British Authorities Will Now Use The Sexual Histories Of Men Accused Of Rape To Better Convict Them

Prosecutors will be asked to focus on a male suspect’s previous conduct in other relationships in order to find any relevant evidence.

— Britain’s The Telegraph reporting on the atrocious changes to “rape” prosecution in the United Kingdom

Scraping the bottom of the barrel has taken on a twisted new meaning in Western rape trials. Why? Because Britain’s Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is allowing prosecutors to use “evidence” of a man’s previous sexual relationships with women to try and convict him of raping a completely different woman. Our favorite witch-hunter, CPS head Alison Saunders, is at it again.

Even when men are convicted, rape trials are quite remarkable for the extreme paucity of objective evidence they provide. Unlike, say, burglary cases, which typically have more concrete proof like CCTV footage or fingerprints, allegations of rape are invariably “he said, she said” battles over the testimonies of the accuser, who is anonymous close to 100% of the time, and the accused.

Alison Saunders.

With the existence of conviction-worthy evidence already in doubt, fairness for the accused will in many situations be utterly destroyed due to the admission of allegations, more tenuous still, of “bad behavior” or “control and coercion” from previous relationships with other women.

Bad break-ups are perhaps the norm nowadays and it is to be expected that a man will have a number of prior sexual partners he cannot stand, let alone wants to ever see again.

An accuser’s sexual history is usually inadmissible

Prosecutorial changes are lessening any demands for proper evidence and permitting women to get away with unsubstantiated allegations.

Alison Saunders and a number of media hacks allege that these changes are the outcome of female accusers’ own histories being delved into during rape trials. The exoneration of falsely accused soccer player Ched Evans is the only one of these cases really being cited. Yet such excuses for further diluting the standard of proof to secure a conviction are just that—excuses.

In the Ched Evans debacle, special permission had to be given for the female accuser’s past to be examined in the retrial. A general prohibition exists against using a woman’s sexual history in court as a result of the terribly named “rape shield” laws. The practical implication of this is that an otherwise promiscuous woman can experience buyer’s remorse and cry “rape” against a man, all while pretending that she’s not the kind of girl to engage in casual sex. The lack of a requirement for real evidence makes these claims especially advantageous in covering up female infidelity.

Moreover, if a woman’s sexual history were really admissible, the authorities would go to the trouble of naming her alongside the accused. This would enable a robust discussion about her antecedence. After all, the accused man’s history is debated ad nauseam and in a defamatory manner through both the mainstream media and social media. Nevertheless, a girl is almost always anonymous and the man she is accusing is almost always named.

If the evidence from the accuser is already so bad and non-existent, how bad and non-existent will the evidence of former girlfriends be?

Wow, what excellent evidence for a “rape” in 2017–the ex-girlfriend from five or ten years ago.

Plus, how relevant will it be? An ex-boyfriend might have told his then girlfriend he didn’t want her to go out clubbing without him. Of course, it’s completely normal that a man wouldn’t want his woman out at venues where other men will undoubtedly try to grind against her ass or make-out with her. Three years and a bad break-up later, however, and much of the time a woman is going to portray such behavior as “control and coercion.”

More puzzling still is how a man’s apparent “misdeeds” with old flames can be collapsed onto a rape allegation involving a completely different girl a long time later. So, he’s said to have raised his voice during arguments in 2014–what the heck does this have to do with “rape” in 2017? Obviously, feminists think it has quite a lot to do with it. But for those people interested in cause and effect, not to mention robust judicial procedures, whether a man goes to prison for years should be determined by proof that a particular thing happened at a particular time, not if he’s on good terms with women from his past.

Even exonerated men will be defamed for life because of these changes

Prison or not, men affected by these changes will be branded as guilty for life.

Given that their names have remained in the public record for years before these changes, the plight of men exonerated by courts has been bad enough. It is only going to get worse with this new focus of “rape” prosecutions. The use of character assassins in the form of jilted lovers and/or bitter ex-girlfriends will solidify further the lifetime’s worth of stigma facing any men taken through Western court systems over unsupported claims of sexual assault.

