World News

39329 readers

2280 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]

Recommendations

How to spot Misinformation and Propaganda

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

149

Woman paid £35,000 over CPS’s decision to drop rape case after ‘sexsomnia’ claim (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/world

24 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A woman has been awarded £35,000 in compensation from the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) after her rape case was dropped over claims that she could have had an episode of a rare sleep condition called sexsomnia.

Jade Blue McCrossen-Nethercott, 32, contacted police in 2017, when she was 24, after waking up to discover she was half-naked, and with the sense that she had been raped while she slept.

Three years later – and days before the man charged with raping her was due to stand trial – lawyers from the CPS said her case was being dropped because two sleep experts said it was possible McCrossen-Nethercott had had an episode of sexsomnia – a medically recognised, but rare, sleep disorder which can cause a person to engage in sexual acts in their sleep, while appearing to be awake and consenting. The case was closed and the defendant acquitted.

In 2022, McCrossen-Nethercott sued the CPS after it admitted her rape case should not have been dropped. Now, the BBC has reported that she has been paid £35,000 by the CPS, which said it had “apologised unreservedly” to her and was “committed to improving every aspect of how life-changing crimes like rape are dealt with”.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[+] [email protected] -19 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (18 children)

[Article answers second paragraph]

Interesting. The situation really puts into perspective how both genders have it difficult. It can really rule out anything, if the man really raped her, the woman caused a fake accusation or it was just a big misunderstanding.

Firstly, the woman who was suspected to have sexsomnia, did she really have sexsomnia? And what evidence did the research facility produce?

Secondly, the man who is blamed to have raped her, if consent was given while she was deemed as fully awake, then why is this situation occurring? Did he fail to realise she is not fully awake?

[–] [email protected] 37 points 4 months ago (15 children)

When McCrossen-Nethercott made her statement, she was asked about her sleep, and said she had always been a deep sleeper and had sleepwalked a couple of times as a teenager.

When the case was dropped, McCrossen-Nethercott requested all the evidence and was shocked by the weight given to evidence from sleep experts who had never met her.

[+] [email protected] -24 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (14 children)

Thanks for highlighting the parts of the article. Certainly answers some questions I had. The thing that can be said is that there isn't clinical proof of the sexsomnia. So there is a low chance of her having it.

The man may have raped her. however, why didn't he run away sooner? Usually perpetrators escape after the abuse (asking a question).

[–] JacksonLamb 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

why didn’t he run away sooner? Usually perpetrators escape after the abuse

No, they don't. Statistically the majority of rapes are by people who know the victim personally. In cases of intimate partner rape the perpetrator does not typically "run away from" his wife or girlfriend etc afterwards.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

Thanks for replying. I do see that there is some incompatibility with both our proof. However, I do realise that you're talking about perpetrators which are close to the victim - and that may yield a different response to that of a random person/ newly met person.

Suffice to say, it does make sense that persons closest to the victim would be the perpetrator.

load more comments (12 replies)

load more comments (14 replies)