Ray wrote:

I think it’s premature to make any conclusive decisions or judgements on this without hearing both sides of the story.

This.

Anzac wrote:

Big Willie wrote:

For me I was unsure from the posts on day 1 but her follow up posts on day 2 once she sobered up paints a very grim picture leading me to believe what she's saying. I can't say for certain he raped her but I believe the voracity with which she's making her claims and fully believe she believes what she's saying and that it's not just making something up.

Believing something to be true and correct is not the same as it being fact and/or being able to be proven in regards to criminal matters.  

However in other types of civil court proceedings the rules regarding the burdon of proof and hearsay evidence are such that what the complainant feels is sometimes more important that what actually did or didn't happen to make them feel that way.  Similarly there are instances where the other party has no say or bearing on the matter and the outcome is entirely about how the other person feels about the matter or believes to be true.

The first issue with these posts is we may not see her making/posting them, so as such there is no corroboration it is her, or that she may have been 'schooled' by a thrid party as to what to say.
Secondly these are not being made under oath to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
And lastly they are not subject to any cross examination to be able to determine if there is any hidden agenda etc.
I'd also add that time is not any alleged victim's friend when it comes to being able to prove any criminal offence, particularly when it comes to corroboration. 

That's the thing for me, whilst you say she may have been "schooled" on what to say, I don't get that impression at all, and as you say whether a rape can be proven or not I can't be sure, but I fully believe that she believes she was raped, and that should be enough to determine whether it happened or not, at least outside of court.

It's a completely different matter whether it can be proven in court, and more times than not they dont get proven, even in instances where a rape did occur as there are many factors which most times don't come together to ensure justice is served. In this instance I don't believe Partey will be convicted to be honest but that's besides the point.

For me, I have no doubt she believes she was raped, and whether its a stranger or even worse a partner in a relationship, if one party did not consent to a sexual act and believes they were still forced to do so, it is rape, whether proveable in court or otherwise, and I believe that she believes this is the case, and her posts come across as someone seriously traumatised by the whole thing rather than someone out to try to set someone up.

The grey area comes from when someone is trying to frame someone for a consensual act and acting like a victim and setting someone up even though they weren't but going through all her posts I don't get that impression in the slightest.

I don't say this lightly either because I know the ramifications of false claims (which let's be honest are the minority in these sorts of cases) as I knew someone who 15 years ago was falsely accused of rape by someone and spent the best part of 4 months on remand until he was released after the police identified 4 other claims by the same person on others which were also found out to be false.

It's sad that it's come to this and putting us in a position where he shouldn't play for us again but it's even worse that we keep trotting him out when all indications point to him at the minimum doing it to her, albeit unable to be prosecuted for it because of the fact it came before the rules were changed.

Coombs wrote:

Isn't it the situation that her case was dropped because of where the incident occurred and the nature of UK law at that time? So she is coming out and risking pretty much everything at this point because she has no chance at justice, while the other case still might have legs? Seems less like someone who is potentially unstable (issues with that being thrown around, honestly) and more someone who is quite brave and clear-headed about the whole affair if you ask me.

Open to being corrected if I've gotten it wrong.

That's the impression I get as well. It seems pretty clear that what she says happened happened. Whether Partey considers that rape seeing as they were in a relationship is a different thing but even then if she said no and he continued, as the screenshots show, then it's rape. He's just lucky he can get off on this one without even it going to court because of the rules at the time but make no mistake, this isn't some nutcase jealous woman trying to stich up her boyfriend because he brought another girl back, and the posts and his responses show that.

Big Willie wrote:

Anzac wrote:

Believing something to be true and correct is not the same as it being fact and/or being able to be proven in regards to criminal matters.  

However in other types of civil court proceedings the rules regarding the burdon of proof and hearsay evidence are such that what the complainant feels is sometimes more important that what actually did or didn't happen to make them feel that way.  Similarly there are instances where the other party has no say or bearing on the matter and the outcome is entirely about how the other person feels about the matter or believes to be true.

The first issue with these posts is we may not see her making/posting them, so as such there is no corroboration it is her, or that she may have been 'schooled' by a thrid party as to what to say.
Secondly these are not being made under oath to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
And lastly they are not subject to any cross examination to be able to determine if there is any hidden agenda etc.
I'd also add that time is not any alleged victim's friend when it comes to being able to prove any criminal offence, particularly when it comes to corroboration. 

That's the thing for me, whilst you say she may have been "schooled" on what to say, I don't get that impression at all, and as you say whether a rape can be proven or not I can't be sure, but I fully believe that she believes she was raped, and that should be enough to determine whether it happened or not, at least outside of court.

