'Rape should carry a mandatory life sentence' - Herald article, Neil Mackay

@Simonjt , I understand your reasoning. However, based on experience I would not agree. If you do a light reading on rapist typologies you'll find the violent sadistic ones are going to be like that anyway. In the case of a murder, with DNA, databases and video footage, the UK have a technically very good system with a high proportion of cases "solved". If you murder someone, chances are you'll be caught.

btw, "life" (in southern Ireland where I work today) is on average 18 years. Following changes in 2021, parole application now is after 12 years.

@Twicebakedroastpotatoes The whole trans discussions typically makes my blood boil. It often derails the core issue of mainstream sexual violence of men against women where progress needs to me made. In numbers terms I'd assume it is just "noise"?

Unfortunately I’m pretty sure Neil Mackay is a TRA. Meaning he presumably thinks lady rapists with penises should serve their life sentences in women’s prisons.

If rape comes with life, my worry is that rape followed by murder may become more common, plus if your victim is dead and you’re an unknown attacker the likelihood of being caught is surely slim.

@bythebanksof interesting information about the data sources thanks

Dark Chapter is a good, but very disturbing read. Like many books, it should have a trigger warning. In fact if you read up on the the real world case (the author has a blog you'll easily find) then you can see exactly some of the items discussed in this thread played out in real life. A young offender, a repeat offender, a short sentence followed by a release, and then repeated offenses.

@howdoesatoastermaketoast I did not mean to provide any encouragement or endorsement of the system as it. Just act any victim!

Of course the models are based on incomplete data. But it is a rich variety of sources, reports to police provide on tiny numbers. You'll see data from rape centers, support services, soliciting of people who've never reported previously through more public calls. They are samples, taken from different people, at different times, and different locations. It is what it is.

I'm not really in a position to give advice on something to like that to you or your daughter, it is something that you'd have to decide. I like to think I'd report to police, because I've seen that it's only through women reporting and bringing this crime to societal attention that things get done. I've been in total awe of the selfness and bravery of some women. But I also understand why many don't and won't and it's their choice. If you are interested, read "Dark Chapter" by Winnie Li. It's recent book, based in Northern Ireland, and while fictional it is largely grounded in real and accurate experience.

I do support locking up rapists for life. They aren’t capable of being members of society.

from a practical standpoint, this needs to be limited to either stranger rape or violent rape. It has to be the clear cut capture and assault situation.

we all know that rape comes in many forms, not just the stranger who jumps out of the bushes. Cases without clear cut evidence and that leave any room for one party misinterpreting are already difficult enough to convict.

@bythebanksof

"There is no single solution to make things much better in an instant, but a combination of things together, many of which suggested in earlier posts, could be a significant improvement."

I completely agree

"Also, today there is a lot more data than in the past, many large scale longitudinal studies, lots of analysis done, a myriad of competing and overlapping (and sometimes contradictory) theories. "

This may well be true but my experience is consistent with theories that 99% of rapes are unreported so I would be sceptical that studies and theories may be based on unreliable / incomplete data.

"Based on personal experience, I favour much longer sentences, with more discretion on the upper end for judges."

I'd totally support very high upper upper limits including life based on the logic of 'looking at the porn he's been consuming and the comments on forums and the escalating pattern of offending we were lucky to catch this guy before he murdered a woman."

"If a rapist is released at age 30, versus a release at age 50, there are very different outcomes statistically. Longer sentences, and released later in life."

sounds reasonable

"In some ways I think the system today is better than at any time in the past,"

in a way I'm encouraged to hear you say that it had seemed to me that rape had been virtually decriminalised but you work in the area so your perspective would naturally be very different to mine.

If my daughter were raped a) would you recommend calling the police and b) in your estimation what would be the chances of the rapist being found guilty at trial?

I disagree for 2 reasons.

One, women will be murdered to prevent them from reporting rape.

Two, juries will be even more reluctant to convict if there's a long sentence.

But I do agree the painfully short sentences atm are disgusting. It should be 10/15 years minimum.

All violent sentences should be longer.

30/40+ for murder.

20 for attempted.

20/25 for permanent injury. Eg acid attacks

15 for death by drink/drug driving.

2-5 years for assaults that cause injury eh broken bones/ stitches.

