police who ignored a 17 y/o girl with mental health problems when she reported a rape should not have been given the option to retire on their pensions

[agentEgypt]

This is the story about Hampshire police who ignored this 17 year old girl when she tried to report a rape, and instead said they would charge her for perverting the course of justice and this made her self harm more and attempt suicide.

However she did get legal help and eventually they settled out of court. However 4 of the cops involved were given the option yo retire!

IMO they should have not been given this option, legally charged and have their entire pension removed.

Whilst I agree that their pensions should not be affected, I think that no consequences for gross misconduct is unacceptable.

It is galling to think that someone who is facing a disciplinary process should be allowed to retire or resign. They should be made to face the consequences.

Hysterical for someone that was raped and ignored by the police. Yes I am.

Well if you admit to being hysterical, hopefully you'll also accept that when your hysterical is probably not the time to be making life changing decisions about someone's pension scheme.

I don't agree their pensions should be taken away, why should their families suffer for this?

Well lots of MPs are also suggesting the same change. As I linked to.

I bet if this was reversed onto MPs people here would be happy to see them be fined from it for far less serious matters.

I think the pensions are a separate issue, anyone who paid into a separate pension would not have their investments taken away (as far as I know).
We don't know from the article the details of why the officers didn't pursue charges. However, the culture around reporting / dealing with abuse / sexual offences is awful and needs turning on its head.

I too am saddened that there are practically no consequences for being found Gross Misconduct.

I bet if this was reversed onto MPs people here would be happy to see them be fined from it for far less serious matters.

No, I don't think anyones pension should be taken from them for a work related issue/violation/situation.

Oh and big shock, lots of MP's are suggesting that people's pensions are taken from them! excuse me if I'm slightly sceptical about their motivations. We all know how honest and caring our dear MP's are...

Mrsstarlord,

A huge amount of work has been done in recent years to change the culture of the way rape allegations are handled by the police. It's not perfect by any means, but it's miles away from where it was just a few years ago. By and large it's certainly no longer awful.

Some people on the thread seen to be suggesting that the police were correct to threaten this victim with charges, although they are being a bit mealy mouthed about it.

A man was found guilty of this rape, there is no question around whether the victim was making it up.

I think that the officers involved should have consequences to face also, for gross misconduct.

The Police didn't JUST 'not pursue charges'.
They arrested HER.
This is more than an 'unfortunate case / isolated incident'.
It is GROSS MISCONDUCT!

For which there should be gross consequences.
The IPCC is no more than a sham.

There is a piece about it on the BBC as well here.

There is no question that the officers appallingly and I find people justifying their behaviour - which had direct serious consequences for a 17yo with mental health problems who had been raped - really just distressing and unbelievable TBH.

They didn't bother getting the evidence she told them about checked out properly.
Because they didn't believe her, because she didn't fit the idea of what a "proper victim" looks like in their heads, I imagine.
And they threatened to prosecute her.
Leading to self harming and 2 suicide attempts.

And people describe this as a "mistake at work" and have a go at people who are (understandably) appalled by what happened and concerned that the officers don't seem to have to face much in the way of consequences.

The people saying "you can't take their pensions away" - OK - what you you see done to punish these officers?

conference I thought the 20k wad a joke too..

Does the case wipe out the years of 'good' policing that is behind them?
uh, yeah,
just like if I did something that qualified as gross misconduct tomorrow I'd be out of the job, with years of good service erased in the blink of an eye.

Given how many times my aunt with mental health problems has cried rape to the police
not really the same situation.
in this situation a girl went to the police and "claimed rape", she also took with her a shirt which she said contained DNA evidence of that.
the police didn't investigate the evidence properly, and instead chose to arrest her on suspicion that she was trying to "pervert the course of justice" - i.e. they decided that she lied, that they thought that the guy was innocent and arrested her for trying to put in him prison.

After she had been arrested for trying to get justice, the police in question thought that maybe doing their job would be a good thing, they analysed the evidence that the girl originally brought in, and secured a conviction on the outcome of that.

In the time that they weren't doing their job properly, (instead finding it easier to claim that the girl was a liar) they drove someone to suicide with their poor work.

I don't think that arresting someone and threatening to send them to jail or fining them for claiming to have been raped is good police work.

if anything it seems more like coercion to try to get them to back down from their claim so that it didn't need to be investigated...

