Letter: Taxi rape trial misunderstood
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: What exactly is Anthony Brookman trying to tell us (Letters, 25 July)? He appears to disagree with the verdict in the recent case of a taxi driver found guilty of the rape of one of his passengers, yet his reasons for this are not clear.
My understanding is that Mr Brookman bases his whole critique of this case on the belief that the defendant was found guilty on the sole basis of the victim's word as against his. This is to misunderstand the facts completely.
The jury asked itself how often complete strangers have consensual sexual intercourse minutes after meeting, and decided, unsurprisingly, that this was very rare.
If Mr Brookman's experience is any different, then good for him; but he should be reminded that the law is predominantly concerned with the lives of ordinary mortals. This is why we have a jury system.
Yours faithfully,
VINCENT SCHEURER
Oxford
25 July
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments