Guardian publishes misleading article about rape

I had another think about this last night. The "conviction rate is 58%" is the misogynists playing field, isn't it?

Firstly, it's so easy to play that card against women who don't report their rapes. Telling them they have a 58% chance of conviction is misleading, as it doesn't take into account the number of cases that don't get to court. It deflects from the failings of the legal system up to that point; the failings that cause victims to withdraw and retract complaints, the complaints that are no crimed, and the rape cases that fail to make it to court in the first place. We need to hold the legal system to account, from the initial account to how victims are treated in court, to find out exactly why 35% of reports are no crimed, withdrawn or retracted. That's 35 out of 100 reports. We need to find out why, exactly, only 20% of all reported rape cases fail to make it to court, and hold those who are making the process more difficult accountable for the effects. Feminists aren't responsible for the 6% of reports resulting in a conviction; the legal system is, through all it's failings.

Yeah, it's just getting yourself into the percentage that goes to court in the first place though, isn't it?
And if there is a standard of rape-rape being applied before it even goes to court then 58% is a crap result too.

Agree the 'I believe you' campaign is fantastic. Just reading the words I believe you on the campaign thread sent chills down my spine. Just reading it on a forum means so much.

Pretty much, Nyac...

And that, to me, is abhorrent. :(

At the time the review was released, a lot of papers mis-reported the "headline" of "dropping" the 6%.

i imagine people just have memories of that.

Those of you who've taken the time to read the Stern report and think about it, what do you make of the recommendations? I've just looked at the intro and recommendations and I don't actually see Baroness Stern recommending that the 58% figure be adopted and the 6% be dropped, only that the public be made aware that there is a difference between the two and why that is. I think that could be a good thing, since it's the attrition rate that's the shocking thing about rape - it's beyond unacceptable that only 6% of women will see their rape go from initial report to successful conviction.

Is there another agenda or is the telegraph and guardian misreporting?

That law article, and the guardian one, and the stats one, all seem to point in the same direction.

That women who have really been raped, who have experienced rape-rape, you know, proper rape, should be encouraged by the 58% stat.

Women who have experienced rape-lite, or who had done something silly like going out after dark by themselves or having an alcoholic drink or being alone with a man they had smiled at... They aren't really important as they haven't really been raped and that's why the 6% is irrelevant and why it must be struck off the record. The ones that don't go to court - they're not worth worrying about are they and that's why they say it's a "myth". None of them believe these women have been raped. Not properly. Probably not at all.

Which is why "We believe you" is so important.

A woman would presumably be heartened by the 58%, if and when the CPS told her that they were going to go ahead and prosecute.

Exactly giyadas

The conversation is all about reporting.

The statistic for seeing a conviction after reporting a rape, is 6%.

Not tricky.

The 6% is the one that is most relevant to women thinking of reporting. Saying that it's 58% gives false hope, but the argument either way focuses on the women reporting not the police and courts side of it.
It doesn't matter what the exact figures are, more women will report if they feel the police will take it seriously and courts will try the suspect without dragging victims through the mud in the process. All the focus on the figures seem to be just a way to make it seem less bad without actually doing anything. The 6% is the number that matters and it should be pointed at the police with the purpose of making them do better.
When they start doing better more women will feel confident to report.

And some of the comments on that statistic site were vile.

It is basic, Sardine, and it's so sad we have to keep going over this.

I've lost count how many times I've read a thread, in which the OP is asking if they were raped, and it sounds as if they're searching for excuses that it wasn't rape, or they were to blame somehow. I just hope that one day, we get past that. That one day, we'll get to the point where women trust that voice in the back of their heads which tells them it wasn't right in the first place, where they don't need telling that their rape was a rape, where the victims don't search for a million ways to blame themselves, before worrying that everyone else will do just that as well.

We know that the cases that go to court are ones which are likely to convict
That they are ones which satisfy the myths surrounding rape
Stranger / dark alley / no drink or drugs consumed by victim / victim assaulted in other ways to the rape etc etc

So this blogger is suggesting that women have a good think about whether their cases meet that criteria before deciding whether to report. Well guess what, they do. And that is NOT a good situation.

It should be the case that all victims feel confident about reporting, and it should be up to the police to take the report seriously, gather evidence and support the victim and the CPS to decide whether to pursue the case. This is BASIC isn't it?

Agree there, Nyac.

sorry, I know my post with the stats (second one) was a bit garbled. Point I was trying to make was that the less victims withdrawing reports, then surely the higher the conviction rate?

We also need to do something about the "no crime" on reports. 3 - 8% are false reports. Mostly for reasons that aren't malicious. (I can't remember who covered reasons for false allegations, but the reasons for false allegations include misidentifying the perpetrator, amongst other things - in other words, there's still a crime)

But 6% of all reported rapes ending in a rape conviction; not a substituted conviction, rape. That's pretty damn shitty. Even the 9.23% chance of a report which isn't withdrawn for whatever reason ending in a conviction is pretty shitty. Substituting victim's rapes for another charge is, again, pretty shitty.

From that 58 campaign thing

"I want to see a campaign that yells loudly about the 58% figure. One that says ?if there is evidence to take this to trial, you are more likely than not to see your offender convicted? ? but also one that is honest about the difficulties in getting a case to trial ? not to put people off making a complaint, but to enable them to make a proper, informed and educated assessment of whether they want to make a complaint."

WHAT? The author of that article is suggesting that it is right and proper that women have a good think about whether or not they should report a rape? The aim should be that ^all women (and men and children) who are raped should feel no trepidation about reporting that rape to the police! FFS what is that author ON?

<a class="break-all" href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110608160754/www.equalities.gov.uk/PDF/Stern_Review_acc_FINAL.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">the stern report

if anyone wants to read it

Nor do I, it's not a "myth"

short that's a much more convincing argument for why the 58% figure should be adopted, but it's still fails to take into account the reason the 6% figure was used in the first place.

I don't think most rape victims consider their chances of securing a conviction if the case goes to court when they first report their rape. I think their main concern is "will I be believed" and the answer to that question is the reason for the 6% figure.

FWIW, a straw poll I conducted among people I knew revealed that most of them had no idea what the conviction rate for rape was and nearly all put it much higher than either the 6% or the 58% figures mentioned here.

Sadly, the idea that women lie about rape seems to be much more fixed in national consciousness.

Actually, I've put it at 9.23% of reports, where the report is recorded, and not withdrawn, retracted or "no crimed".

Or, of those charged, 23%.

Convicting someone of sexual assault is not convicting someone of rape. And it minimises the victims experience to do so.

Sorry, misunderstood point you were getting at. I do think, however, it should be considered that it wasn't the sole response. Also, the other responses to the survey seem quite high. Conviction rate is one thing putting women off, but not the sole reason.

You seem determined to hang on to the 6% myth. Not quite sure who's interests that is in, but anyway..I give up.

I linked to this because it refers to the stern review that Frothydragon was talking about. And I would say it's definitely not MRA friendly.

shortsmallsally, See my posts... Clears that myth up. HTH.