In the case we are following where a man was convicted of rape of a young girl, apart from the fact that the girl was "tightly closed", there was also no signs of tearing of the fourchette, or other trauma associated with digital penetration (without foreplay = dry). The girl claimed regular assaults of this type that would have produced scars and the like in 83% of cases, but there were no scars, a finding which is clearly inconsistent with her claims.
An engagement to be married is a pre marital agreement between couples aiming for a wedding in the not too distant future. To be living together and indulging in sexual activity was held to be living in sin. This is an outdated concept and what with the complications of calling off an engagement that leads to ill feeling on the part of the abandoned party, can have serious consequences now that the Sexual Offence Act 2003 has reversed the burden of proof, making any man accused of rape, guilty on entering a courtroom, rather than innocent until proven guilty.
What kind of Nazi like eugenics programme was David Blunkett thinking of. His law gives any woman who wants to take revenge on a partner for jilting her, carte blanche. All she has to do is fabricate a reasonably convincing story and the cops will help her to perfect it with some naughty coaching. It is basically a witch hunt.
Our advice is not to get engaged in the first place. Secondly, carry a tape recorded at all times and record permission before you indulge in sexual intercourse. Is she worth it?
Further down the line you have division of assets and bucket loads of legal expenses. Then there is alimony and child visiting rights. Wow!
SINFUL REGIME 1939 TO 1945
CIVIL SERVANTS INVESTIGATED FOR POSSIBLE ISSUES 1983 TO 2018