Auto Amazon Links: No products found. Blocked by captcha.
In early 2020, Ruth took the difficult step of reporting to the police that she had been raped by her then-partner, a serving police officer, seven months after their relationship ended. What she did not anticipate was that, instead of her ex-partner being charged, she herself would be accused of fabricating the allegation. Ruth, whose real name has been changed to protect her identity, faced charges of perverting the course of justice—a serious offence that can carry a life sentence. The legal battle that followed extended over several years before she was ultimately found not guilty.
Ruth’s experience highlights a rarely seen aspect of rape allegations in the UK. According to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), only a very small number of people are prosecuted annually for making false claims of rape. Historical data from 2011-2012 reveal that while thousands of rape prosecutions occurred, only a handful pertained to false accusations. The current CPS policy stresses the importance of handling such allegations carefully and indicates that charging decisions must be reviewed at the highest levels of authority. Despite this, Ruth’s case saw serious procedural questions raised, including concerns about the reliance on a covertly recorded audio clip made by her ex-partner.
The circumstances surrounding the allegation were complex. Ruth described the sexual encounter as one in which she reluctantly consented under specific conditions—most crucially that her partner should cease immediately if she expressed pain. She asserts that she withdrew her consent during the encounter and experienced acute pain, which led her to seek medical care soon afterward. Her ex-partner denied the rape and countered her claim with an audio file secretly recorded during the incident, which Warwickshire Police said suggested consensual sex due to apparent laughter and consent being audible in the background. However, the recording’s credibility was later challenged during the trial.
When the trial began in 2023, prosecution lawyers leaned heavily on the recording and inconsistencies in Ruth’s WhatsApp messages to argue she had fabricated the allegation. Yet when Ruth’s barrister played the tape in court, the jury heard her voice clearly expressing pain and protest while background noises thought to suggest enjoyment were actually sourced from a pornographic film playing in the background. This revelation shifted the courtroom atmosphere dramatically. The defence’s argument focused on Ruth’s conditional consent being violated, which under UK law renders the act non-consensual. In the end, after just over an hour of deliberation, the jury acquitted Ruth of perverting the course of justice. The judge subsequently questioned the handling of the case by the police and CPS, recommending that the original rape investigation be reopened. Ruth, while disappointed that her ex-partner was not prosecuted, remained steadfast that reporting the alleged rape was the right choice for herself and others
Read the full article from The BBC here: Read More
Auto Amazon Links: No products found. Blocked by captcha.