A female survivor was given the microphone at the rally and initially received encouragement. Yet when she clarified that the men who attacked her were not migrants but white British men, the atmosphere changed instantly. The crowd began to jeer, drowning her out, before organisers cut her speech short and removed her from the platform. Instead of solidarity, she was met with hostility for speaking honestly about her experience.

The gathering had been framed as an event to raise awareness of violence against women, but it was underpinned by anti-immigrant sentiment. Many in attendance were holding banners that demanded tighter border controls, and chants could be heard targeting refugees and asylum seekers. The speaker’s testimony stood in direct conflict with these claims, which is why her voice was rejected so forcefully.

For years, sections of the press and certain politicians have repeated claims such as:

“Four in ten rape charges involve foreign nationals.”

These statements are not supported by reliable data. The Office for National Statistics does not publish records on sexual offences that separate suspects or offenders by nationality. Academic research into crime rates consistently shows no link between increased immigration and higher levels of rape or sexual violence.

Experts point out that migrants form a significant portion of London’s population, particularly young men. While this demographic can appear more frequently in some crime figures, that does not equate to evidence of higher levels of offending. Simplifying such statistics into a single explanation about immigration is misleading and fuels damaging stereotypes.

In 2023, 90% of those charged with child sexual abuse offences were from white ethnic groups. Although some high profile scandals in towns like Rotherham and Rochdale involved perpetrators of Pakistani heritage, those cases are not reflective of national trends. Their prominence is partly due to the way they fit into long running fears promoted by certain outlets.

Campaigners who push the idea of the “migrant rapist” are often accused of exploiting women’s suffering to pursue anti-immigration policies. Survivors who do not fit that script, like the woman at the rally, risk being silenced or disbelieved. Her treatment is an example of how politics can shape which victims are listened to and which are ignored.

The misuse of crime statistics also raises wider concerns about justice. When media and political attention is overwhelmingly focused on immigrant communities, the crimes committed by white offenders can be overshadowed or minimised. This selective narrative makes it harder for survivors to achieve recognition, and can reinforce biases within law enforcement and the courts.

In the aftermath of the rally, footage of the incident has circulated widely online. Clips showing the woman being booed and escorted away have sparked heated debate on social media platforms. Many users have argued that her removal was not due to time limits or disruption, but because her testimony did not align with the anti-immigration message of the event. Some commentators expressed outrage that a survivor was silenced in such a way, while others pointed out how the response exposed the selective nature of the campaign’s narrative.

Ultimately, the experience of the woman removed from the rally demonstrates how difficult it remains for survivors to speak their truth in a climate dominated by division. Rather than amplifying her trauma to reinforce fear of outsiders, campaigners could have chosen to listen and reflect on the reality she described. By refusing to do so, they highlighted the danger of using misinformation as a political weapon.