Rape and Privacy

[Aletheia]

"Let the opposing defence lawyer read out and use against you, your last 7 years worth of txt and email messages, or give up being able to prosecute the rapist. "

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49072302

Imagine this in a theft case.

Police officer to rich white man: Sir, we caught the man who broken into your house and stole your paintings. He claims you gave them to him and it was an entirely consensual act. We need you to hand over all your message from the last 7 years to prove you are not his friend, or we refuse to take him to court.

[Pjmm]

That's the UK. And it's ridiculous. How do they even get seven years of phone texts? I don't keep mine or my emails. Well if they want to be bored with mine have at it. But it is just a way to attempt to discredit the victim.

[Hot4Tchr-Bieg]

There's multiple levels of super-not okay there.

But the obvious one to me...the one that should make it so this policy cannot exist... is that it potentially interferes with other people's privacy. My phone is full of texts about other people's children, including specifics of medical conditions, special education accommodations, absent fathers...and if you go back 7 years, I couldn't even say what else! Who is responsible for making sure that stuff is not disclosed? Who pays for the redacting? Who is liable if something that's not supposed to be made public is read?

[LiveWhatULove]

I suppose I sound like a conspiracy theorist, BUT I have always assumed & still assume my emails, my texts, and even my conversations in my own home are NOT private. I accept that my words have the chance to be "hacked" and made public.

So the threat & manipulation, would not sway me in any way. I would try to have legal representation on my behalf do what they could to assure confidentiality, as I don't think the entire world would need to hear all 7 years, but so be it, if justice is found.

[AllofFive19]

Revolting

[Deleted User 670]

It's another spin on blaming the victim.

[jas]

While that is extreme, I think we in the US have gotten away with the "innocent until PROVEN guilty". It's been guilty until proven innocent and that's not how it should be.

[Traci_Momof2]

While that is extreme, I think we in the US have gotten away with the "innocent until PROVEN guilty". It's been guilty until proven innocent and that's not how it should be.

This is something I thought of. There needs to be proof before the accused can be declared guilty in the name of the law. How do they prove something like that, especially if it was two people alone? I mean, I think if I was the victim and providing my messages would help prove him guilty, then I would be more concerned with proving it than with a sense of privacy. I mean, I feel for rape victims because I know it's a very difficult crime to prove, but we can't just ignore the law. There has to be some sort of proof of his guilt. That's how we operate.

[Deleted User 1018]

This is a rather extreme measure to rule out false accusations