Page 17 | Ken Clarke differentiates date rape from 'serious rape'

NotFromConcentrate · 2011-05-18T11:07:32+00:00

AIBU to think it's time he went?

allsquareknickersnofurcoat · 19/05/2011 07:40

Anyway, as I wrote yesterday, KCs "date-rape" and "serious-rape" assumes that all "date" rapes are issues of dodgy consent where the woman decides afterwards that she was drunk and said no. You could easily be "violently" () date-raped, just as you could be raped by a stranger without them beating you to within an inch of your life!

Anyway, you know what they say about people who assume....

They are cunts (to nick a phrase from my DH)

DuelingFanjo · 19/05/2011 07:43

AlpinePony the situation you describe is not defined as rape in Law. AyeRobot has already pointed this out just above your post. Prisons are not full of teenagers who have had underage sex. Mind you - they are not full of rapists.

They are talking about it on the news now, and about the difference between date rape and rape, rape.

JenaiMarrHePlaysGuitar · 19/05/2011 07:47

Seriously the more I think about this, the more I think KC was poorly briefed ahead of this interview deliberately

Plenty of people in his own party him - he's neither a Bullingdon boy nor a Tebbit type for one thing and not a "natural" Tory.

He's made a twit of himself but I don't actually believe that he believes quite what he said. And I dread to think who they'd replace him with.

HubbaHubbaBubba · 19/05/2011 07:49

KC has said he meant underage sex, but used the term date rape incorrectly.

(and yes, I've read the underage sex clarification, which I hadn't understood before this thread, but it looks like KC isn't clear on it either)

I am in no way a Tory or a KC supporter, but I think his words, or rather his intended meaning are being misconstrued.

carminaburana · 19/05/2011 08:01

There are degrees of seriousness wrt rape, just like there are degrees of seriousiness with any crime. A man like the Yorkshire ripper should not be placed in the same category as a man who is accused of non violent rape by his girlfriend of 5 years. All rape is serious, but you have to apply common sense - because god forbid - your son could be in the dock one day.

KC is on the right track with this imo.

SardineQueen · 19/05/2011 08:02

yellowstone I don't understand your approach.

So if one of the builders working in our house at the moment, or my dentist, or my father, people who I like and trust, suddenly brutally raped me in my own home, that would in your view be not so bad?

I genuinely don't understand how you can think that.

Alpine Pony a. A 16yo boy having sex with a 15 yo girl would be sexual activity with a child, not rape b. This crime is very rarely reported, let alone prosecuted, and certainly not convicted. I would be interested to know how many 16 or 18yo are in prison for having consensual sex with their 15yo girlfriends. None? One or two? I imagine it's none. The CPS do not prosecute this (quite rightly) as it is not in the public interest. The age of consent is there to protect the vulnerable from predators and exploitation, it is not there to imprison 16yo boys for having normal consensual sexual relationships with their 15yo girlfriends.

Do people on this thread really believe that 16 or 18 yo boys regularly go to prison for having consensual sex with their girlfriends? You really honestly believe that? It's simply not true.

SardineQueen · 19/05/2011 08:04

carmina men who are violent or kill are charged with that addiitonally.

So for your first person, the charges would be rape, abh, gbh, assualt, sexual assault, murder (I'm not a lawyer but you get the drift)
Your second person would be charged with rape.

I don't see the problem with this.

Rape is penetration with a penis without consent.

SardineQueen · 19/05/2011 08:07

hubbahubba later in the interview mr clarke said that there were different sorts of date rape, some of it was as serious as the most serious rape.

If he genuinely thought that date rape was consensual sex between teenagers then he would not have said that as it doesn't make sense.

His "clarification" is a desperate attempt to pull back from the disgraceful comments that he made.

HubbaHubbaBubba · 19/05/2011 08:12

You may well be right sardine. I haven't seen the entire original interview, only the excerpts from the BBC report.

tbh though, if he did misunderstand the difference between underage sex and what has been clarified above, then he has been badly briefed. As justice minister, he needs to be clear on all nuances of the law.

carminaburana · 19/05/2011 08:19

There's a difference in planned rape ( stranger waiting for unsuspecting female in dark alleys etc) and rape when you have known the man for months, maybe years - who knows what type of sex they may have been engaging in prior to the falling out or whatever - I'm not dismissing the seriousness of rape at all - but there are levels of seriousness.

MisterDarsey · 19/05/2011 08:21

Sorry but there is no way I am going to be on the same side as the Sun, which called Clarke a 'danger to women' on their front page today. Somewhat ironic coming from them I think.

The people who will get the most benefit from Clarke being sacked are not rape victims but the right wing of the Tory Party & their friends in the press.

SardineQueen · 19/05/2011 08:29

Carmina

"There's a difference in planned rape ( stranger waiting for unsuspecting female in dark alleys etc) and rape when you have known the man for months, maybe years - who knows what type of sex they may have been engaging in prior to the falling out or whatever "

What does the bit about falling out mean? I don't understand what you are saying.