It's a completely different matter whether it can be proven in court, and more times than not they dont get proven, even in instances where a rape did occur as there are many factors which most times don't come together to ensure justice is served. In this instance I don't believe Partey will be convicted to be honest but that's besides the point.

For me, I have no doubt she believes she was raped, and whether its a stranger or even worse a partner in a relationship, if one party did not consent to a sexual act and believes they were still forced to do so, it is rape, whether proveable in court or otherwise, and I believe that she believes this is the case, and her posts come across as someone seriously traumatised by the whole thing rather than someone out to try to set someone up.

The grey area comes from when someone is trying to frame someone for a consensual act and acting like a victim and setting someone up even though they weren't but going through all her posts I don't get that impression in the slightest.

I don't say this lightly either because I know the ramifications of false claims (which let's be honest are the minority in these sorts of cases) as I knew someone who 15 years ago was falsely accused of rape by someone and spent the best part of 4 months on remand until he was released after the police identified 4 other claims by the same person on others which were also found out to be false.

It's sad that it's come to this and putting us in a position where he shouldn't play for us again but it's even worse that we keep trotting him out when all indications point to him at the minimum doing it to her, albeit unable to be prosecuted for it because of the fact it came before the rules were changed.

I'm not saying she is trying to stitch him up or anything, just that what she may believe to have been the case may not have been that at all.  

The are 2 parts to any criminal act and both need to be proven before a criminal conviction can be determined.  One part is the physical action and the other part is the intent to knowingly carry out that act.  For arguement sake in this case she may feel it, he may have physically done it, but there was no intent to commit rape.  There is the unfortunate situation whereby one person may not have said yes but also did not say no, or visa versa, and you end up with them feeling like they were assaulted/violated but the other person had no idea.

As an example of how far consent/intent is being taken to try to clarify/simpify things, there was/is a suggestion here earlier this year to introduce legislation requiring both parties to make a verbal agreement to actively engage in sex with each other before any time they may do so.  

Big Willie wrote:

Coombs wrote:

Isn't it the situation that her case was dropped because of where the incident occurred and the nature of UK law at that time? So she is coming out and risking pretty much everything at this point because she has no chance at justice, while the other case still might have legs? Seems less like someone who is potentially unstable (issues with that being thrown around, honestly) and more someone who is quite brave and clear-headed about the whole affair if you ask me.

Open to being corrected if I've gotten it wrong.

That's the impression I get as well. It seems pretty clear that  what she says happened happened. Whether Partey considers that rape seeing as they were in a relationship is a different thing but even then if she said no and he continued, as the screenshots show, then it's rape. He's just lucky he can get off on this one without even it going to court because of the rules at the time but make no mistake, this isn't some nutcase jealous woman trying to stich up her boyfriend because he brought another girl back, and the posts and his responses show that.

What rules and how has anything changed?

Anzac, let me reply to some of the points you make.

1. Why didn't she report the crime in Spain?
Fair question, but she is a UK citizen who probably doesn't speak Spanish and was on holiday there. She came back from holiday and reported the crime to her local police, in the jurisdiction where both she and the perp reside. Completely logical behaviour. She is not a lawyer and would not have known about jurisdiction issues. Apparently even the lawyers fucked that one up.

2. We haven't heard the other side of the story and there has been no cross-examination etc.
We are not in a courtroom. You need to distinguish between two things here: a) Is it likely that he committed the act that he is being accused of? and b) Can he successfully be prosecuted for that in criminal court? Everything you put forward is only relevant for b). However, if the answer to a) is yes, then the answer to b) is irrelevant in the context of the actions the club should take. The act that he is being accused of is a morally reprehensible act, one of the worst things a human being can do, and someone who did it shouldn't wear the Arsenal shirt. If you disagree on that I guess we can end the discussion here. I'm sure you make many judgments for yourself on a daily basis without a court having decided whether it is true or not. Otherwise I imagine your life may be quite complicated.

3. Innocent until proven guilty
Again, it has no relevance outside a courtroom. Even inside a courtroom, only judge and jury are instructed to abide by this principle, as there is a prosecutor who is actively arguing that the defendant is guilty. There is no law or rule that says the general public has to consider someone innocent until proven guilty. If you want to abide by this principle on a personal level, by all means, but others don't have to and it also makes no sense for them to do so.

4. We are only reading evidence of an allegation.
What is your point here? There is indeed an allegation and evidence is being presented to back it up. 

5. It could all be a lie (paraphrasing here)
I agree, it could. Anything is possible. But is it likely? Consider the stuff being presented, amongst others:

• chats and texts where he basically admits what he did
• NDA
• texts from police apologising for this outcome
• emails from lawyers corroborating various parts of the story
• doctor's reports 
  All of it backs up the story. 

