Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Met Police change rape guidelines - shocker of a quote from cressida dick

118 replies

TheDukesOfHazzard · 02/04/2018 13:06

A few articles today - this evening standard one is not paywalled.

It's interesting. Partly because the lack of disclosure was across all crimes, but the press focus in on rape (most of us will know why).

Secondly because the "We believe you" thing was - on MN at least - never about unquestioningly believing a report at all times no matter what. It was a reaction to two things:

  • Cases where women (and chidlren, probabyl men too) had reported and the police said I don't believe you go away - Saville etc Warboys had this too
  • Cases where a woman had reported a rape and immediately the police had started investigating her, and not investigating the actual crime she had reported at all

So the idea that they treat victims with dignity and respect and go and investigate is fine - I mean who wanted anything else Confused

The part that concerns me A LOT is this at the end:

"She reportedly added: "And what might be a misunderstanding between two people, clumsy behaviour between somebody who fancies somebody else, is not a matter for the police.""

This (to me) is a clear reference to "date rape" / sexual assault when the victim knows the assailant, and it happens behind closed doors, isn't it? I can't see another reading of it.

WTF?

OP posts:
Elendon · 02/04/2018 14:47

Regarding the 'hands on the knees' allegations. The one I know of in the media involves a much older man who was a family friend and she knew him from when she was little. Now that instance does cross a line.

Elendon · 02/04/2018 14:39

Aoifeaye Yes. And it's not illegal, not even if you are a male teacher in a school who was caught doing it - though you will face suspension.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/teacher-andrew-corish-film-up-schoolgirls-skirts-no-prosecution-not-illegal-judge-rules-croydon-a8041806.html

Abra1de · 02/04/2018 14:39

‘officers must have an open mind when an allegiance made and not just blindly believe’ agree in general.

‘It is very important that victims to believe that they are going to be believed’ agree.

‘Our job ... is to be fair, to be impartial,and where appropriate to bring to justice and of course to support victims’ agree.

‘If it’s s long time ago or it’s very trivial or I’m not likely to get a criminal justice outcome I’m not going to spend a lot of resources on it’ agree with very trivial but would want to know terms of reference. A
man placing his hand on my bottom wouldn’t scare me but would my 80-year-old mother. And possibly my daughter. So trivial to me but not them.

QuentinSummers · 02/04/2018 14:37

Well. Another police officer said (last year I think) that police might have to stop investigating the lowest level of downloading child abuse images because it was too prolific.
Basically the police can't deal with men's sex crimes.
It would be nice if they came up with a more detailed suggestion than just "not putting resource into it".
But I feel this needs a multidisciplinary response (and proper consideration by politicians).
Which ain't gonna happen while men are mainly in charge

UpstartCrow · 02/04/2018 14:36

Aoifeaye Yes. You'd think under your clothing would be private.

Aoifeaye · 02/04/2018 14:34

What is upskirting? Is that someone taking a photograph up a woman's skirt without permission?

UpstartCrow · 02/04/2018 14:31

'AIBU to think that If you reported a burglary you'd expect to be believed'. How does that sound?

UpstartCrow · 02/04/2018 14:29

TheDukesOfHazzard Exactly, and I still don't understand how upskirting isn't illegal. The only conclusion you can reach isn't a happy one for women.

Original poster
TheDukesOfHazzard · 02/04/2018 14:29

You can start a thread Staples? I'll comment (although later going out for a bit now!).

I always feel nervous about feministing out of this section, that's ridiculous though isn't it, all women and parents of girls need to know this is the Met's approach.

OP posts:
Original poster
TheDukesOfHazzard · 02/04/2018 14:28

LotsOfStats - I am very sorry for what he did to you and that you saw no result from reporting it to police.

At least they were nice to you though, maybe that's all we can ask Confused

OP posts:
StaplesCorner · 02/04/2018 14:27

I wish this was on Chat or something like that so that it could get a wider audience, this is shocking. We're slipping back into the dark ages - or the 1970s - either way this woman putting other women in danger.

Elendon · 02/04/2018 14:27

It's not OK but equally if there isn't enough resource to go round they have to prioritise somewhere.

Perhaps they could start with not interviewing a mother of four for her comments on Twitter regarding Mermaids as a 'test' case, and spending the night for two officers in a hotel in order to conduct the interview.

Posie, aka Kelly-Jay Keen-Minshull

vimeo.com/260557348

MrsHathaway · 02/04/2018 14:27

(New York link - I hadn't noted that the change had been made in response to journalistic exposé and local pressure)

Original poster
TheDukesOfHazzard · 02/04/2018 14:27

MrsHathaway -

yes that sort of thing. Like upskirting. You assume it's already illegal / against the rules.But it isn;t.

OP posts:
Chaosandchocolate · 02/04/2018 14:26

Repeating my comment from other thread

"Given the issues over digital evidence there will never be adequate resources made available to properly investigate rape where the parties know each other.

