New Life For Man Cleared of Rape

[Ford Super Sunday]

New life for man cleared of rape

Peter Bacon will set off for the airport next month for a flight to Malaysia. But it won't be Peter Bacon who will step off the plane at the other end.

Mr Bacon, a 26-year-old graduate from Canterbury in Kent, says the stigma of being wrongly accused of rape has led him to create a new identity and make a fresh start thousands of miles from Britain.

In March, a jury at Winchester Crown Court heard that a woman was so drunk that she was incapable of giving consent to sex and that Mr Bacon took advantage.

He insisted that the woman had consented. The jury returned a unanimous not guilty verdict in 45 minutes.

Since then, Mr Bacon has been busy reinventing himself.

'Nightmarish'

Speaking to Victoria Derbyshire on BBC Radio 5 Live, he said: "I've changed my name by deed poll now - the whole name.

"I've changed my passport, my taxes, my National Insurance, my NHS records. Everything, basically."

He has set up new Facebook and Hotmail accounts - and his degree certificate bears his new name.

"I enquired about name changing on certificates before I graduated. Because, apparently, your degree certificate is a historical document, they will not change your name; it's impossible. So, if I didn't do it before graduation, then I couldn't do it.

"My name has come up a few times since the original newspaper interest died down. My name is going to keep on coming up and I'd rather move away and start again, I suppose.

"You've still got your name connected to it. Just to have it connected to something like that is bad, terrible, nightmarish. It doesn't matter what the outcome was."

Mr Bacon said he felt like an innocent man "but punished all the same... it just seems like a load of doors have closed to me because of this, even though I've done nothing wrong".

'Traumatic'

In August, a former Emmerdale actor, Lewis Linford, was cleared of sexually assaulting a woman at a nightclub in Hull, East Yorkshire.

Lawyer Nick Freeman, who represented him, believes the law that allows rape defendants to be named while their alleged victims remain anonymous should be reviewed.

Mr Freeman said: "Those who are investigated and charged in such cases should be given the same protection as the complainant until such time as they are convicted.

"The judge should always retain the discretion to lift the veil of anonymity in deserving cases prior to conviction.

"If you have a serial sex offender, they shouldn't be able to hide behind anonymity so as not to impede police investigations.

"Counsel should be able to apply to the judge for anonymity to be lifted and he would grant it or deny it.

"In the case of Lewis Linford, the jury was out for just seven minutes, so he got a lot of positive publicity and sympathy.

"But it had an extremely traumatic effect on him and his family - emotionally, physically and financially. He was a completely innocent victim whose life was traumatised by a fabricated allegation.

"She was entitled to remain anonymous while he was subjected to the full glare of publicity."

Break away

Women Against Rape does not share Mr Freeman's view about anonymity for men accused of rape.

Ruth Hall, from the campaign group, said: "Most rapists are serial rapists. Many rape cases could be won if more than one woman came forward to give evidence."

She said if suspects were given anonymity, police would not be able to find other alleged victims.

Ms Hall said: "Rape survivors and alleged rapists are both entitled to justice. But justice means convicting the men who commit rape.

"We have sympathy for anyone accused of something they didn't do, but that applies to all crimes.

"Rape survivors need anonymity or no-one would come forward to report rape."

While the debate goes on about the rights and wrongs of anonymity, Peter Bacon has decided it is time to leave Britain. But why Malaysia?

"It's getting a new start really, isn't it? A lot of people here know me as Peter Bacon. I'd like to go to a place where nobody knows me and I can start using my new name, start a new Facebook group, just rebuild a life really.

"I'm surrounded by too many people who know me as Peter Bacon.

"But I think as soon as I get to the airport with my passport and I'm boarding the plane then I'll think 'that's it, there is no more Peter Bacon from now'.

"So hopefully, I'll be starting my life again completely afresh. It should be good."

Article here lovers

So, i;m sure this debate has been had on here once, twice, many times I expect, but this is the first story, and shows the clear damage and lengths a man cleared of rape has to go to in order to turn his life around.

So like the article says, should we protect those (first time) accused of rape and/or sexual assault. There is the potential that women can now use the system to ruin someones life (as has been shown in several cases) by crying rape or sexual assault, and they get away scott free, and never get named.

I do see the womans point in the article, others might not step forward if the accused isn't named. But how is it fair? A man who has been found innocent of all charges should not have to move abroad, change his name, everything about him, in order to get away from something he didn't even do.