Consider also the following:

• she stands to lose 200k and be sued by doing this
• there is nothing to gain since there is no realistic future pay off after this
• she gets constant death threats and abuse for doing this, by our beloved fellow fans (and people wonder why victims don't speak out)
• the other allegations against him.

So what is your counterfactual here? That all the documents and stories are fake? It's possible, but what is more likely, that he did it or that someone went through the trouble of creating this big conspiracy against the guy, doctoring all this stuff? Again, it's possible, but I find it to be very unlikely.

I should go and read all the messages thoroughly - and I will - but not today because I don't want to. The whole thing is a bit depressing - whatever the truth is exactly.

So, for those that know, let me ask this whilst trying not be too explicit: The accusation is Partey and the alleged victim were in bed drunk, she was asleep and Partey woke her by slapping her in the face with his penis and then putting it in her mouth (or attempted to?), she woke up and said stop because she was too drunk and would be sick if he did that, he remonstrated but stopped. No violence or force was used and he didn't continue or try to complete the act against her will.

So the accusation of rape is on the basis that he penetrated her mouth whilst she was asleep and therefore could not consent to it?

Do we know why if this was dropped by U.K police due to the law change, why has this not been taken to the police of the country where it took place (Spain?) ?

You have to report your case there yourself, meaning she has to fly back to report it and go through everything again.

Ricky1985 wrote:

I should go and read all the messages thoroughly - and I will - but not today because I don't want to. The whole thing is a bit depressing - whatever the truth is exactly.

So, for those that know, let me ask this whilst trying not be too explicit: The accusation is Partey and the alleged victim were in bed drunk, she was asleep and Partey woke her by slapping her in the face with his penis and then putting it in her mouth (or attempted to?), she woke up and said stop because she was too drunk and would be sick if he did that, he remonstrated but stopped. No violence or force was used and he didn't continue or try to complete the act against her will.

So the accusation of rape is on the basis that he penetrated her mouth whilst she was asleep and therefore could not consent to it?

If this is the accusation then I'm not sure it meets the criteria for rape, which used to identify with sexual intercourse in the traditional sense i.e. genitals.

These sorts of things used to be considered to be a lewd act, which was a different category of sexual offences.
On a similar note there was also a push to have rape removed from being considered as a sexual offence to one of physical violence as being a sexual assault.

Clrnc wrote:

You have to report your case there yourself, meaning she has to fly back to report it and go through everything again.

She'd have to do so a number of times regardless of where she reported it.

Shady wrote:

Do we know why if this was dropped by U.K police due to the law change, why has this not been taken to the police of the country where it took place (Spain?) ?

What law change?  So far as I'm aware no law enforcement agency anywhere has any jurisdiction outside national boundaries, meaning UK law enforcement could never investigate something that is alleged to have happened in a foreign country.
That said there are extradition treaties between countries, but that is not always the case.

If I understand correctly from her posts (and I haven't looked up the actual law to verify it so I may have got it wrong), because they are both resident in the UK, she was led to believe the UK police were able to prosecute even though the alleged offence happened abroad. However, the law allowing this came into effect from June 29 2021 and the incident occurred on June 19 meaning it was 10 days too early to be convered by the law change. As far as I can tell it could still be reported in Spain but hasn't been.

Gurgen wrote:

So what is your counterfactual here? That all the documents and stories are fake? It's possible, but what is more likely, that he did it or that someone went through the trouble of creating this big conspiracy against the guy, doctoring all this stuff? Again, it's possible, but I find it to be very unlikely.

I'll try to cover the bases.

1 - I dispute that it is completely logical to wait until you return and then report a crime to your local law enforcement.  For example would she have done the same had the hotel room been ransacked and property stolen?  My next question is in regards to the timings - how long was she on holiday, when did this take place in relation to the holiday and how long before she reported it?

2 - I have no place for rapists, but if the accusation is as Ricky posted then it may not not meet the criteria for rape and is more in being a lewd act.  As such IMO it does not warrant some of the reactions posted in this thread.  The difference in our daily decision making is that we are not generally calling out someone in social media and making accusations of criminal behaviour.

3 - Fundamentally disagree it has no relevance outside the courtroom, as without it we run the risk as a society to becoming mob rule.  There have been vigilanty cases previously when men have been accused of rape and 'outed'.  IIRC in once case an innocent man was basically kidnapped and assaulted in a case of mistaken identity.  Whilst the circumstances are more specific in terms of identity, it's all about the moral standards in society.  If we allow our standards to become fudged then where is the line drawn and who determines where it is?  What's next = lynching or targeted abuse of minorities?

