Promoted heavily by media (great stories), police (easy boost for conviction rates) and CPS (we prosecute rapists) - I predicted that the false allegations industry would be the crime of the century when it happened to me 14 years ago.

Read Ben's story in the Mail on Sunday; this is happening to hundreds of innocent men and women now - not just high profile celebrities.

Normally not for greed or profit but for revenge or genuine memory changes (historic claims), often the result of misunderstandings or use of drink or drugs - this can only grow and grow until someone in politics (Nigel Evans?) does something about wasting money that should go on solving or preventing real crime - or in dealing with the aftermath.

You'll notice Ben asks for anonymity until charged? That won't work as the police will simply charge people on arrest (they can then decide not to proceed after investigation). The publicity provokes further allegations (whether false or true). That has always been the problem. The relationship between media and police (something Lord Leveson didn't want to hear). And the valid point; multiple rapists can get caught that way. But it doesn't take into account the vast majority of claims provoked will be false - usually exaggerated, sometimes totally invented; I know, I've been there.


www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2664619...-long-nightmare.html

[T]his is happening to hundreds of innocent men and women now - not just high profile celebrities.

How can you be sure it wasn't happening to hundreds of innocent men (and women?) all along but we didn't hear about it because they weren't celebrities.

The community of the wrongly accused (COTWA) documents a long history of false allegations of rape or sexual abuse mostly against men. www.cotwa.info/

JK2006 wrote:
You'll notice Ben asks for anonymity until charged? That won't work as the police will simply charge people on arrest (they can then decide not to proceed after investigation).

Are you sure it won't help at all? There surely must be some procedural ramifications to placing a charge. Besides, don't they need to consult with the CPS before charging: likelihood of conviction, public interest test and all that.

Hopefully Ben Sullivan's situation and campaign will result in the law being changed back to anonymity for all - accusers and accused.
If the law protects the accuser, it MUST equally protect the accused.
Publicity AFTER a guilty verdict is acceptable, but certainly not before.

Good and fair points; yes it WAS happening to innocent "ordinary" people in the past but someone (two days before the government was forced by Europe to equalise the ages of consent) realised 14 years ago that local coverage was OK but how about trying it with a national celebrity and getting national coverage. Yes the police DO have to get CPS permission to charge but they would find a way around that I'm sure. And, of course, there's always (helpful) Twitter!

Gnomo wrote:
Hopefully Ben Sullivan's situation and campaign will result in the law being changed back to anonymity for all - accusers and accused.
If the law protects the accuser, it MUST equally protect the accused.
Publicity AFTER a guilty verdict is acceptable, but certainly not before.

I don't think publicity after conviction is always helpful either, because it very often identifies the victim.