I don't think that the police involved should loose their pensions. (after all they did save hard), but I don't think accusing someone of lying, arresting them on that (unfounded) suspicion and threatening them with charge under law for perverting the course of justice can be described as "a police investigation"...

it sounds more like, coercion to drop claims.

or you know, "perverting the course of justice".

The police knowingly and willingly failed to investigate, and harassed a rape victim. they can keep their pensions, but they should be facing a criminal trial for attempting to pervert the course of justice. or misconduct in public office.

www.cps.gov.uk/legal/l_to_o/misconduct_in_public_office/

The elements of the offence are summarised in Attorney General's Reference No 3 of 2003 [2004] EWCA Crim 868. The offence is committed when:

<span class="italic">a public officer acting as such</span>
<span class="italic">wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconducts himself</span>
 <span class="italic">to such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public's trust in the office holder</span>
<span class="italic">without reasonable excuse or justification</span>

just to clarify
I don't think that arresting someone and threatening to send them to jail or fining them for claiming to have been raped is good police work.

perhaps I should have written:
I don't think that arresting someone and threatening to send them to jail or fining them for claiming to have been raped without actually investigating that claim is good police work.

TTWK
That is good to know. I have a relative who is currently going through this and has nothing but praise for the police, however I know that historically this has not been the case.
Five years for the perpetrator seems awful to my mind and I'm mindful that whilst the focus is on the gross misconduct - which is what this was - of the officers, the rapist's responsibility is being glossed over.

notaunique I agree they should be facing consequences.

There are a couple of inaccuracies in your post though. The victim didn't commit suicide - she attempted suicide twice and self harmed after the police said they wanted to prosecute her.

Also " the police in question thought that maybe doing their job would be a good thing, they analysed the evidence that the girl originally brought in, and secured a conviction on the outcome of that. "

From the BBc article it was the CPS who said the evidence needed to be checked over properly. I'm not sure what triggered them to do that. I think it's unlikely it was the original officers though, convinced as they were of her guilt. I imagine the family applied pressure to get the evidence looked at somehow - maybe via the officers - as the family seem very determined. I don't think the officers would have done it off their own bats.

It should not be the case that you only just justice if you shout loud enough.

If she didn't have a supportive family then this could well have ended with the victim dead and/or prosecuted.

They should most definitely have been taken through disciplinary procedures, preferably on suspension without pay, not allowed to resign/retire like good honest employees. This would be a punishment in itself as it would affect their reputation and the rest of their working lives (for those who had not reached retirement age). Frankly there should be some similar charge they could be prosecuted under because, by arresting the victim instead of investigating the crime, they were themselves guilty of perverting the course of justice. I also agree the amount of compensation was inadequate for the amount of distress undergone by the young woman (child at the time!) which could have cost her life. "Er, sorry about that, here's some money" just does not cut it. Disgusting.

Don't agree with rifling their pensions though, that's another matter. A pension isn't a reward for good service, it's a deferred portion of one's salary. Attacking that principle is the thin end of a very dodgy wedge.

She brought that successful claim under the Human Rights Act.

Y'know, that HRA that the government is soon going to abolish? After cracking down and restricting access to judicial review which is another way that ordinary citizens can hold authorities to account.

YY breakwind I assume that was why her lawyer made a big point about that.

That without the HRA she wouldn't have had recourse / recourse that she could have accessed easily (?) I'm not sure which.

Certainly if it becomes difficult and complex to challenge things like this then it will be available only to the rich / powerful which is an ongoing problem with legal systems around the world. Just sending us backwards.

The victim didn't commit suicide - she attempted suicide twice
(indeed I could have been clearer.)
But the only difference between committing suicide and attempting suicide is whether you succeed.

Is it worse if someone attempts to take their own life and succeeds because of these actions?
we prosecute drunk drivers on the basis that they "could" cause harm, even though no actual harm may have been committed.

(probably a bit derailing to continue along that line.)

I don't know if it was the police or the CPS that investigated the DNA evidence.
I suspected the police, as I can't imagine that the case would be referred to the CPS before any investigation was finished. (I'm not sure though it may have been referred with an incomplete investigation - that doesn't seem clear in the news I listened to.)

pensions should not be touched as they are not free money they have been paid for by the police themseleves unless you want to lose your pension scheme if your fired (which would be totally out of order).

Should they have been forced to complete disicpline process YES

Should they be stripped of their pension NO due to they have paid a large part of their wages into it and no one has the right to strip that from them unless everyones pension is up for grabs as well