I dunno, it does seem unfair, but there are the counter arguments and such. I know it's a touchy issue, but really, something needs to be done, it can't carry on as it is surely?

[Jon the Hat]

There is a clear distinction between attacking a stranger, being identified as involved with multiple attacks and found through say DNA or other similar means. In a case like this the police would of course publish details of the accused in order to encourage witnesses to come forward.

In the case of "date rape" where someone gets tso wasted they claim they cannot have given consent it is a lot less clear that the alledged rapist should be named. I tend to agree with the counsel quoted above, that the judge shoudl decide whether it is in the public interest to name or not. In most cases it would seem too damaging on a potentially innocent man. That said I can see the risk of a man getting away with serial rape, although a judge might then consider that if a man had been accused more than once then he would not be granted annonimity.

[lou]

God this is a tough one.... very touchy subject. Im not commenting on this bloke in particular but would like people to bear in mind that not every one who is aquitted in court is actually innocent. It doesnt mean the womans tried to ruin his life on purpose. Lack of evidence doesnt always mean it didnt happen.

Any woman who does that though should be locked up, not only have they potentially ruined a mans life but theyve stuck 2 fingers up to every genuine rape victim out there (a large number of whom never get to see their attackers bought to justice)

Also I do think its out of order for anyone to have sex with anyone (male or female) who is so wasted they might not know what theyre doing. Surely any person with a modicom of decency wouldnt take advantage of someone whos clearly very drunk? Ive got a Son and 2 daughters, Id like to think my Son has more respect and sense.

I do think its not always right for the defendant to be named though saying all that.

[Thracian]

God this is a tough one.... very touchy subject. Im not commenting on this bloke in particular but would like people to bear in mind that not every one who is aquitted in court is actually innocent. It doesnt mean the womans tried to ruin his life on purpose. Lack of evidence doesnt always mean it didnt happen.

Any woman who does that though should be locked up, not only have they potentially ruined a mans life but theyve stuck 2 fingers up to every genuine rape victim out there (a large number of whom never get to see their attackers bought to justice)

Also I do think its out of order for anyone to have sex with anyone (male or female) who is so wasted they might not know what theyre doing. Surely any person with a modicom of decency wouldnt take advantage of someone whos clearly very drunk? Ive got a Son and 2 daughters, Id like to think my Son has more respect and sense.

I do think its not always right for the defendant to be named though saying all that.

Everything you say is true so surely there's a case for rape trials to be held in camera and for all witnesses to be bound to silence until the case has been heard and until the judge has decided on whether the details should be made public or not.

There will usually be some who are party to the alleged incident but people who are subject to the Official Secrets Act stay silent enough most of the time on the pain of serious consequences if they don't so if the "rape" witnesses were subject to the same demands I am sure they would take the need for their silence seriously.

There really is so much potential for the ruining not only of individual lives but also the lives of connected family from rape cases that the very idea that anyone innocent of rape should have had his life ruined before the trial, is totally unjust.

I entirely agree that a not guilty verdict doesn't mean someone is innocent but equally there have been many cases of malicious allegations that have had devastating effects. Or even allegations based on the fear of a third party like a husband or boyfriend.

[Dr The Singh]

Everything you say is true so surely there's a case for rape trials to be held in camera and for all witnesses to be bound to silence until the case has been heard and until the judge has decided on whether the details should be made public or not.

There will usually be some who are party to the alleged incident but people who are subject to the Official Secrets Act stay silent enough most of the time on the pain of serious consequences if they don't so if the "rape" witnesses were subject to the same demands I am sure they would take the need for their silence seriously.

There really is so much potential for the ruining not only of individual lives but also the lives of connected family from rape cases that the very idea that anyone innocent of rape should have had his life ruined before the trial, is totally unjust.

I entirely agree that a not guilty verdict doesn't mean someone is innocent but equally there have been many cases of malicious allegations that have had devastating effects. Or even allegations based on the fear of a third party like a husband or boyfriend.

Stigma attached to being accused especially for crimes that involve rape etc is terrible, but that's society for you!!

[Lillehamring]

God this is a tough one.... very touchy subject. Im not commenting on this bloke in particular but would like people to bear in mind that not every one who is aquitted in court is actually innocent. It doesnt mean the womans tried to ruin his life on purpose. Lack of evidence doesnt always mean it didnt happen.

Any woman who does that though should be locked up, not only have they potentially ruined a mans life but theyve stuck 2 fingers up to every genuine rape victim out there (a large number of whom never get to see their attackers bought to justice)

Also I do think its out of order for anyone to have sex with anyone (male or female) who is so wasted they might not know what theyre doing. Surely any person with a modicom of decency wouldnt take advantage of someone whos clearly very drunk? Ive got a Son and 2 daughters, Id like to think my Son has more respect and sense.