1 year minimum for domestic abuse and be put on a DV register and have to declare new relationships to police for 20 years

25-30+ for child sexual abuse

Mandatory jail for all non contact sex offences

@scaredoff, to be honest I really don't know if it would make a significant difference. It might, it might not. However, if you speak to victims, you'll overwhelming hear that they are desirable, they want "better" justice.

@howdoesatoastermaketoast and @heldinadream yes indeed there is a risk, but I'd consider it small. If you want to know more on the subject you should go to local library or Uni that has access to research journals, and use scholar.google.com and look up motivations for such crimes, and perpetrator typologies specifically Massachusetts Treatment Center Rapist Typology (MTC: R3). It's widely considered one of the more helpful models in understanding why they do it, and what they are willing to do. There is a small subset of offenders who will/want to use serious violence as part of the crime, and they'll do that regardless to their victim. The majority use minimum force required to control the victim and get what they want done.

yes. I think there is a real risk of that.

That's interesting @bythebanksof . What do you think of the objection that longer sentences might make juries less willing to convict?

I've worked in this legal area for many years, both in south east of England, and more recently in Ireland. There is no single solution to make things much better in an instant, but a combination of things together, many of which suggested in earlier posts, could be a significant improvement.

Also, today there is a lot more data than in the past, many large scale longitudinal studies, lots of analysis done, a myriad of competing and overlapping (and sometimes contradictory) theories. However, at the end of the day it is humans and a legal system we've created.

Based on personal experience, I favour much longer sentences, with more discretion on the upper end for judges. In most of the cases I've seen the rapist knows what they are doing, when, where, how, (and sometimes who), it's pre-planned. I'll skip comment on the "why". They also know the chances of repercussions are small. Again in the cases that come to court, I've seen so much additional material showing that a rape is often just one more crime in the arsenal of a man with a range of repeat offenses, and often previous rape allegations.

While there are notable exceptions, the age profile of active rapists is a major factor with respect to repeat offenses. If a rapist is released at age 30, versus a release at age 50, there are very different outcomes statistically. Longer sentences, and released later in life.

In some ways I think the system today is better than at any time in the past, but not at all fit for purpose. I also think that we (females) don't do enough with respect to protest, politics, etc. to try move things to a better place. Horror cases grab the new headlines, and then things move on. I used to be shocked at the support that (alleged) rapists had from their family and friends.

I recognize some of the poster names on the thread. We're all people who work in this area, who know someone directly impacted, or ourselves were victims. It's a topic off the radar for most people sadly. They don't care so much on a day-to-day basis, and they don't understand the impact of rape on victims.

I guess rape is an unusual crime in that the actual crime of penetration can in other circumstances be a lawful act. And because often it takes place behind closed doors it becomes one word against another. All evidence can be explained away by saying the act did take place but was consensual.

The measures listed above by pp: lower standard of proof, ditch the jury; and build data; letting juries know about previous convictions or other complaints would undoubtedly increase the conviction rate but would, as many have said, go against natural justice.

It’s hard to know then what possible way they could increase conviction rates. I often read how rape convictions are 2% and this is a disgrace and how many women don’t even report because there’s no point. But I’ve never seen any really convincing ideas about how to improve things.

I wouldn't rule out sex crime courts, but this idea that you could get rid of juries and proof beyond a reasonable doubt to me is simply not acceptable. The number of false imprisonments for rape is really irrelevant to undermining those principles. There is no reason that would apply only to this one kind of crime, if we say the principles are invalid.

It would be a fundamentally different kind of justice system and I don't think people would be happy with the outcomes.

There certainly are other types of justice systems, but neither restorative, nor what are often put forward as indigenous approaches, tend to be a lot harsher than western systems. If anything it seems the opposite. Or, in the other direction, you get systems with long jail times in horrific conditions, physical punishment, or the death penalty, often with a highly biased trial.

We have specialised family courts, why not sex crimes courts? There are restorative justice initiatives, Indigenous processes in some countries. Yes, you'd have to look at the principles of justice. It is just possible that a bunch of white blokes a couple of hundred years ago didn't capture the exact best way of doing everything.

Blackstone's ratio or Franklin's quote about guilty people going free is fine if you don't understand recidivism in sex offending and conviction rates. If Franklin thinks 100 guilty men should go free, that's a thousand rapes. If we carry on with our current conviction rate that's hundreds of thousands. My risk of being sexually assaulted is about a million times higher than the risk of being falsely imprisoned. Not 100 times. Or ten times depending on the principle.

