Should rape accusers have their anonymity withdrawn if they lose their court case? This isn’t a question I ever thought I’d have to seriously answer until today when I saw it posed by a colleague. She brought it up in reference to the case of Durham University student Louis Richardson, who was cleared of rape and sexual assault charges this week.

Though he is now free to live his life in peace, Angela Epstein believes that the 21-year-old has been so cruelly treated during the trial that the two women who brought the allegations against him should pay. Specifically, by losing their anonymity and having their names plastered all over the press. She may have a point in relation to this case, but as a general rule, it's incredibly problematic - even vindictive.

As much as we want to trust our justice system, we cannot assume that a non guilty verdict in rape trials means that the claimants were lying - although in this case they may well have been. As Rape Crisis South London’s Rebecca Hitchen says: “As a general rule, a not guilty verdict or an acquittal isn’t always the same as a false rape accusation. Suggesting otherwise fuels the fear that women lie about rape."

Rape conviction rates in the UK are among the lowest in Europe. Only around 13 per cent of reported rapes end in a conviction and that can be due to many reasons: a lack of evidence; false witness testimonies; victims dropping charges after struggling to cope with traumatic trials; and perhaps most importantly, the fact that 12 jurors have to be certain a crime took place when we live in a world perpetuated with rape myths - from ‘she would have fought back if she didn’t want it’ to ‘she was asking for it’.

To publicly name and shame victims for being brave enough to report their crimes, and go through this court process, would be cruel.

One woman, who says she was raped but whose attacker was found not guilty in court, tells me: "Withdrawing my anonymity is basically the same as calling me a liar. I shouldn't be demonised for the worst thing that happened to me - but that is exactly what this proposal suggests."

Victims like her would have their lives destroyed further by the removal of anonymity, but what too would it do to the approximate 85,000 women and 12,000 men in England and Wales raped each year? Reporting rates for rape are already worryingly low – they may have risen by 30 per cent in the last two years – but police have repeatedly stressed that sexual assault crimes are under-reported.

If lifelong anonymity for rape victims could be removed if they’re unsuccessful in court, why would they put themselves through months, even years, of trauma? Rape trials are notoriously invasive – victims have to re-live the crime by giving evidence, they can have their lives scrutinised and pulled apart in court, and they often have to give up full control of their social media accounts and personal information.

The one privilege they are granted throughout this ordeal is anonymity. To withdraw this could have devastating consequences - not just for UK reporting rates but for citizens like us who could end up walking the streets alongside unconvicted sex offenders.

There are, of course, cases where people have lied about rape and made false accusations. These are appalling crimes and anyone guilty of doing so should be punished – but it’s important to remember that the number of false rape cases are minimal. Over five years, 109 women in the UK were prosecuted for false rape claims. Considering an estimate of 425,000 women would have been raped over that time period in England and Wales alone, it is a tiny figure.

"We cannot assume that a non guilty verdict in rape trials means that the claimant was lying"

Ann Olivarius, senior partner at law firm McAllister Olivarius, explains: “Do women lie about sex crimes? You might get some extraordinary cases but our view is they don’t generally lie because the consequences for being raped mean no one wants to be known as someone who’s been raped. The stigma might not be as bad as it used to be but it doesn’t enhance someone’s reputation.

“Of course we want people to go to jail if they’ve lied. But those cases are so few and far between. My firm has tried thousands of rape cases and we haven’t ever dealt with a single false rape claim.”

She believes it is “morally wrong” for rape victims to have their anonymity rescinded if the defendant is acquitted, but explains that in the rare cases they have lied, there are other ways for justice to be served. “It’s possible to go after them for different crimes, such as defamation, or an intent to cause harm.”

Footballer and convicted rapist Ched Evans Credit: PA

Our justice system has provisions in place to ensure that the falsely accused can still have justice and restore damaged reputations. But all it can do to protect rape victims from society’s stigma and ill-placed judgment is provide them with anonymity. To take that from them would have horrific consequences.

Just look at the woman who accused Ched Evans of raping her when she was 19. She was granted lifelong anonymity but has been publicly outed twice. She has had to move home five times during the past four years and has now fled abroad.

This woman was vindicated in court – Evans was given a five year sentence for raping her though he is now trying to appeal it – but she has still been hounded by his fans for daring to report a rape. No other woman should ever have to go through what she has been through and anyone who believes in naming and shaming rape victims needs to stop and put themselves in her shoes before suggesting such a dangerous proposal.