I do think its not always right for the defendant to be named though saying all that.

that's a moot argument, though, i'm sure there are plenty of innocent people put away each year... the fundamental basis of the british judiciary system is 'innocent until proven guilty' - rightly or wrongly -

we have to accept as a democratic civilised soociety that the system we have in place judges without prejudice. and based on that fundamental principal, where damage of this degree can be inflicted upon someone who is, in the eyes of the law, innocent, it seems irresponsible to name some one who has yet to be proven guilty.

especially in today's knee-jerk, social-panic, reactionary society - too many people these days believe everything they read, and don't always let the facts get in the way of the judgementalism.

"We have sympathy for anyone accused of something they didn't do, but that applies to all crimes.

this is an atrocious thing from someone in her position to say - she of all people most understand that rape and the stigma attatched to it is not like 'all crimes', you won't see a lynch mob going after someone who has robbed a bank. she should be focussing her attention on getting a better system for persuing all these 'serial rapists'.

on the other hand, no doubt many people will just read his actions as further proof of his guilt....

[lou]

that's a moot argument, though, i'm sure there are plenty of innocent people put away each year... the fundamental basis of the british judiciary system is 'innocent until proven guilty' - rightly or wrongly -

we have to accept as a democratic civilised soociety that the system we have in place judges without prejudice. and based on that fundamental principal, where damage of this degree can be inflicted upon someone who is, in the eyes of the law, innocent, it seems irresponsible to name some one who has yet to be proven guilty.

especially in today's knee-jerk, social-panic, reactionary society - too many people these days believe everything they read, and don't always let the facts get in the way of the judgementalism.

this is an atrocious thing from someone in her position to say - she of all people most understand that rape and the stigma attatched to it is not like 'all crimes', you won't see a lynch mob going after someone who has robbed a bank. she should be focussing her attention on getting a better system for persuing all these 'serial rapists'.

on the other hand, no doubt many people will just read his actions as further proof of his guilt....

It wasnt an arguement, merely an observation, but theres also plenty of men that rape that get away with it too. Its a crime with one of the lowest rates of conviction I believe. Theres not that many women would put themselves through all the indignities of what happens to victims of sexual assaults, also police and the CPS are pretty adept at finding out when someones lying I would think. Im sure the percentage of cases of women making it all up to get back at someone are very low. Do you honestly think someone can just go to a Police station and cry rape that easily?

Where did it say a lynch mob went after anyone? Ive not heard of anyone whos been aquitted of rape getting lynched?

[BoneDog]

The most fitting punishment for rape is a bullet.

No police or public court where you won't be happy with the sentence.

Not saying the guy in this story is guilty of anything though

[Ford Super Sunday]

The most fitting punishment for rape is a bullet.

No police or public court where you won't be happy with the sentence.

Not saying the guy in this story is guilty of anything though

What about those who really are innocent, but found guilty then? Should they take a bullet just because the judicial system has failed this time around?

[BoneDog]

What about those who really are innocent, but found guilty then? Should they take a bullet just because the judicial system has failed this time around?

I'm saying that someone who has been raped should do it themselves. Or ask someone else. No courts or wrong decisions that way. If someone shoots someone for raping them how could someone innocent get shot?

I'm not for courts handing out death sentences because of the amount of times they get it wrong or the chance they would have of getting rid of anyone they fancied by accusing them of anything and planting dna etc.

[Ford Super Sunday]

I'm saying that someone who has been raped should do it themselves. Or ask someone else. No courts or wrong decisions that way. If someone shoots someone for raping them how could someone innocent get shot?

I'm not for courts handing out death sentences because of the amount of times they get it wrong or the chance they would have of getting rid of anyone they fancied by accusing them of anything and planting dna etc.

So basically advocating revenge, or vigilantisim

So I could go round and shoot someone I hate, then get my friend to say that he raped her?

[BoneDog]

1. So basically advocating revenge, or vigilantisim

2. So I could go round and shoot someone I hate, then get my friend to say that he raped her?

1. Yes, it's up to the wronged party if they want to do something or forgive. And if a rape victim decides to send a bullet her attackers way I would say that she was in the right. I'm not saying you should tell people about it, just do it.