4 - Problem here is you are essentially accepting a one sided story as being true and correct without applying any sort of validation process, becasue you think it is more likely than not.  This is why there is a legal process to examine any evidence as to it's truth and relevance, and why there are jury trials for serious crimes.  

5 - I want to stress the point I am not calling her a liar or anything of the sort, just that we need to be very careful we are all on the same line and calling the same thing a spade when it is a spade, and not a shovel.  If the 'evidence' is so compelling then it raises the question as to why there have been no charges laid.  As for what she stands to lose I very much doubt that any celebrity actually sues a member of the public for defamation etc, as it would be a lose/lose situation.  That said to my knowledge there is nothing stopping her from selling her story if any media wanted to buy it.  Further to that I imagine she could also file a complaint via a civil court if a criminal complaint was dismissed.

I'm not saying this is a conspiracy by her or anyone else, and I do not dispute that it would be unlikely.  However I'm not prepared to make any hasty judgements based upon one person's word, as what they may think may be the case may not be entirely correct.  Case in point being the nature of the alleged act as to if it was rape or a lewd act.  Similarly the 'evidence' is hearsay until the person or persons who wrote the emails etc actually presents it themselves.  Yes it adds weight to the accusation but I am wary of their only being a single point of 'truth'.  As I said previously it is entirely possible that she believes what she is saying or alleging took place, but at the same time it also entirely possible that what she thinks happened is not what took place.  She may feel violated and that she was penetrated, but what Ricky described does not meet any definition I know of rape in traditional terms of a criminal offence, and nor does it make an accused a rapist.  Ricky's description may not be the actual accusation, but it also serves as an indication as to how unreliable things are in social media & the typical Chinese Whispers scenario.

invisibleman18 wrote:

If I understand correctly from her posts (and I haven't looked up the actual law to verify it so I may have got it wrong), because they are both resident in the UK, she was led to believe the UK police were able to prosecute even though the alleged offence happened abroad. However, the law allowing this came into effect from June 29 2021 and the incident occurred on June 19 meaning it was 10 days too early to be convered by the law change. As far as I can tell it could still be reported in Spain but hasn't been.

OK thanks for that & I do find it interesting if not astounding that this would come into law, as it would be virtually impossible to preserve any evidence such as a crime scene.  I'd be curious as to if this is only for serious crimes such as child abduction etc.  Do we know if it was widely publicised before it came into effect?  If not then she may not have been aware of it, or at best made an assumption without verifying the facts, which then makes this talk of technicalities etc more irrelevant.

The law giving police jurisdiction has been in effect for much longer than that. She’s sort of changed her tune now though, initially saying the law giving them jurisdiction changed 10 days too late, to now saying they arrested him using the incorrect (I.e. updated) law.

Anzac wrote:

Gurgen wrote:

So what is your counterfactual here? That all the documents and stories are fake? It's possible, but what is more likely, that he did it or that someone went through the trouble of creating this big conspiracy against the guy, doctoring all this stuff? Again, it's possible, but I find it to be very unlikely.

I'll try to cover the bases.

1 - I dispute that it is completely logical to wait until you return and then report a crime to your local law enforcement. For example would she have done the same had the hotel room been ransacked and property stolen? My next question is in regards to the timings - how long was she on holiday, when did this take place in relation to the holiday and how long before she reported it?

2 - I have no place for rapists, but if the accusation is as Ricky posted then it may not not meet the criteria for rape and is more in being a lewd act.  As such IMO it does not warrant some of the reactions posted in this thread.  The difference in our daily decision making is that we are not generally calling out someone in social media and making accusations of criminal behaviour.

She may feel violated and that she was penetrated, but what Ricky described does not meet any definition I know of rape in traditional terms of a criminal offence, and nor does it make an accused a rapist.  Ricky's description may not be the actual accusation, but it also serves as an indication as to how unreliable things are in social media & the typical Chinese Whispers scenario.

I see you wrote half a novel worth of posts here Anzac without even bothering to read the chats between the two. How arre you covering your bases when your only account of what happened is a post by Ricky who himself in the same breath said he didn't fully read what's happened?

That you then go on to complain about unreliable Chinese whispers in social media while you're doing exactly that would be hilarious if the topic wasn't as grim. I'm not here to read the chats for you but no, she didn't wait but immediately reported what's happened to the UK embassy and Ricky's description is not accurate. One thing to not watch Arsenal matches and post about them here, another to doubt and scrutinise someone in this situation without having read what's going on.

Not joining this discussion fully, but even if she hadn't reported it right away you shouldn't really ask "why didn't she report it sooner". There are tons of reasons.

People will do well to not comment on these things in a non-factual way when the information is so limited - especially if you haven't even fully informed yourself on the limited amount of information out there.