Members of the jury at the Oxford Crown Court heard closing arguments on Thursday during the high-profile rape trial of British rapper Slowthai, whose real name is Tyron Frampton. The 29-year-old artist faces serious allegations, including three counts of joint rape against two women at a party following his performance at The Bullingdon venue in Oxford on September 7, 2021. Slowthai, along with co-accused Alex Blake-Walker, 27, who also denies charges of sexual assault, pleaded not guilty throughout the proceedings. The jury was advised to focus solely on the evidence disclosed during the trial, with prosecuting attorney Heather Stangoe K.C. leading the charge for the prosecution.
During her closing submission, Stangoe urged jurors, “This is not C.S.I., this is not the fictional drama we see on TV. This is about real people and events,” drawing comparisons to the high-profile Wagatha Christie saga, which involved public figures embroiled in legal disputes. Stangoe emphasized the importance of the jurors' impartiality, instructing them not to play investigators but to assess the facts presented during the court proceedings.
The trial has attracted significant media attention, drawing wider public sympathy and scrutiny toward the accused. Throughout the case, both men have maintained their accounts of consensual activities with the complainants. The allegations suggest a troubling narrative, with the prosecution claiming incidents of rape took place on the roof of the house party, allegedly at Blake-Walker's encouragement and with Slowthai's complicity. The two women at the party have alleged they became victims following the invitation made by the men.
Key Details of the Allegations
The jury learned key details about the events leading up to the alleged assault. Following Slowthai's performance, the two complainants and their friends relocated to the home of one of the members of the party. Testimonies indicated this was not just any typical gathering, and some witnesses recalled discussions about sexual acts, including vague references to supposed orgies. A witness to the party reported hearing phrases denoting sexual promiscuity, which left them confused about the atmosphere.
It was alleged by the prosecution's case mayhem ensued on the property, with claims of intoxication among guests, which included alcohol and drugs such as ketamine. One member of the party recalled tension, with loud shoutings like, "We have lost respect, just go, get out," conveying the chaotic mindset of individuals present during the alleged misconduct.
The Defense's Arguments
The defense has adamantly opposed the charges put forth by the prosecution, with Patrick Gibbs, the attorney representing Slowthai, stating, "There are dozens of inconsistencies and issues with the accusations against my client." Emphasizing the persona of Frampton, Gibbs characterized him as far removed from the stereotypical image often attached to male rappers, painting him as someone who leads with thoughtfulness and moderation.
Gibbs's strategic portrayal of Slowthai aimed to counter the public bias against him fueled by the nature of these allegations. He added, “Even if he is acquitted, the impact on his life will be everlasting. He will be canceled for life.” This remark encapsulated the contemporary climate for public figures, where the mere suggestion of guilt can have irreversible effects on reputation and career.
Slowthai has expressed regret about the allegations impacting his public image, asserting his compliance with boundaries during sexual encounters. While he recognized having engaged with one of the complainants, he maintains the interactions were consensual, rejecting claims of coercion or encouragement by his co-defendant, Blake-Walker.
Course of Events and Witness Statements
Testimonies from individuals present at the party have also played integral roles during the trial, including descriptions of impulsive behavior observed on the roof and the atmosphere contributing to overall misunderstandings about the events. Many witnesses have been ambiguous about whether they observed troubling behavior or were merely caught up on the party's excitement.
Reflecting on Consent and Impartiality
Throughout the proceedings, the subject of consent has arisen frequently. Judge Ian Pringle highlighted the fundamental nature of consent as the courtroom processed people’s sentiments and perceptions surrounding these sensitive encounters. He reminded jurors to set aside emotional biases and to focus solely on the facts relating to the case. He stated, “There’s no stereotype for perpetrators or victims of rape,” which aimed to remind jurors to take their responsibility seriously.
The jury's deliberations are expected shortly, as they must now sift through complex narratives and weigh inconsistent memories against the somber weight of the allegations before them. The verdict will not only have ramifications for the individuals involved but will also contribute to the larger discourse on sexual consent, accountability, and perceptions of public figures.
Ongoing Repercussions of the Case
Outside the courthouse, public opinion swirls around the trial with many engaging with the dialogue about the prosecution and defense’s narratives. Public discussions highlight underlying issues of sexism, male privilege, and the influence of reputations marred by the modern social media era. The emotional repercussions for the alleged victims, the accused, and their families create layered dynamics often overlooked by the societal narrative, yet they lie at the core of these legal battles.
One of the complainants, described as a long-time fan of the rapper, has shared feelings of helplessness during her testimonies, depicting moments of being coerced without clear agency. Many observers have lamented the difficult reality of proving or disproving allegations of sexual violence, and critics warn of the systemic issues women face when coming forth with accusations.
The culmination of this trial will neither erase nor remedy the pain experienced by the parties involved nor shift the tides of societal norms overnight. Outside observers remain firmly fixated on the outcomes of this case, knowing its influence will ripple through various systems and potentially define new conversations about consent and accountability.
This trial reflects broader fears and hopes people harbor about trust and accountability, rising questions about how society approaches sexual violence issues, and developing one’s voice against accusation and accountability.
The world watches as the jury deliberates, awaiting the verdict and reflecting on the responsibility each individual bears concerning consent and violence within modern relationships.