And then there’s the absolute hell for men found “guilty.” Conviction quotas for sexual offenses are the order of the day in 2017. The quantity of convicted men, not the quality of the evidence put forward to convict them, is what matters. To achieve the necessary numbers, perverse evidentiary standards like “factoring in the opinions of your ex-girlfriends” are being pulled from the world of gossip and jammed into what are meant to be fair and facts-based criminal trials. In other words, Don’t Bang Britain.

Read More: The #MeToo Campaign Compares Not Replying To A Girl’s Texts With Raping Her

59 thoughts on “British Authorities Will Now Use The Sexual Histories Of Men Accused Of Rape To Better Convict Them”

  1. Prosecuting lawyer: “Defendant Roosh has previously written that rape should be legal. It is obvious that he is guilty.”
    Judge: “Correct. Guilty as charged. The poor slag he raped is a hero.”
    Well, I don’t think I’ll be having sex in Britain anytime soon.

    1. On the contrary. You just need to get raped by a woman. Then you can play the victim forever like they do. And you could put hashtags on the internet that advertise that your junk was painfully violated by someone who found you arousing.
      “See. Someone found me arousing”

        1. Its has been said that historically the expansion of the British Empire was mainly to just get away from British women…the world’s most disgusting. HIStory ftw.

    2. fact is , as long as the womb is always the filter that kids are seen through BECAUSE ITS BY FEMINISMS DESIGN AND PROGRAMMING.
      as long as feminism can hold the position of power over childrens lives HOSTAGE TO WOMEN and their feelings, FEMINISM, will keep its deadly grip on society. otherwise it would be soundly beaten out of it. until gynocentrism is confronted snd exposed as feminisms cancerous tentacles, its death grip on men will not be severed.

  2. Easy solution: Refuse to administer dick. Period. Save your money all year for a call girl or a trip to Amsterdam.

    1. Tell that to the guy that spent two years fighting a rape allegation due to walking past that 60 GoT star at a London train station. He did nothing, and it was on CCTV that he did nothing, and he went through hell.

  3. I’m confused. Untold numbers, possibly over a thousand young girls were abused in Rotherham and the authorities looked the other way due to political correctness. Yet local guy Nigel, who picks up a gal at the pub takes her home and gives her a good screw could be looking at a legal nightmare. It’s even worse for him if he is a known “player.” Why don’t the EU nations just cut to the chase and make masculinity illegal? Foreigners excluded of course.

  4. I will never travel again to:
    1. USA
    2. UK
    3. NZ
    4. Australia
    5. Canada
    until Anglo-bitches go back to the kitchen.

  5. All these new draconian laws in Europe make me wonder…what is it going to take for these men to take a stand?
    In Britain, you’re going to see things get progressively worse. But dollars to donuts these men won’t ever put their lives on the line to fight back against this tyranny. Instead, they’ll cower in fear that they won’t be the next victim, all the while going on with their pitiful lives.

    1. Men are too demoralized and detribalized. A big problem is a lot of men, especially in the USA, have this libertarian philosophy that all people are individuals and only the government is the problem. The problem with that is that men are individualistic idiots that don’t stick up for other men, and the other problem is that government is essential to any civilization, and the only reason it is fucked up now is because of the way white men have allowed the nutcases to take control of it. White men fuck each other over so much it is unbelievable. I fucking hate libertarians for this, don’t mind many of their ideas, but these idiots who are always blaming the “du government”, always blaming taxes, always preaching “every man for himself” are the real problems. Denationalizing a nation is the biggest problem. If every white man today decided NO MORE and actually was willing to give up his life for something bigger than himself, than ALL these problems would disappear OVERNIGHT, women would be easily put in their place, immigrants deported, and the government turned back into what it was designed for. This is also why the left hates seeing men organize in any fashion, and will violently attack meet-ups like the one Roosh did. It really is depressing to see libertarian men in this country always talking shit about the Alt Right and how race/immigration doesn’t matter (“it is just du government and taxes, bro”…all while you see the anti-whiteness exploding in this nation. I personally think libertarians are just selfish cowards.

      1. What you said about men being “detribalized” is exactly right. I think men have been conditioned through our media to think this way for years now. This was the preemptive strike against Western men before the hordes of migrants flooded the West and laws created to neuter men were put into play.
        The Left knew there would be push back on these things so they took it upon themselves to rid men of their tribal instincts.