SardineQueen · 19/05/2011 08:29

misterdarcy if the man in charge of our criminal justice system holds views about rape that are based on rape myths and prejudice then it is a very dangerous situation for all of us.

goodegg · 19/05/2011 08:31

Rape is the penetration of a woman without her consent.

It is a crime.

All circumstances of rape are different, but this doesn't make the act more or less of a crime.

KC should not presume to tell women that the circumstances in which the crime happened make it more or less of a crime.

'Serious rape, I don't think many judges give five years for a forcible rape, frankly, the tariff is longer for that and a serious rape where there's violence and an unwilling woman'

This makes no sense. Is there such a thing as 'non-serious rape' or a 'willing woman' in rape?

He makes me feel sick and I don't see how his position can be maintained, I don't care if that makes me on the same team as the Sun for this one.

nottirednow · 19/05/2011 08:34

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

TandB · 19/05/2011 08:55

I really, really don't agree with these suggestions that there should be a "scale of seriousness" for rape. The comparison to murder or GBH has been made several times and there is a very important reason why these offences are not, and should not be, comparable.

Pretty much our entire society accepts that murder and GBH are wrong. These offences can have anyone as a victim - man, woman or child. A murder victim is almost always seen as a "proper" victim. There is very rarely any suggestion that they might have been in some way to blame for their death. Even the serial prostitute murders were reported sensitively and I did not hear anyone saying "oh well, they were asking for it" or anything to that effect.

Rape is entirely different - there are always excuses. Obviously there are cases where a jury acquits because they simply did not believe that the rape took place - there are cases where false allegations have been made and I have been involved with more than one such case. However, I think there are probably an awful lot of cases where a jury acquits because they think the rape probably did happen but that the woman was in some way culpable.

If murder was to be broken down into levels of seriousness, it probably wouldn't be too much of a problem because it would not lead to people thinking domestic murder isn't serious or anything like that - murder is too well-established in our society as a Bad Thing.

But if rape was to be broken down in the same way, I don't see any outcome but for people to be encouraged to think of some rape as not "proper" rape. I firmly believe that this would lead to a drastic drop in convictions.

Bear in mind that I am a defence lawyer - a drop in conviction rates for date rape would make my job a lot easier as the bulk of our rape cases are date type rape cases. If sentences were lower and juries highly unlikely to convict, these cases would be pretty low-pressure for lawyers. However, I think this would be a huge backwards step in the way society views rape and I would be as strongly against it as I have been against any change in our justice system in recent years.

carminaburana · 19/05/2011 09:14

SQ; say I meet up with an ex-b/f in a pub one night and I invite him back to my flat for old times sake. We end up in bed together but I decide half way through I really can't be bothered - but he doesn't stop ( maybe our sex life had always been like that?) so I report him the next day for rape. Are
you seriously telling me he is as bad as a man who 'plans' to rape women?

slug · 19/05/2011 09:15

"In his mind there is a difference between rape where the victim doesn't fight and one where they do."

So where does the woman who has had rohypnol slipped into her drink fit? She can't fight back because she's drugged.

celadon · 19/05/2011 09:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

xstitch · 19/05/2011 09:24

I was raped by my XH, I said no from the outset and tried to fight him off. I gave up fighting physically about 3/4 of the way through because it hurt so much and I didn't want to wake my dd or put her at risk. Does that mean I asked for it? Does that mean it hasn't had a bad effect on me. Am I completely imagining the feeling that I want to die every day. Am I completely imaging the feeling of outright terror I feel when I have to see XH. Do I imagine the sick feeling in the pit of my stomach when I have to hand dd over to him?

I should be imaging it because it was apparently not proper rape. He said he I was to have sex, I said no he forcibly undressed me, pushed me down, held me down and forcibly penetrated me. IT WAS RAPE IT WAS RAPE IT WAS FUCKING RAPE. Next person who wants to imply I asked for it, have they nerve to say it to my face?

LadyThompson · 19/05/2011 09:26

Kungfupanda: erm, but there already is, effectively, a "scale of seriousness" for rape. For instance - violence, or the fact of a the attacker being a stranger, are aggravating elements when it comes to sentencing. All rape is horrendous, of course. But a rape plus physical violence is worse than a rape without one, in the eyes of the law. Distinctions are already made, and have been for many years. You say you are a lawyer - are you a solicitor??

AppleyEverAfter · 19/05/2011 09:30

KC just laughed in the face of a journalist who asked him if he was going to resign.

DuelingFanjo · 19/05/2011 09:35

this 'if I change my mind halfway through' stuff...

If you say 'no, stop' then of course he should stop. If he doesn't then of course it is rape.

Carmina, I don't know if you have sons but surely you would hope they know this?

DuelingFanjo · 19/05/2011 09:36

in fact, if you have daughters surely you would expect them to expect this?

carminaburana · 19/05/2011 09:37

No one knows what's going through the mind of KC apart from KC himself.
& I'm sure he's consulted with plenty of other people on this issue including lawyers - he didn't decide yesterday to change a law whilst in the lift on the way to lunch.

He's been consulting on this for months i would imagine