to be properly offended by this numpty?

[maighdlin]

i love the BBC's have your say section. interesting read and you do get some clever people on it. today they were talking about "sexual" items aimed at children, t shirts that say "porn star" etc. one person said this

This does need to be addressed. Kids should be kids. I dispise seeing kids forced to give up fun for 'education' (some kids dont have a clue about fun) and I dispise seeing kids (usually young girls) wanting to look and act like tarts.

In my family I have cousins who were barely up to my knee in height but dance like lapdancers because of the pop singers at the time. Luckily their parents make them dress appropreately but I think if young kids were taught self respect there would be less rape cases. Being taught the difference between a prostitute/lapdancer/stripper and normal behaviour would make all the difference.

I completely agree with what they are saying except for the " I think if young kids were taught self respect there would be less rape cases" WTF????? I am very rarely offended but how bloody dare they say that a girl having low self esteem means she gets raped??? I hate this attitude that some people "deserve" or "ask for it" when it comes to rape. Rape is rape no matter what you are wearing or whatever. Its a stupid misogynistic way to think that only "good" girls get raped.

Im not sure im even making sense here but am so effing angry at this ignorance AIBU to think that some uninformed ignorant dickhead wrote this?

[HerBeatitude]

"The problem with rapes is that forensic evidence like fingerprints and semen is not conclusive"

No, the problem with rapes in the main, is that the police do not look for corroborating evidence and rape myths are so deeply embedded, that juries look for a higher standard of proof than with other crimes. They are horrified by the thought of sending an innocent man to prison for rape; not quite so horrified by the thought of sending an innocent man to prison for burglary, or fraud. So instead of convicting a man who they figure is guilty beyond reasonable doubt, they will usually only convict a man they think is guilty beyond any doubt at all. The most absurd and bizarre defences are accepted, even when jurors think the guy is probably guilty. And the reason for this, is because the myth that women often lie about rape, is so deeply embedded, that they weigh that up against the ludicrous defences of the rapist and give him the benefit of the doubt when they wouldn't do the same for a robber or a fraudster.

[ISNT]

Not always, with the police, I mean. It has happened to some women, not all, obviously.

[MrManager]

I always meant it, ISNT, but you seemed intent on not believing that was what I meant.

But yes, this: "The police should neither believe nor disbelieve anyone, they should remain independent and impartial until evidence reveals the truth" is what I believe.

[Diamondback]

Wow, isnt and MrManager - way to carry on an argument where you both completely misunderstand each other.

MrM - ISNT isn't saying that rape complainants should automatically be believed and have their word accepted, she's saying that they shouldn't be assumed to have been lying and asking for it.

ISNT - MrM isn't saying that it's right to assume all rape victims are making it up - I can see that he's worded what he's saying very clumsily, but it's apparent from subsequent posts that he's just saying that police and courts should be impartial until the evidence is in and not automatically believe either side.

Is that about right, you two? There's nothing more frustrating than two people who actually pretty much agree with each other, fighting over word confusion.

[MrManager]

Sowwy, Mummy.

[HerBeatitude]

But the point we're making Diamond, which I'm not sure MrM acknoweledges, is that the police do not start from a position of neutrality. They start from a position of disbelief of the victim, and because of that disbelief, they don't bother to investigate the crime, so they don't find corroborating evidence. So the case they present to the CPS is weak, so it decides it's not worth taking it to court.

That attitude of disbelief within the police, is one of the causes for the complete absence of justice for the vast majority of rape victims. That's why ISNT's getting irate about it - because it's important and because MrM doesn't seem to understand that it's there and it undermines justice.

[HerBeatitude]

Sorry ISNT don't mean to speak for you, perhaps that's NOT why you're getting irate - in fact, perhaps you're not remotely irate.

[MrManager]

HerBeatitude A Home Office Evaluation Report actually praised the police and CPS for trying hard to collect evidence and form strong cases.

[Sakura]

BUt the gove has just shelved an investigation into the sloppiness of police investigations when it comes to rape due to "lack of funding"

[MrManager]

Why the quotes on lack of funding? A lack of funding sounds like a very real problem - if you can't afford to pay a policeman to collect the evidence, then there will be obvious problems.

[MrManager]

The report I was talking about is here (PDF file)

pg. 75 - "More specifically, the following promising practices were identified during the course of the research:
? Careful case preparation by the prosecution, where, following pre-trial hearings and rulings and agreements on evidence, transcripts and videos were edited to remove material that would introduce sexual history evidence.
? Strenuous efforts made by police and CPS to find evidence that supports the complainant?s account. This was especially noted where a CPS lawyer observed that the Criminal Justice System (CJS) had to recognise the ?changing face of rape? ? that most assailants were known to the victim and that most defendants would mount a consent defence ? and develop tools and strategies to address this."

[Sakura]

no, sorry I was unclear. They claim they didn't have the funding to make an inquiry into the way police deal with crimes against women. I tried to find a link, there was a thread about it on here.

We need a Lawrence style enquiry into the way women are treated by the police.

Here is a thread about the police ignoring a mother's complaints over 100 times before her daughter was eventually murdered

Then there's the high-profile police failure to investigate serial rapists Warboys and Kirk Reed

Culturally, women are viewed by the police as whiners, and are not taken seriously. Time and time again we see cases of women not bothering to report a heinous crime committed against her, or of her reporting it and the police not taking her seriously, and the perpetrator then going on to commit another crime

[Sakura]

women don't bother to report crimes, because they already know how they're going to be dealt with... and they're suspicions are correct, from what we know of the way women are dealt with

[Sakura]

their

[ISNT]

Cherry picking one comment out of one report from 2006 to prove conclusively that the police are doing an excellent job isn't right.

John warboys committed scores of crimes and was allowed to continue due to the failures and incompetence of police, many of whom worked in the sapphire specialist rape unit.

Kirk reid was also left free to attack due to police incompetence.

There are plenty of other examples of women being treated badly and the police not doing their job.

The government carried out a review more recently than 2006 which had a string of recommendations, it would be a start if those could be implemented.

[ISNT]

There have been threads on here full of women who have been raped and not reported it to the police - the situation is terrible.