to get one over because she lost the case over the house (to which she was still living in at the point of the rape trial).



So what’s been the effect of this 3 year ordeal.

My stepdad is now on medication for anxiety and depression. He went from being a very bubbly outgoing person to a virtual recluse scared of his own shadow. He now virtually won’t talk to another woman without someone else present for fear of what the think of him or being accused of anything else.

It’s clearly taken a toll on my mother as well. Who has stood by him. It nearly bankrupted them and has forced them to remortgage the house to cover the legal costs.

He has lost all contact with his son who believed his mother.

Around 9 months ago she was finally dragged kicking screaming and biting the bailiffs as they removed her from the house. It sold a couple of months ago. Basically she never got a penny because of the rent deductions. Infact she owes him money for rent which he can’t be bothered to go after. My mother on the other hand is livid and wants revenge.

To top it off she had virtually destroyed the inside of the home. Holes in walls you name it. Cost about £10k to get it back to standard and my stepdad and dad (best friends and in their retirement) went and did a lot of the work.


So am I careful and suspicious when I hear someone accused of rape. You bet I am. I have sympathy for the genuine victims. It’s an abhorrent crime not normally about the sex but the control and fear. But I am also rueful about someone who is drinking to excess, takes someone home gets into bed with them (all willingly) and then in effect I changes thier mind in the morning.

I’m sorry but it is practically impossible to prove what went on once two consenting adults are in bed together it’s a pure he said she said situation and you are in effect ending someone’s life with a rape conviction with no evidence other than someone’s word who was happy to get themselves in to bed in the first place.

In the case of the bbc article posted in the op I just don’t see enough evidence to support the outcome.

Anyways sorry for the rant. It’s an emotive subject and one I have seen the false accusation side of first hand.

Edited by MB140 on Saturday 6th October 08:02