      2. Having said that, libertarians like Lew Rockwell ARE speaking out against mass immigration and anti-white culture. Mises and Hayek were not open borders types.

        1. Dude, most libertarians are retarded, a few may not be when it comes to immigration and anti-white culture, but they are still the most complacent people even when it comes to that. It is that civic nationalism bullshit that they always come up with. Also, I don’t really agree with their economics either…they always support BS free trade deals that make no sense whatsoever, they keep pushing for tax cuts that are absolutely ridiculous, they don’t give a flipping shit about the environment and that pisses me off (I am big into the outdoors, no hippie bullshit), and honestly, one of the big reasons not to let in immigrants is so that you can have some DECENT (not over the top) welfare. People helping and supporting each other is why NATIONS and civilizations formed in the first place. Most Libertarians don’t give a fuck about tribalism, and they fail to see how it is tribalism has to come first, then with that you can create a culture with, you know, individual freedoms, capitalism, whatever. They are just too selfish and retarded, and it is sad because, like with most ideologies in this country, they do make some good points.

        1. @ccc Kind of what we are doing right now…the first step is to wake people up. Once you have enough “woke” people then you can start physically organizing. You cannot build an army of people who do not even know what they are fighting for. The internet is an important tool, lol, the shitlords on the internet probably got Trump elected. You also need to continue to increase your own knowledge on subjects, too many conservatives are not doing that and they are just going down the same path that got Obama elected in the first place. I guarantee you if you ask most conservative today about immigration, racial issues, womens issues they would probably not have much to say about it, but I am sure they would have plenty to say about “My taxes too high BRO”, “Muh, regulations and shit” (even though I doubt they could name one regulation), “Du government BRO”.

    2. What you do in a society like that is bugger it every chance you get. Do not play by the rules; cheat every chance you get. Take a page from the Moooslim playbook. We are the righteous, they are the infidel. Lie, cheat, and steal when dealing with the infidel, but play by honor with the Righteous. Finally, remember the Golden Rule of rogues: don’t get caught.

  6. One look at the pic of Allison Saunders is enough to know why she’s a militant man-hating feminist – nobody with two functional brain cells would try to hit that, no matter how drunk or drugged up. Dollars to dogturds that she’s read ’50 Shades of Grey’ and goes to sleep with her vibrator fantasizing about being coerced in rough play by some hunky man. Unfortunately for her, a good dildo is as close as she’s going to get to being satisfactorily banged! Even then, if the dildo had the ability, it would flee in terror. So she takes it out on all the men who would never hit on her.

  7. Perhaps what inspired the Greek legend of the Amazon women, were men who foresaw what might happen if women were given equal rights to men and taken to the extreme. Eventually the men abandoned them and then you got an all women society.

    1. Even with an all female society, women will still NOT be happy.
      Example is this whole Boy Scouts controversy. There is a club called Girl Scouts, but girls still want to be allowed into the Boy Scouts. They don’t even argue for boys to be allowed in Girl Scouts. Quite frankly, no boy wants to be in the Girl Scout. Now even girls don’t want to either.

  8. The way things are going you’ll have to fill consensuality & confidentiality forms before sex.Women will have to keep a log of who enters.PC is killing sex as we know it

    1. actuality consensuality makes signing that form sound kind of erotic. Are you working for the other side?

      1. So few Western women are even bangable now there is a 1000 man lineup for the ones that are. Compete… for THAT? Have other more fulfilling things to do… like trying out a new whiskey. As in, tonight.

  9. it’s funny how ‘equality’ appears to involve reversing rather than levelling perceived inequalities in power. As the article points out women’s sexual histories are deemed irrelevant but an accused man’s is relevant, just as in the nordic model, prosecuting hookers for soliciting has been replaced with prosecuting men for being solicited. In divorce the principle of equality involves women getting more rather than half. In sentencing, be it for sex crimes or anything else, women get a fraction of the sentence for the same offence. Attempts to get parity in the boardroom is still an urgent priority however women swamping education and teaching, and getting awarded the majority of degrees for their excellent NWO approved coursework doesn’t matter etc etc.
    One could understand that the momentum of ‘equality’ might tip things a little bit in women’s favour except it really doesn’t sound as though any effort whatsoever is made to make things actually equal but only to REVERSE the perceived inequality.
    It’s odd how marxists / leftists seem to believe in all seriousness that equality = matriarchy. What I have never heard is any attempt to justify why they believe that to be the case. I guess its just that the shekinah must be raised above.
    I’m not sure equality has very much to do with it, beyond the rhetoric used to justify the takeover. The risk is that the entire democratic project fails on account of the manipulation of its advocacy. If we cease to be a democracy in the future it will be almost entirely the responsibility of these dickless dicks who’ve abused it to the point of breaking

