Amos wrote "I can imagine a case where the consent was withdrawn after the fact, which could leave the male in a very awkward situation; but my advice would be to choose better whom he pursueth."

There lies a very sad situation and it is there where the male really does get a raw deal. I do not think he should get named for an allegation and should have the same protection as the alleged victim until proven. Too many men have come unstuck because a woman has changed her mind afterwards and the called rape. For me, if she knows she consented and then calls rape she shoulod be the one charged.

If she is not certain what she did but knows what happened to her when she wakes up... massive grey area. To me this is the haunting one. Was it rape or consented? Who would truly know? Some evidence of rape would be required I am sure, and not just sperm but force, to proceed with prosecution. I dare say there have been cases where women have got it wrong but not in any malicious way. It would be nice to think modern law and forensic could help find the truth... but there is major areas of doubt.

As for malicioulsy accusing someone of rape falsely: if that is then proven then the accuser should do the time. It devastates lives and many men, falsely accused, have in the least had ruined careers and at worse killed themselves. False accusation is as heinous as rape in my opinion.

mp