Dear Principal and Vice-Chancellor,
I am writing to you in my capacity as the founder of Unseen Victims CIC, an organisation that supports in part, individuals and families affected by sexual harm, coercion, and complex victim dynamics.
I am contacting you following the recent investigation into the lecture involving an external speaker affiliated with Justice for Innocent Men Scotland (JIMS). I want to begin by acknowledging that I respect the seriousness with which your institution appears to have approached the complaints process. I also recognise the importance of academic freedom, open dialogue, and the right to challenge established perspectives—principles that are fundamental to higher education and to a healthy society.
However, I feel compelled to raise concerns based on nearly a decade of frontline experience supporting thousands of individuals impacted by these issues.
While it is undeniable that wrongful convictions and false allegations do occur, and absolutely should be subject to scrutiny and challenge, it is equally important to recognise that there is a far more prevalent and deeply concerning reality: individuals who are guilty of serious offences manipulating those closest to them into denial being fuelled by false rhetoric and misinformation. This often results in vulnerable family members—partners, parents, and even children—being drawn into harmful belief systems that reject evidence and discourage critical thinking.
In my work, I have seen first-hand the consequences of this. Families can become entrenched in denial, sometimes at great financial and emotional cost, and in some cases placing children at risk. Safeguarding can break down. Individuals who initially believed they were supporting a loved one later come to realise the reality of the situation, often after further harm has occurred—either to themselves or to others within their family.
It is in this context that I am concerned about the potential unintended impact of platforming groups or narratives that may, even indirectly, promote blanket denial, victim-blaming, or the dismissal of lived experiences. Without careful framing and balance, such messaging risks reinforcing harmful dynamics rather than encouraging informed, critical engagement.
I want to be clear: I support the core principle of ensuring fair trials and due process. These are essential safeguards in any just legal system. However, when these discussions are presented without sufficient balance or without acknowledging the complexities of victimhood and offender behaviour, they can contribute to a one-sided narrative that may be harmful—particularly to students who are still developing their understanding of these issues.
Universities have a unique responsibility not only to encourage healthy debate, but to ensure that such debate is grounded in evidence, balance, and an awareness of real-world consequences. Providing students with a rounded perspective—one that includes both the reality of false allegations, wrongful convictions and the far more common patterns of manipulation and harm—is essential.
I am sharing these concerns not as criticism, but in the spirit of constructive dialogue. I would welcome the opportunity to contribute to future discussions, provide insight from lived experience, or support the development of more balanced approaches to these sensitive topics.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Yours faithfully,
Emma Wells
Founder, Unseen Victims CIC