I expect the comments quoted reflect how the criminal justice system are handling this. Stop throwing resource at "acquaintance" rape.

I expect whoever replaces Alison Saunders will take up this line also."

UpstartCrow · 02/04/2018 14:26

Not loving it but I don't think she's talking about rape.

Then she needs to clarify.

Yes she does, and that pretty ironic given her stance.

Original poster
TheDukesOfHazzard · 02/04/2018 14:26

Abra1de

Thanks for commenting.

Any view on what cressida dick has said?

Given that she is the head of the met and "some on MN" are not.

OP posts:
MrsHathaway · 02/04/2018 14:25

Meanwhile we note the state of New York has just this week made it illegal for law enforcement officers to have sexual intercourse with detainees. Because rape claims were becoming epidemic and every single officer under suspicion claimed the encounter was consensual.

2018, my friends.

Original poster
TheDukesOfHazzard · 02/04/2018 14:24

Quentin - disagree

"These kinds of public comments can be viewed as the police trying to show the impact of the cuts."

We have seen what they say when compaining about cuts - they say things like "These cuts mean that we havehad to halve our burglery reponse team by 50% and this will result in an increase in burglery" type thing.

This comment is in no way related to that - it is the latest in a smattering of statements from various forces that say in a mealy-mouthed / roundabout /euphemistic way that they want women to stop reporting crime of a sexual / historic / dv nature. Unelss there is a body, or at least some really meaty physical injury, they don't care.

OP posts:
Abra1de · 02/04/2018 14:24

the "We believe you" thing was - on MN at least - never about unquestioningly believing a report at all times no matter what.

I’m afraid that for some on MN it was exactly that.

MrsHathaway · 02/04/2018 14:23

If there's only ever a successful prosecution in certain types of cases it's misleading, patronising, cruel.. to tell women they should still report.

With most crimes, you lose nothing by reporting. Bike pinched? Report. Car vandalised? Report.

Possession, or rather property, has always been said to be nine tenths of the law. In reality it's closer to ninety-nine hundredths - and that's why rape was ever even illegal. But as women and children have gradually attained personhood and are no longer considered property, society and the law haven't really caught up in considering CSA, rape, DA etc as crimes against the person rather than crimes against possession.

It can't be rape if your mate's already had a go and passes her over, because she's temporarily his possession. It can't be rape if she took your money, because she's given herself to you so she's temporarily your possession. Etc etc.

What we've seen from actual cases of sexual assault and rape coming to court is that if there's the slightest sniff of doubt, the prosecution will fail, and the victim will be considered a perpetrator of The Greatest Lie Ever Told.

The faintest sniff of doubt and would I fuck report anything at all.

Which is why a woman shares her stories quietly instead. Because #WeBelieveHer.

Original poster
TheDukesOfHazzard · 02/04/2018 14:22

"Maybe the police have had a myriad of accusations of someone putting their hand on someone else's knee in 1983.

Doubt it."

Well, quite.

Certain - I think she is talking about "date rape" which many people still don't see as "rape-rape". And from a police perspective, is it really a crime? Violent crime is framed very much in the sort of thing that men do to each other. the type of crime men do to women - often leaving no physical damage - seems to be hard for at least 50% of society (including women like cressida dick) to understand as "real" crime.

So bottom line is, if I go home with a colleague and he punches me in the face and breaks my nose >> crime
If I go home with a colleague and he pins me down and rapes me but does not also beat me up - so maybe there are no lasting physical injuries or they are "minor" (considered these days to include bleeding for 48 hours afterwards apprently) >> no crime

If he does BOTH then the nose breaking my act as evidence for the rape as well >> it might make them inclined to see the rape as non trivial as there is proper violence in there as well.

Not sure. Certainly there has always been a real issue around rapes that don't contain better recognised "violent" aspects as being recognised as "bad" in any way.

OP posts:
QuentinSummers · 02/04/2018 14:20

I think there are a lot of issues at the moment with cuts to police budgets meaning specialist units are increasingly being disbanded. These kinds of public comments can be viewed as the police trying to show the impact of the cuts.
It's not OK but equally if there isn't enough resource to go round they have to prioritise somewhere.

Ereshkigal · 02/04/2018 14:11

Not loving it but I don't think she's talking about rape.

Then she needs to clarify. Because that is what it will be taken as. And I think is a fair reading.

Elendon · 02/04/2018 14:07

Bluetoo1

I would say the misunderstanding bit at the end is in response to the myriad of comments about a clumsy grope or pass made at someone now being treated as sexual assault and now being reported to the police as such.

I know! I mean what production company would re shoot a three episode series due to accusations of sexual assault allegations against one of the major actors - Ed Westwick?

www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2018/apr/01/ordeal-by-innocence-review-saga-seamlessly-sifts-truth-from-lies

www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-42577505