After her death, Mr Economou expressed his sympathy for her family; again, this was a tragic and unnecessary death, but it was a death for which only one person should be held responsible.
Having spent an estimated £220,000 to clear his name, Mr Economou might rightly feel a little chagrined to learn that he is still being branded a rapist.
On Friday, May 22, the Victoria Derbyshire programme on the BBC carried a report about a genuine rape, that of a teenager who was accused of filing a false report and threatened with prosecution. Eventually justice prevailed, and her rapist was convicted at Winchester Crown Court. The shocking thing about this case is that there was physical evidence of the assault, and this was not tested by the police.
Alexander Economou and Eleanor de Freitas In the studio with Miss Derbyshire was Lisa Longstaff of Women Against Rape who spoke about this case; she also raised the case of Eleanor de Freitas stating point blank that “her rapist” was bringing a private prosecution against her when she killed herself. This was no slip of the tongue – she repeated it – but a gratuitous slur.
Women Against Rape presents itself as a champion of victims against a wicked criminal justice system that we are supposed to believe is in cahoots with rapists or even with organised paedophile gangs, and would like nothing better than to shut victims up. The reality is very different. Yes, the conviction rate for rape may be “only” 6%, which means the CPS is bringing far too many weak cases.
Victoria Derbyshire (BBC)Part of the Women Against Rape narrative is that women who bring false allegations should not be prosecuted because their prosecution discourages genuine victims from coming forward. What is the reality?
Falsely accusing someone of rape or of any serious criminal offence is a serious criminal offence in itself, and in the absence of special circumstances should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Clearly the de Freitas case was not one of those special circumstances. Longstaff and her outfit have a long history of lying about false rape cases, most notoriously they supported Rhiannon Brooker, whose false allegations against Paul Fensome beggar belief.
That being said, there is some common ground between the de Freitas case and the current one: poor investigation. If the police had carried out a proper investigation of the allegation against Mr Economou, they would have realised de Freitas was lying, no charges would have been filed against him, she would probably have been prosecuted for a lesser offence, and if the case had not received substantial publicity, he would have let sleeping dogs lie.
In the current case, the victim told the police there was forensic evidence on her clothing – semen – which incredibly they ignored. In both cases they made snap judgments, and in both cases they were wrong. They assumed Mr Economou was a plausible predator in a business suit, and equally assumed because the teenage victim in the other case had suffered from mental health issues – as do many of us in this increasingly mad world – that she had little or no credibility. Physical evidence should always trump first impressions and reputations unless there are good reasons for suspecting its provenance.
Hopefully a valuable lesson will be learned from this case; hopefully too Miss Longstaff will issue a public apology to Mr Economou, lest she too feel his wrath in the form of a libel writ.
Top photo: Lisa Longstaff
Source
No comments:
Post a Comment