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”.
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).
How about you believe women rather than come up with convoluted reasons for why they might not have been raped?
I do believe she feels raped, and I do feel the sexsomnia excuse is BS especially since other experts say that sexomnia exists only in papers used to defend rapists. There should’ve been a fair trial to determine if the rape indeed occured according to the rules of law (that does not mean she cannot feel violated if that’s ruled out though). But to say that you just blindly need to believe her, or the accused is a but too much for my taste.
I will probably not be liked for this opinion but I hope we don’t fall into the trap of always believing one or the other side without critical thinking. The victim deserves to be believed so that there will be an investigation and a court ruling and the accused deserves to be presumed innocent until proven otherwise. The judicialsystem is not flawless (see this example) and the negatives from those flaws have impact on both the accused and the victim. Only not always in the same amount or in the same time.
Sorry… “feels” raped?
What the fuck?
“With the sense she has been raped wile she slept”
Seems to me an appropriate short hand to what was written. And i also believe that in rape cases, like all criminal cases, the victim should be trusted but verified. And the accused is innocent until proven guilty. And that the names of both parties should be sealed until the matter is resolved.
It exists, my wife has told me I’ve done it multiple times. It wasn’t to completion, I fell fully back asleep half way through, but sex was initiated. I was not conscious for the experience.
I have no opinion on this case but the phenomenon does exist.
Hi, to answer your question I’d like to ask what convoluted reason did I state?
It’s nice to see you replied to my comment, and the last part of my comment was just a question which I am confused about.
And sorry for coming across as not believing. You could consider that serious accusations shouldn’t be based on beliefs - but facts.
This part. Where you came up for a ridiculous reason why it might not have been rape:
Oh sorry forgot the question mark there. My bad.
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.
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.
He did run away when confronted.
The question was why he didn’t do it sooner. Not when confronted.
If he knew he did something wrong, illegal, and immoral then why did he stay and wait until the victim wakes up.
You think rapists are perfectly rational actors? They only make good decisions?
There are tons of reasons rapists think they can get away with rape. He clearly had one in mind until she confronted him directly.
To answer this, no they are not perfectly rational. However they are not dumb, anyone can be a rapist, it is a mental disorder which doesn’t correlate with their IQ.
The ‘tons of reasons’ statement would be interesting to read about, as usually a perpetrators focus is rape and escape. Not befriending the victim - i might suggest how inconsistent this sounds.
Unless the victim has other mental problems then this could occur. However, I was simply seeking an answer, not an explosive statement.