2. No, that's just murder.

[Lillehamring]

It wasnt an arguement, merely an observation, but theres also plenty of men that rape that get away with it too. Its a crime with one of the lowest rates of conviction I believe. Theres not that many women would put themselves through all the indignities of what happens to victims of sexual assaults, also police and the CPS are pretty adept at finding out when someones lying I would think. Im sure the percentage of cases of women making it all up to get back at someone are very low. Do you honestly think someone can just go to a Police station and cry rape that easily?

Where did it say a lynch mob went after anyone? Ive not heard of anyone whos been aquitted of rape getting lynched?

argument or observation? irrespective.

it is still a moot point, the fact is that until trial, according to the british judicial system they are innocent - so the efficiency of the trial is not important - that is what i am saying----

no one mentioned a lynch mob, where have i quoted anyone mentioning a lynch mob - the lynch mob observation was my construct, and totally relevant in this discussion - read my post again, i am referring to the woman who compares rape with 'all (other) crimes' - the experiences of this man, who wasn't even found guilty suggests that 'lynch mobs' do pursue men named in rape trials.

- in our media obsessed society, people do react to things they read in the papers or see on tv. for that woman to have compared rape to other crimes, as you emphasise above, is dangerously inaccurate.

[Daggers]

If someone shoots someone for raping them how could someone innocent get shot?

Amazing!

[Ford Super Sunday]

1. Yes, it's up to the wronged party if they want to do something or forgive. And if a rape victim decides to send a bullet her attackers way I would say that she was in the right. I'm not saying you should tell people about it, just do it.

2. No, that's just murder.

1. So fight fire with fire... my god this country would be in meldown in a matter of weeks. Everyone being able to take the matter into their own hands.. you may just say it for rape, but wait till people start doing it for other crimes.

2. Yes, it's muder, as would the victim killing her attacker in revenge, after the event, no self defence argument there. My point was anyone, ANYONE could then go and claim that they were raped, therefore it was legitimate to shoot them... it's their word against a dead persons word... and if someone is capable of pulling a trigger on another human being, I can't say i'd expect them to tell the truth 100% of the time either.

Amazing!

I'm not the only one then.

[BoneDog]

- in our media obsessed society, people do react to things they read in the papers or see on tv.

Peter Kay on Phoenix Nights : "I've not seen 'em this excited since they printed that paedophiles address in the newspaper"

Amazing!

You know what I'm saying though!

[BoneDog]

1. So fight fire with fire... my god this country would be in meldown in a matter of weeks. Everyone being able to take the matter into their own hands.. you may just say it for rape, but wait till people start doing it for other crimes.

2. Yes, it's muder, as would the victim killing her attacker in revenge, after the event, no self defence argument there. My point was anyone, ANYONE could then go and claim that they were raped, therefore it was legitimate to shoot them... it's their word against a dead persons word... and if someone is capable of pulling a trigger on another human being, I can't say i'd expect them to tell the truth 100% of the time either.

I'm not saying I want everyone who has been wronged to do violent things. I'm just trying to say that I think it is ok when extreme crimes have been committed for the victim to decide to shoot the perpetrator if they wish (and not by law, just for them to decide personally. If they got caught they would obviously have to go to court for murder). Someone who rapes or hurts innocent people should not be allowed to carry on if it is obvious they are just a loony in my opinion.

[davieG]

I'm not saying I want everyone who has been wronged to do violent things. I'm just trying to say that I think it is ok when extreme crimes have been committed for the victim to decide to shoot the perpetrator if they wish (and not by law, just for them to decide personally. If they got caught they would obviously have to go to court for murder). Someone who rapes or hurts innocent people should not be allowed to carry on if it is obvious they are just a loony in my opinion.

I think you're sounding like the loony!

[BoneDog]

I think you're sounding like the loony!

Why? When there are reports of horrendous crimes on here people say things like 'he should get shot' or similar! I think most people agree that a rapist or murderer deserve to get shot. And alot of rapists and murderers do get shot or worse. Fair play I say

[davieG]

Why? When there are reports of horrendous crimes on here people say things like 'he should get shot' or similar! I think most people agree that a rapist or murderer deserve to get shot. And alot of rapists and murderers do get shot or worse. Fair play I say

As part of self defence yes but not in a cold calculating revenge.

[Thracian]

What about those who really are innocent, but found guilty then? Should they take a bullet just because the judicial system has failed this time around?

I don't advocate state administered capital punishment for any crime but, just out of interest, what about the judicial system "failing" in such a way that convicted rapists or murderers are released early to kill, rape or maim again?

Failure to sanction harsh penalties due to the fear of being wrong or out of a wish to give people chances, or to see or get the best from folk, creates additional problems and far too often fails to protect the public who, in our society, aren't allowed to properly protect themselves to any practical degree.

Given that you cannot continue to abdicate uncomfortable decision-making either in criminal matters, the military, medicine or, indeed, many other areas of life, what would you do in dealing with serious crime allegations that would be both effective in protecting the public yet 100% foolproof as well?

Cos virtually everyone would agree that you have to do something.

[Ford Super Sunday]

I don't advocate state administered capital punishment for any crime but, just out of interest, what about the judicial system "failing" in such a way that convicted rapists or murderers are released early to kill, rape or maim again?

Failure to sanction harsh penalties due to the fear of being wrong or out of a wish to give people chances, or to see or get the best from folk, creates additional problems and far too often fails to protect the public who, in our society, aren't allowed to properly protect themselves to any practical degree.

Given that you cannot continue to abdicate uncomfortable decision-making either in criminal matters, the military, medicine or, indeed, many other areas of life, what would you do in dealing with serious crime allegations that would be both effective in protecting the public yet 100% foolproof as well?

Cos virtually everyone would agree that you have to do something.

There is almost nothing you can do to make a case such as rape and sexal assault 100% fullproof, if it is one word against another, and there are no witnesses, DNA and other evidence, it's down to who's story is straighter and who you believe from the jury.

And yes, It is a vast problem that some real rapists and sex offenders can get off scott free at times, but do I want innocent men killed by the state for something they didn't do? No I don't.

I'm just glad it's not my decision to make with all this, it is probably the touchiest subject going

[lou]

argument or observation? irrespective.

it is still a moot point, the fact is that until trial, according to the british judicial system they are innocent - so the efficiency of the trial is not important - that is what i am saying----

no one mentioned a lynch mob, where have i quoted anyone mentioning a lynch mob - the lynch mob observation was my construct, and totally relevant in this discussion - read my post again, i am referring to the woman who compares rape with 'all (other) crimes' - the experiences of this man, who wasn't even found guilty suggests that 'lynch mobs' do pursue men named in rape trials.

- in our media obsessed society, people do react to things they read in the papers or see on tv. for that woman to have compared rape to other crimes, as you emphasise above, is dangerously inaccurate.

Where did that get suggested?

The experience of this man suggested nothing of the sort... he said he felt compelled to do it becuase of the "stigma" and didnt mention any lynch mobs or revenge attacks.

Anyway my point was a lot of people are insinuating that because a blokes been aquitted that the woman had "cried rape" or was deliberately trying to get at him. Its very rarely the case! Double standards abound, people are on about not judging these men but no one gives a toss about the woman being judged a liar.

I never said I didnt think they shouldnt remain anonymous anyway, I cant see why it would be a bad idea to be honest. Im certainly not in favour of shooting them

[Katy]

No I don't think people accused of rape should be named but then if it's proved beyond reasonable doubt that they have had unlawful sex with someone then they should have their balls cut off and made to eat them plus their name splashed all over the tabloids.

Particular bastards are the ones who think it's perfectly ok to have sex with someone even though the girl is out of her head and is unable to say 'no'. Even bigger bastards are the ones who do the above and then deny all knowledge of a rape occurring and even try and blame said girl by saying she was 'up for it'. Those sort of people make me feel sick and make me want to smash their head repeatedly against a wall.

[Lillehamring]

Where did that get suggested?

The experience of this man suggested nothing of the sort... he said he felt compelled to do it becuase of the "stigma" and didnt mention any lynch mobs or revenge attacks.

Anyway my point was a lot of people are insinuating that because a blokes been aquitted that the woman had "cried rape" or was deliberately trying to get at him. Its very rarely the case! Double standards abound, people are on about not judging these men but no one gives a toss about the woman being judged a liar.

I never said I didnt think they shouldnt remain anonymous anyway, I cant see why it would be a bad idea to be honest. Im certainly not in favour of shooting them

ok.

for what it's worth, i didn't use the term lynch mob in the literal sense of people waving sticks and burning torches, but in the sense of people abusing and judging people rashly, with prejudice and without consideration - 'stigma' is, of course, a form of abuse and judgement...

Stigma is often based on ignorance, irrational or unfounded fears, mass hysteria, lack of education, or a lack of information pertaining to a particular person or group. Social stigma often leads to marginalization.

Stigma is generally based on stereotypical and uninformed impressions or characterizations of a given subject.