“Allegation Is Not Evidence”: How Due Process Quietly Died in Domestic Abuse Cases

By Michael Thompson

Founder, Falsely Accused Network

There was a time when this principle was beyond dispute.

An allegation is not evidence.

It was the foundation of due process.

The safeguard against abuse of power.

The line between justice and suspicion.

In theory, it still exists.

In practice — particularly in domestic abuse cases across England and Wales — it has quietly collapsed.

What has replaced it is something far more dangerous: a system where accusation alone is often enough to trigger punishment, exclusion, and lifelong consequences, long before any finding of fact is made.

FROM PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE TO PRESUMPTION OF RISK

The law still claims to uphold the presumption of innocence.

But domestic abuse frameworks increasingly operate on a different presumption altogether.

That risk exists unless and until the accused can somehow disprove it.

This shift did not happen overnight. It emerged gradually through safeguarding policies, institutional risk-aversion, and fear of criticism for “doing too little”.

The result is a system that prioritises institutional protection over individual justice.

The central question is no longer:

Is this allegation true?

But instead:

What will happen if we don’t act?

That reframing has transformed allegation into action — and action into punishment.

WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS WHEN AN ALLEGATION IS MADE

In domestic abuse cases, particularly those involving families, an allegation frequently triggers:

Immediate police intervention

Arrest without corroborating evidence

Bail conditions removing someone from their home

Prohibition on contact with their own children

Non-molestation orders granted without findings

Social services involvement based on untested claims

All of this can occur before any investigation is completed, and often before the accused has been properly interviewed.

The process itself becomes the penalty.

Even if the allegation is later dropped, disproven, or never substantiated, the damage has already been done.

FAMILY COURT: WHERE TRUTH BECOMES OPTIONAL

Nowhere is the erosion of due process more visible than in the family courts.

Allegations are assessed on the balance of probabilities — a lower standard than in criminal law. That standard can be justified only if evidence is properly tested.

Too often, it is not.

Instead, we see:

Findings of fact avoided “to reduce conflict”

Courts declining to determine whether allegations are true or false

Child contact restricted “pending resolution” that never arrives

Judges acknowledging allegations are unproven but treating them as operationally real

Parents — overwhelmingly fathers — are left in legal limbo.

Not guilty.

Not innocent.

But treated as unsafe indefinitely.

In this environment, truth becomes secondary to risk management, and due process becomes expendable.

SAFEGUARDING HAS BECOME A SHIELD AGAINST SCRUTINY

Safeguarding is necessary. No serious person disputes that.

But it has also become something else: a shield against scrutiny.

Any attempt to question an allegation is reframed as:

Minimising risk

Failing to prioritise safety

Not believing victims

This shuts down legitimate inquiry before it begins.

A system that cannot tolerate scrutiny is not safeguarding.

It is operating on assumption, not evidence.

THE ASYMMETRY OF CONSEQUENCES

One of the most corrosive features of the current system is the imbalance of consequences.

When an allegation is made, the accused faces immediate and severe penalties.

When an allegation is false, there is almost never accountability.

False allegations are routinely excused as misunderstandings, emotional responses, perceived fear, or “safeguarding concerns raised in good faith”.

Even when allegations are demonstrably untrue, the system rarely asks why they were made or what harm they caused.

This creates a dangerous incentive structure.

Accuse — and the system acts.

Lie — and nothing happens.

That is not justice.

THE HUMAN COST NOBODY MEASURES

Statistics do not capture the real harm.

Parents excluded from their children for years without findings.

Careers destroyed by arrests that lead nowhere.

Mental health collapse under indefinite suspicion.

Families fractured by unresolved allegations.

“No further action” is treated as closure.

It is not.

There is no apology.

No restoration.

No mechanism to undo the damage.

WHY THIS HARMS GENUINE VICTIMS TOO

A system that treats allegation as evidence ultimately harms everyone — including genuine victims.

When scrutiny disappears, trust erodes and credibility collapses.

Truth-finding is not hostile to victims.

It is the foundation of credibility.

When everything is believed automatically, nothing is believed deeply.

RESTORING DUE PROCESS IS NOT RADICAL — IT IS ESSENTIAL

This does not require abandoning protection for real victims.

It requires restoring balance.

Treat allegation as a starting point, not a conclusion.

Insist on early evidential scrutiny.

Make findings of fact instead of avoiding them.

Separate risk assessment from guilt.

Acknowledge that false allegations exist and cause harm.

Safeguarding without truth is not safeguarding.

It is institutionalised suspicion.

JUSTICE CANNOT SURVIVE ON ACCUSATION ALONE

A legal system that replaces evidence with allegation does not become safer.

It becomes unjust.

Due process is not a technicality.

It is the difference between protection and punishment.

If accusation alone is enough, justice no longer depends on truth — only on who speaks first.

That is not a system worthy of trust.

CONTACT THE FALSELY ACCUSED NETWORK

If you have been falsely accused of domestic abuse and need support:

Website:

www.falselyaccusednetwork.co.uk

Email:

support@falselyaccusednetwork.co.uk

Telephone:

0204 538 8788

England and Wales only.