He will be convicted, and do some very long and hard porridge.

Theophanous brought all this down on himself.

But as for this blog, most comments, and the former Minister’s protestations – they have ALL done a good job of demonising the victim…

No, but it has always been thus. The media will have a duty to report the outcome, whatever it is. Usually this only happens after there are charges, as are the cases which are reported from courts and the like. Few argue that those charged with any offence, including sexual assault, should kept anonymous – the exceptions are mostly when the victim is likely to be identified.
In this case it has happened before there are charges, and yes that does make me uncomfortable particularly given their nature. Even if cleared, or never charged, the stigma will never go away, and that would be an unfortunate outcome.

If a rape charge issues and is proved, Theophanous won’t be the first cabinet minister whose dick was far more active than the minister.

Victorian MP Theo Theophanous has hit back at claims he raped a woman 10 years ago, declaring his innocence and slamming the media for publicising the allegations.

Mr Theophanous, who has stepped down from his role pending a police investigation of the sexual assault claims, said the publication of the allegations have hurt his chances of a fair legal process.

“I was shocked to read in today’s Age (newspaper) statements from a person accusing me of the most horrible crimes that are totally against all the moral and religious values I believe in,” he said in a statement today.

“These accusations have never been put to me before, and to be put publicly in this way places me in the most difficult position. I have scrupulously tried to avoid making any detailed comment which would amount to interfering in a police inquiry.

“Again, I reaffirm my complete innocence of any wrongdoing.

“When I stepped aside from the ministry two days ago I put my trust in due process, and in the police dealing with this inquiry in a way that was fair to all parties.

“Instead, I have found myself subject to ongoing reports attributed to ’sources’, and now I face the most distressing direct accusations through the press.

“Rape is a horrendous crime. To be wrongly accused of such a crime is deeply harmful to me and my family.”

Theophanous has already been tried and found guilty by the media. A “not guilty” verdict will never clear his name.

If the accuser can remain cloaked in secrecy then the accused should also be kept confindential.

But the way it stands today, it’s one law for one, and one for another.

If as Andrew and others have suggested then yes she should be outed and she should be seeking help.

There is nothing graver then the false allegation of rape or pedophilia.

Any false accusation makes life that much harder for those women that are in real need of assistance and those that have truly been victims of a serious crime.

The exact circumstances of the allegations and the names invoved must be released

I agree with Ruff Stuff that accusers in this kind of case ought not be named unless they wish to be, partly because of the old fashioned idea that there is shame in being a victim of such a sexual crime. It’s a pretty Saudi view of the world, but it is what it is.

We are right to be sensitive to the feelings of people who make these accusations.

But as important as that is for individuals, justice for all of us is more important.

Every possible element that would make the accuser’s claim highly suspect has been satisfied in this case:

1) The accuser has psychiatric difficulties

2) The accuser took a very long time (a decade) to make the accusation

3) The accusation itself is gravely serious (albeit bordering on the fantastic) and appears to only rely on the accuser’s assertion.

It seems very unlikely anyone accused in these circumstances could possibly ever be convicted in a properly functioning court of law. Unless of course there’s something none of us yet know, something the accuser held back in her exclusive interview with The Age.

Premier Brumby was right to call on Victoria Police to interview Minister Theophanous and settle this matter once and for all. After an eighteen month long investigation, this really does need urgent action.

Ruff Stuff is right to worry about accusers in this situation. But there is something about this accuser’s story that simply doesn’t add up.

Until those issues are resolved, I believe great caution should be exercised, lest those cheering her on be seen as little more than a despicable lynch mob.

I give you two clear examples

1 Belinda Neal – no charges ever laid in the end after having “A Current Affair” follow the women into the dunny.

2 The bouncer accused of killing
David Hookes – taken to trial and found not guilty. The media went to town on that guy at the time. There was even a book written about the saga which focussed on the “trial by media” aspect of the case.

If the media have egg on their face again then lets hope they act a little more maturely in the future.

Walter Plinge is a pseudonym, traditionally used in London theatres when a part has not been cast, an actor is playing two parts or an actor does not want his or her name in the programme. Plinge was supposedly a real London pub owner, honoured by a group of actors with the borrowing of his name.

And if he is charged and later convicted of rape, Andrew Landeryou will, presumably, have a lot of explaining to do.