I'm not saying there is a better way, just that the current way is shockingly poor.

Specially trained, three judges, somewhere between balance of probabilities and beyond a reasonable doubt?

I don't see how this could be allowed, it's directly removing the most basic rights we all have in the justice system. Which people did not always have.

If we were now to say, no, actually, those aren't your basic right as a citizen, don't be surprised if very soon people begin to think that might be true in other cases where they are not getting as many convictions as they believe they should. I think we'd begin to see the creep in less than a generation.

@DarkSol You've lost me. I'm not trying to sound cool. Yes, in history (and in some parts of the world today) rape is seen as such a disgrace to the woman and her family that it would be better if she died. Her validity as a woman is erased, if that's the right way of putting it. To me, saying that rape is so damaging to a woman that it is as serious as murder and merits an all life sentence (whatever the circumstances of the rape, and in the UK in 2022), does make me think of that attitude. But that is not how women in the UK (from most cultures) are perceived if they have been raped.
And yes, I do believe that some rapes are "not as bad as others". And that doesn't make me a rape apologist. I don't believe that a boyfriend not withdrawing when his girlfriend tells him to do so at the last minute should be judged in the same way as an attack in the park, for instance. Do other women really believe that these 2 rapes are equally serious and should be punished in the same way?
I remember there was a thread a while back where people stated as a fact that the death of a child was the worst thing that could possibly happen to a parent and that all deaths of children were all without exception equally terrible. Eg a stillbirth was as terrible as the brutal murder of a 10 year old. I didn't agree with that either.

It's reminiscent of the view that a woman who has been raped is better off dead.

This is a historic reality. This is part of the history of womenhood that current women are standing on. There was a time when it was supposed to be better for a raped woman to commit suicide or die in the attempt to resist the rape than to survive it 'ruined' in the eyes of men and the civilised world. It was not that long ago; a lot of the 1950s famous westerns are based around stories of that time. It doesn't help to forget and blur the realities of what women faced and the attitudes they dealt with because we're dealing with a resurgence of misogyny I've never seen in my lifetime, and that's more than half a century.

The idea of rape being equivalent to murder is something worth discussing and considering, and like the word 'hysteria' there is a grim history there for women. This is a valid point in the conversation whether you agree, disagree or have views that shade between the two.

I don't like mandatory sentences. It makes sentencing decisions dead decisions and takes judgement of circumstances out of the process. If sentencing is to be just then it has to be the decision of a court, not legislators. And it has to be seen as being so, with a judge giving their reasons for it.

Where did he say rape survivors are better off dead? I'm sorry but I am so tired of comments that wilfully take text out of context. It's not cool anymore. You're not getting any gold medals for this.

We can take your comments out of context too! For instance I could suggest that you sound a bit like you're a rape apologist because you think some rapes aren't as bad as others. Did I win any cool internet points for that?

BoiledBeetle

I’d like to see rape AND everything that goes with it prosecuted fully and properly,

For example, if a woman is attacked on her way home and dragged into a back alley and raped, the offenses should be rape, AND kidnapping/deprivation of liberty, AND actual/grevious bodily harm, AND any other crime that occurred.

I hate that other crimes are usually ignored on the rare occasions rape charges are brought.

Establishment views cannot simultaneously believe that:

Rape is so very serious in terms of damage to a woman mentally, physically, life altering and in some cases long term to permanent harm in terms of the trauma that it deserves a very serious sentence

AND

Rape is hardly prosecutable and seen in society and courts as something women have responsibility for (only this week I heard of a male responding to a woman talking about her rape by telling the woman who had been raped that she must say it was an 'alleged rape' - even though the woman was the one who had experienced it) and an unkind thing to talk about because it makes males uncomfortable

AND

Raped women are such a small matter that the risk of stuffing serious sex offenders (with rap sheets of such repeated, terrible, sadistic rapes that they not only got through court but had a heavy sentence) in women's prisons and a few rapes happening to women prisoners is not something anyone should talk about or care about. And that a female sucking up a rape or two is small potatoes compared to the devastating harm of limiting a male person's validation of their chosen identity.

This can't all be simultaneously true. They're going to have to pick a side.

This would be the only way to increase the rate of conviction which is more important than increasing the punishment for the tiny percentage of rapes that end in conviction. Harsher sentencing is already possible depending on circumstances.