Almost everyone, especially the woman's supporters, is saying "held for 8 hours without a lawyer - a disgrace". But surely she was meant to be a VICTIM; being interviewed as a victim; shown evidence that contradicted her account and being asked for clarification - as a victim. Victims do not need or want a lawyer present, in most cases. After enduring half an hour on each RAPIST (tea and coffee probably provided) and being shown video evidence, other witness statements, she retracts a few false claims. Then onto those she admits having had sex with. More video. Hours tick past. She starts to wish she had never started this but is still, technically, a victim. Then she decides to retract all her false claims. Wants to go home. Eight hours. Police warn her; she could be prosecuted for lying. Does she want a lawyer? No; she just wants to retract, get out of there, forget the whole thing. She'll sign anything (who cares who wrote it?).

Especially if she knows one of her victims was underage. Brits are nervous about being revealed as paedophiles.

Does this scenario sound ridiculous?

The scenario is possible but what is missing is: why did she go to Police in the first place, especially if concerned that one of the males was 15?

This is lacking for me psycholgically from your possible scenario. And it also seems to me that contacting police abroad would also take even more consideration for a teenager...

This is not my equivalent of "no smoke without fire" (as none of us can possibly k ow the truth) just joining in the psychological speculation!

In that scenario; she would have realised what the video showed and the legal trouble she could get into if it went viral. Certainly now she wouldn't want UK police involved (if she did have sex with an underage) but it's now out of her control. Cyprus Police alone must be fuming; so must be the Judge.

Still don't get it.

She goes to the Police not believing she has been assaulted because she knows there is a film, in an attempt to discredit a film that shows her consenting?

She goes not believing she has been assaulted but unaware of the film at this stage. Still, what is her motive initially?

I can see the motive for someone targetting a celeb for money but whatever way I look at this I can't see a motive for reporting this, other than a belief she had been assaulted...

A possible motive; that someone is going to arrest her for having sex with an underage boy if the footage goes viral online. Anticipating that possibility (and media/feminists against her as a paedo); she decides to allege rape. Later, seeing the amount of evidence against her, she retracts.

Ok, I can see the possibility from that angle, but think that more plausible would be a concern that a viral film would be seen by family, friends, work colleagues, boyfriend more likely a concern than future arrest...

Ghastly Victoria Derbyshire fails to question the woman's lawyer about whether or not she had sex with an underage boy. Funny how media so often seems to avoid questions on the wrong side of the agenda.

wyot wrote:

She goes to the Police not believing she has been assaulted because she knows there is a film, in an attempt to discredit a film that shows her consenting?

She goes not believing she has been assaulted but unaware of the film at this stage. Still, what is her motive initially?


It's the first, I believe. The story has never been that she was unaware of being filmed (as far as I know - it's changed so much that it's hard to know what's what).

Advocates for the woman's status as innocent and a rape victim say that the video only proves consent to the sex depicted in the video. The claim is that once the camera stopped, other events followed that were non-consensual. But some of the men/boys accused of the off-camera events had solid alibi evidence putting them elsewhere. What a mess...

Not just a mess Randall but possibly another example of the thousands of false allegations each year.

Underage sex I can not see anything reported that indicates a deliberate act of underage sex at all.


The reported articles seem to indicate "the usual", to varying degrees, both the girl and guys are from society sector of teenagers "acting badly",
irresponsible. So I have no sympathy for the girl or the guys and only hope for them personally they learn from this and consider their actions in the future. Some of the guys are noted as acknowledging their actions - lacked self control and respect and others want to sue. Girls should be made aware of such groups of guys but will they listen. Who knows! Guys should be taught to respect and avoid easy women out respect for the women and themselves. Why all the court action and heavy handed police involvement is always hard to know. Maybe the way it had to be. UK could of gone on for months but the 3% level seems to indicate the ridiculous cases no longer pursued.
But I have seen cases where irresponsible behaviour (with evidence) is not dealt with and the activists are correct in their concern!

It would be better if the situation were judged to the applicable legal standard of proof, according to the evidence that actually exists, whether of rape or of making a false complaint.

NOT what could have happened when the cameras were off. NOT what the medical evidence could be consistent with, without it excluding other causes of injury. Certainly NOT prejudging a complainant as truthful or the accused as guilty of rape. And likewise, NOT prejudging that she's some kind of lying harlot and the boys were cherubs.

I think the case has been fascinating in illuminating a society very confused about the subject...As you say Randall the pejorative pre judgments either about the complainant or the initially accused is concerning.

It is not just this subject but any: nuance and care for evidential detail is seen increasingly as morally suspect, where it is even acknowledged as existing. Polemic is all.

Where it all leads - and far beyond the reaches of this subject - must be speculation for another thread...