  10. The other ROK article says you have to bust-a-move, while this one warns of the dangers. This female shit test is heading toward the extremes of few (white) males courting Western chicks, to 75% bona fide rapes (unreported of course – don’t wanna perpetuate rayciss stereotypes) of Western chicks by swarthlords.
    There appears to be no difference between an ungraceful, awkward or botched bust-a-move and violent forceable rape in the eyes of the courts.

    1. Yes, the blurring of sexual assault cases into one rubric is a big problem. If I had a daughter who was going to university in some town, I would rather like to know if she is facing a risk of gang rape, or of being pinched on the butt while on the metro. The two crimes are not similar.
      The foreign invaders get a free pass, apparently. All they have to do is say that in ‘their culture’ it is not rape.

  11. Ironically, conservative anti-feminist women aggressively speaking out and standing up against this nonsense may be Western civilization’s last line of defense. I just don’t see any other way at this point. Are they the sleeping giant that will shut this movement down once and for all?
    Feminist women love their ideology more than they do their very own sons (and daughters). They could care less that their own sons could one day be wrongly accused and convicted of rape. In fact, many raise their sons to be feminists.

    1. Let me restate my last sentence. I just realized that I was being too kind with my words. It should have read: In fact, many feminist mothers mentally and emotionally abuse their young boys by heavily indoctrinating them with feminist ideology causing severe harm to them and to society, at large.

      1. 100% correct. Feminist mothers are poison. Verbally, they berate men and masculinity and fill their children with paralysis and self doubt. By their actions, they show attraction for hypermasculine men or the caricature masculinity of butch lesbians. It creates an emotional environment of hurtful nonsense for a boy child.

    2. fact is , as long as the womb is always the filter that kids are seen through, men never really have a solid connection to their kids, BECAUSE ITS BY FEMINISMS DESIGN AND PROGRAMMING. once a man gets past that conditioning, then he has an unseverable and meaningful bond with his kids.its why women will kill their kids because they cannot stand that a fathers bond with them is not through her, and is intolerable to feminism conditioning, and results in feminisms true hatred of men, expressed by the womb killing the people most important to a father. that fact is expressed daily through the murder suicides that women do and is reported on daily.
      as long as feminism can hold the position of power over childrens lives HOSTAGE TO WOMEN and their feelings, FEMINISM, will keep its deadly grip on society. otherwise it would be soundly beaten out of it.

    3. Most likely these radical feminists don’t have any kids of their own because:
      1. They’re too fugly that no sane man would knock her up or
      2. She aborted them all and proudly announce it.

  12. Perhaps they read this site and picked up the idea of using a woman’s past against her. And applied it to you. Mwahahaha.
    It’s sooooo satisfying to see you assholes complain against the very behaviour you recommend among yourselves.

  13. Everywhere you look, specially in the Western countries, there is rampant anti-man propaganda. #meetoo, anti-man bias at work, feminist attitudes, feminist politics and so on. Are most men not noticing this Trend? It’s time to fight back: don’t hire women, go MGTOW or just Pump&Dump, don’t interact with women other than sex and chores, look down at women, when they talk turn your back, No social media likes for women, Boycott any company or brand that supports feminism.

  14. Maybe British broads need to go extinct as a species. I would suggest that British men start life anew in foreign countries, preferably white, so they can start families with close racial cousins. In the mean time, British girls will either grow old without child or be raped by their Muzzie pets, so any offspring as a result will be half-breed. Let the U.K. burn in feminism and Islam.

  15. Maybe British broads need to go extinct as a species. I would suggest that British men start life anew in foreign countries, preferably white, so they can start families with close racial cousins. In the mean time, British girls will either grow old without child or be raped by their Muzzie pets, so any offspring as a result will be half-breed. Let the U.K. burn in feminism and Islam.

