They’re provided with no context at all. They may have happened years ago, and be listed specifically as an attack on the character of the accuser, which is an old-school tactic that led to anonymity laws.
They may be much more recent, and as such relevant to the police, whose job it is to investigate, and to the jury whose job it is to deliberate. They’re certainly not relevant to you or me, and the OP is a question about why the accuser is provided anonymity.
According to the woman:
She had flirted with the alleged rapist, met up for drinks, was assaulted, became pregnant, had an abortion.
As to the question of anonymity, I have never dealt with a case involving even a minor celebrity. In general it is a matter of public record who is arrested. Nothing is released during the middle of an investigation. Almost all police reports are public record but they are not automatically headed over to the press. The press has the right to access our public records but it depends on how motivated they are. The last press release we did on a sexual assault was an arrest due to accusations by adults about something that happened while they were children. We were hoping that other victims might come forward when they saw it.
This is why it is hard for someone on the outside to come to a conclusion. All the information is not out there. I just glanced at a few articles not really following the story. But one account had it going like this, met alleged rapist, met up for drinks, took him to her office because her boyfriend was home, was allegedly assaulted, sent text messages as to when they were going to meet again, realized she was pregnant, had an abortion, when the boyfriend found out told him she was raped, months later boyfriend confronts alleged attackers father. Its obvious that all the information is not out and the information that is out is coming from anonymous sources.
Yeah, the anonymous sources are coming from the NYPD, right? Not exactly where I’d want to go to get my unbiased factual information. This chick is already fucked.
I think just the opposite. For one the NYPD is not investigating because of the possible conflict of interest. This is a high profile case. I could see how some might suspect it would get squashed before it came out. Now its too late. No one in the prosecutor’s office will want to risk their jobs for someone they don’t know and has nothing to do with their life or career. They all know this will be scrutinized by the press and everyone else. If anything they are going to dot their i’s and cross their t’s more than usual. They know they have a spotlight on them. Even his father is going to stay far away because any hint of undue influence will destroy his career. It looks at this point that it is being handled exactly by the book.
If any of what I am reading is correct I will guess the case is going to come down to what was in those text messages they exchanged after the incident. But that’s just a guess based on very incomplete information.
Handling by the book is not leaking info that’s anonymous and unsubstantiated.
And you have no idea who the sources were. Very possible it was no one directly involved in the investigation. Any clerk with access to the reports could be making extra money. But that really isn’t important except to those reading newspapers. What is important is how the prosecutor’s office investigates it.
It’s still unprofessional and not ‘by the book’, unless ‘by the book’ means ‘throwing it for the accused’.
You are reading way more into than is in public. I have seen nothing that doesn’t appear to be factual. Nothing particularly inflammatory about the accusers background. Just brief mentions about her job. If what is out there isn’t truthful that’s one thing. At this point we don’t even know if her boyfriend is leaking anything too.
I have to agree with Der Trihs, on this one. What in the world makes anybody think his post was anti-woman?
I’m just as happy to have a dogpile on **DT **as the next person, but, CitizenPained and the one who followed are way, way off on this one.
What would you think if the accused rapist was you?
lol. Like I said, if you boil it all down objectively, rape is a matter of how the person feels about the event afterward. In this case the catalyst that changed her state wasn’t “Kelly not making her rape-cakes”, it was “her BF finding out and accusing her of cheating”. Same “Buyer’s Remorse” concept in action though.
Don’t worry, I’m not back. Just passing through. 
99% of rapists are male. Most male rape is perpetrated by other men, *not *by women. This is not male-bashing, it is a cold fact. That doesn’t mean that 99% of men are rapists; in fact, that statistic doesn’t even *imply *anything about how many men are rapists at all. It’s quite possible to hold that rapists are usually men and victims are usually women without being misandrist. Pretending that men and women are equal when it comes to forced or coerced sex *is *anti-female rhetoric. Denying this *is *misogynistic. Why? Men are physically stronger than women, and more likely to commit violence to get what they want. Women raping men generally involves a weapon or age/power differential. When all other things are equal (age, power, and no weaponry), and we are told there was a heterosexual relationship in which sex was coerced, we are nearly always right to assume that the male was the coercer.
There is an imbalance in sex drive between males and females in the “statutory age range” (around 14-17). Males are FAR more likely to be the coercers than the coerced in that range, even when the parties involved are the same age. If an underage girl says to her boyfriend, “Hey, I wanna fuck you!” chances are good that the guy will be happy about it. The chances are not as good when the genders are reversed. Female teens don’t usually force sex, they just break up and find another boyfriend. The reason behind this has to do with hormones (chiefly testosterone), the smaller chance of females committing violence to get what they want, and let’s not forget consequences. If a teen guy has sex, he doesn’t have to worry about getting pregnant, deciding whether to get an abortion, missing out on college, and possibly giving up the next 18 years of his life to raise a child. Maybe that seems like a little thing to someone who isn’t paying attention, but avoiding pregnancy is one of the major reasons teen girls avoid sex. For a guy to have sex during his teen years, it takes a lot less risk. Ergo, they’re more willing than women to propose it, coerce it, and/or commit rape. Acknowledging this is not anti-man; it’s common sense.
That said, I *agree *with you that teens who have consensual sex ought not to be punished and labeled abusers/abused for it. The above only applies in cases where rape or coercion occurs. It’s certainly possible for an 18 year old guy and his 17 year old girlfriend to have consensual, non-coerced sex. It happens every day. When the girl’s parents press charges in those cases, it makes a mockery of real rape victims.
Correction: 99% of *reported *rapists. For obvious reasons (and your cite states it quite plainly), men who get raped by women tend to not be taken seriously if they even dare reporting it at all.
Rape by deception is also a thing, you know. Also by “negotiation” you could say (e.g. “fuck me or I’ll tell your secret”). Coerced sex does not necessarily imply violence.
I remember having a class disscussion on this in college. We also had a rape crisis counselor visiting the class. She kept insisting over and over again that in if a male was intoxicated enought to be unable to consent to sex he’d also be unable to maintain an erection. :dubious: She seemed pretty offended the subject was even brought up. Considering her center did have programs for male rape victims (raped by other men) that was a profoundly idiotic thing for her to say. I’d have called her out on it, but I really didn’t want to reveal exactly how I knew she was wrong. 
No, the cite states 99% is their best possible estimate, after taking underreporting into account. Lots of females also do not report rapes perpetrated by males.
Yeah, that’s much too close to “WAG” to base anything on, be it a reasoning or an entire worldview.
Well, it’s pretty scary when you have a counselor getting offended at anything said. Counselors who get offended at something like that are the same kind that say things like looking at a woman for to long is a form of rape; all that kind of nonsense.