Eva Wiseman states "In real life false allegations of rape are incredibly rare". This is wrong.
Coming from someone who was wrongly convicted of sex offences you might say "he would say that" or even more likely, in this discreetly censored media today, simply ignore me. But the truth is - as usual - neither one extreme nor the other. It's the definition of the word that has become blurred. Unfortunately Eva looks at the recent CPS study and fails to see the reality; many falsely accused are convicted. Many false allegations are dismissed early, when they are shown to be wrong. Many claims are the result of misunderstandings, drink or drugs, genuine delusion, desire for revenge or sympathy, greed for cash or compensation. Yes; in a 17 month period, there were 5,651 prosecutions for rape (how many resulted in wrongful convictions? We shall never know). And only 35 for false allegations (a very difficult prosecution). Her conclusions, and those of the CPS, are easily made but incorrect. Her definition of "victim" probably does not include victims of false allegations or, worse, victims of wrongful convictions who will never be able to prove they didn't do something.

It looks as if people are beginning to realise that the Savile complaints are largely invention, so questions about the safety of convictions must follow, surely?

That is a sterling letter, JK. The last sentence is pure gold. Thank you for writing it and posting it here. Let's hope it gets published.