  16. 10 years back I left after accusations from my wife. It was the same then, I was guilty without trial. The only way out is to not live in the country. Doesn’t matter if you have sex with a woman or not, only the accusation counted.
    White men need to stop supporting the system, stop working, stop paying tax, stop being a productive member of society. Let the women and Muslims pay for the government.

  17. When a woman gets a man drunk and seduces him and the next day he dearly regrets it is called second thoughts.

  18. which is why sex robots will always be violently opposed by feminists because it reduces a woman back to her only biological function and that is being the viable woman order to create offspring.
    other than that women are the primary materialistic consumers in a society, but once Society transcends the need for their wombs in order for humans to reproduce and continue the species, they will have no function at all except as useless consuming. Cloning is not an answer because it’s stagnates genetic diversity that is needed for the human race to survive.

  19. …a womans only NECESSARY biological function if providing the egg and womb….

    1. We’ve all been that guy or known that guy who was at a party and some woman whom he would never have been interested in got him wasted and screwed him because she knew he was drunk.
      Most guys the next day feel shamed and shrug it off.
      They don’t cry rape because it is not.

  20. Deplorable
    I don’t espouse gays but look at how they clean up a rundown neighborhood filled with a bunch of single mothers and kids.
    Gays are not interested in women so the following happens when they “gentrify” a bad neighborhood (In the States)
    1) First the prostitutes leave. Males no longer even interested in paying $30 for a rushed blowjob in a car.
    2) The crack/heroin dealers leave because their primary source of income is prostitutes buying their drugs. Ditto pimps.
    3) The seedy straight bars with males fighting over women close down because women can’t get gays to buy them a beer. “Ladies Night” has no meaning.
    4) The cops stop having to come as often and when they do it is usually the Lesbos that are fighting, not gays
    5) Speaking of Lesbians they tend to live in squalor on the fringes of society while gays tend to support a pretty decent economy.
    Eventually in a gay district women just leave. Now imagine a world of sexbots where males were not interested in women. What would they do?

    1. Here are some facts absent from your post that I would like to include:
      Have you ever seen a line of gay street hustlers/prostitutes working street corner after street corner down a main city corridor that stretches through all types of neighborhoods? I have!
      Have you ever been accosted by gay men in public restrooms who openly masturbate while making full eye contact with you, or who, while using the urinal next to you, blatantly peek over to see you your penis while you urinate in a urinal, or who stand on the toilet in the stall next yours to greet you with a smile and ask you what are you doing while you take a dump. I have!
      If you don’t believe me, just ask any police officer who worked in a major city about these things, and they’ll tell you about what I just shared and more.

  21. A totally screwed up system. It’s clear most “rapes” are “regret ” encounters.

    1. When was the last time you met a woman who was feeling horny at a party and got a guy to screw her because he was drunk who otherwise would not have.
      I’ve done it, you may have, we all have. Get up the next morning and look at what you did in the cold light of day and do the walk of shame.
      Take a shower and try to get over it.
      Happens to all males. We call it beer goggles.

  22. As long as western males try to adapt and survive instead of actually DOING SOMETHING about the sorry state of things there is no hope.You are quickly running out of the proverbial “places to hide” and sooner or later you will have to stop “running” and make a stand.the white man has become the weakest of the species that as an African I sometimes ask myself: are these the people who travelled around the world taking over other countries?? What happened? I’m a blackman from Zimbabwe and I respect as well as love the white man but WTF!!! Grow some balls and do something.otherwise in 100 years white as a race won’t exist.

  23. I wouldn’t expect anything less from the UK; never trust a government that won’t trust you with a firearm. We have (in the USA) a Constitution and bill of rights for a reason.

  24. JWO is succeeding in their mission
    to finally eradicate the white race.
    And nothing can stop it. Nothing.
    This is not something that looks ominous now,
    yet will turn around in the future as a hero steps up
    or divine intervention saves the day at the last minute.
    Oh don’t worry, you WILL be forced to take action.
    They will leave you with no other option than fight.
    It won’t be a back-from-the-brink moment either.

Comments are closed.