Former Conservative MP raped his wife, family court finds

Anniebach ‘balance of probabilities’ is a strange wording.
If he is guilty then well done to her for managing to bring a rape case to court and getting a successful verdict. It takes courage.
But a decision saying he probably did it is a bit odd.

I watched a programme about family courts (in England) and some of it was very distressing - children of all ages up to teenagers being dragged out their homes by police and social workers sometimes overnight usually removed from their mothers and family courts awarding custody to fathers who had often been abusive.
I am not a Tory and don't live in England but well done to the lady for speaking out. Doesn't matter what she does as a job really but in her position she is able to highlight what happened and happens. These courts are held in secret. Families less well known may be scared or less financially able to fight against it so it could help them I hope.

Mollygo I am not comfortable with ‘he probably did’ and the
headline ‘raped his wife’.

Rape is a criminal offence as is driving when drunk, we don’t
read ‘probably drunk’.

Gwyneth

Here we go again!! Yes I agree Monica . What this man has done is despicable but his politics is irrelevant.

Do you not think that the details were not fully disclosed at first because he was a govt minister? So it's not a question of party politics.

Legal terminology is set in Law.

What is exceptional is that it was revealed at all. Remember, this all happened in the Family Court not the criminal court and in the Family Courts cases like this would normally be shrouded in secrecy, even when one of a couple has been accused as he has been. The judge who made the decision to release the details, felt he had to explain why he was going against Family Court precendent in doing so. This means that the original decision not to reveal and had nothing to do with him having been an MP or Minister. It was the revealing that was exceptional.

Minister or not, in his time, he would have been cast to the wolves once he was convicted (in the criminal courts,) in a previous case of depraved and lewd behaviour, so he would had no power or influence and no powerful friends left anyway.

I expect the wording is 'probably' because the family court is not in a position to find him guilty.

I think it's important that this decision is publicised so that other women know that this precedent now exists.
As can often be seen on Mumsnet, some women are deterred from leaving an abusive partner because they fear what may happen when he has parental access visits with the children.

I think his job is completely relevant.
Look at the character and history of the people who are serving our country. The Prime Minister doesn't know how many children he has!

This is one example of the disgusting class of people we have allowed to gain power and control.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Cold I think you are mixing this guy up with Charlie Elphick, his wife (sorry, ex-wife) stood for his seat and won it after he had to stand down.

Charlie Elphick is no saint he was convicted of two sexual assaults but when compared with this with this sleaze ball. he has the advantage. He and his wife divorceded, but, as far as I can remember, no case in the family courts.

Andrew Griffiths wife is not an MP.

I would Google again.

Yes she is an MP. A brave woman.

In criminal cases, the standard of proof is beyond reasonable doubt. If found guilty of rape and the other forms of abuse AG subjected his wife to, he would go to prison.

In civil cases, the standard is that the complainant must provide evidence that convinces the Court that the likelihood of the event is more likely than not. The Judge was convinced by the evidence before the Court, so reached the findings reported in the press.

To suggest that the Court found that AG ‘probably’ raped and abused his wife is legally incorrect. It also minimises the horror this woman was subjected to and her bravery in attempting to protect a child.

Woman’s Hour covering this now. Chilling evidence