to ask how to make a complaint about police? Is there an ombudsman?

[myoriginal3]

Basically, my report wasn't investigated. I've spoken yesterday and today with the police who were involved and they are saying I was 'unwilling' to assist police with their enquiries.
They are getting a DI to ring me. That's nice.
They are arse covering.

Do I need to go through the ranks or is there a police ombudsman?

For background, I was a victim of crime and they knew who he was (or suspected in their words) but they didn't arrest him because I was not well enough to go through a video interview. Less than a month later he committed a similar crime.

They have told me that I was UNWILLING to assist the police.

They are having a Detective Inspector call me - God only knows when.

Is there somewhere out of their ranks I can initiate a report?

For relevance, I was raped in his house, the other girl was raped in a park.

He raped a girl because he is a rapist and a vile piece of scum, what anybody else did has no baring on that fact. There is a chance that even if the police had investigated, the investigation would not have been completed and he would have raped her anyway.

There are processes in place for different scenarios. I don't know why they insisted on that process with you, I don't know what specific process they would use in the instances you've asked about (I am not and have never worked with the police or the CPS, nor do I agree with their policies. I only know about them as I used to work with RASASC) so I can't comment on why those decisions were made. All I can comment on is the general process, which is that after an initial statement, a investigation cannot begin until they have a full statement, which is usually video recorded for the benefit of a jury and to increase the chance of successful prosecution.

My point is that it puts the onus on the victim to aid their prosecution in rape cases, something that is not required nor utilised in other crimes.

If they raided his house that evidences that they did investigate. What they couldn't do was charge him.

Fundamentally a rape case comes down to consent. Without your say so they cannot prove this element of the offence and there is therefore no case. They could should show who, how, where and when but tithout that bit they don't have a crime.

This doesn't mean that any of this is your fault. HE is the rapist. HE is the criminal! HE is at fault for it all. No one else, HIM.

As a rape victim, believe me, it did not help me. Remotely.

It's like an escape clause for them to not bother investigating.

They only raided his house AFTER he had raped the other girl.

This must be devastating for you. I had a similar thing happen to me and Its Fucked up, I hope you're okay. Definitely make a complaint, maybe they'll actually take rape victims seriously in future

They had my statement. They had photos of the bruises.

You are right. The victim shouldn't have so much pressure on them. Unfortunately rape has to have a "guilty mind" element to it. That is one of the many many reasons that utter suits get away with it so often. Proving what is in someone's mind is so incredibly difficult.

Shits not suits

Against The bastard wouldn't have raped again if they had investigated my case. They told me yesterday that they suspected knew who it was. I fucking knew who it was after a 10 second google search.

But there is a difference between knowing and/or suspecting and proving. Which is why they needed the video statement. Not because they're putting the onus on you to prove you were raped, but to help them prove who did it.

Like I say. Without evidence of lack of consent their hands were tied. They didn't essentially have a provable crime. Even with all of the other evidence.

If they raided his house and collected evidence they did all they could probably in the hopes that you would become suddenly capable of giving testimony. Because they believed you. Again like I say, believing and proving are 2 different things.

The blame here lies solely with him.

I'm so sorry you've been through this OP. However, it does sound like a point of law is at fault here, not the police officers. And the point of law is indeed unreasonable in its expectations.

I feel the same way as RatOnAStick.

A woman police officer said terrible things to me, shouted at me, my solicitor said her interviewing was the worst she had seen for years.

My friend advised against complaining. Saying that because of another police officer, their fellow officers regularly stopped her, fined her for going 32 in a 30 mph, etc etc, had similar things to RatOnAStick.

That's the only reason I didn't complain. I couldn't face the idea of being harassed.

Thankfully noting even closely related to this but I have to work on prosecution paperwork in my job. The hoops we have to jump through and the stupid things we have to evidence to get anywhere near a courtroom, let alone win, are absurd. One can only imagine what the police have to do to get a conviction.

If I was burgled, I wouldn't need to undergo a video interview.

If for example you were burgled, would the police say 'oh we can't do anything about this until you tell us all in a video interview'?

No.

But they do that for rape cases. Because we're 'special'.

Nope but the crime there had a lack of consent implied. If they broke into your house without you being there or while you were asleep you couldn't possibly have consented. And it is unlikely a perpetrator would go with the defence "she gave me the stuff" because the question of for cable entry would be there to contradict that.

My body being black and blue from bruises should be sufficient evidence.

Rape has a lack of consent implied.

If I was burgled then there would not be a need to investigate whether I had consented to being burgled. Burglary happens without consent. rape is by definition sex that has not been consented to. You cannot say that sometimes burglary can happen with consent and sometimes without whereas with rape, it all hangs on whether consent was involved and since the victim is the only person who can explain why/how there was no consent the onus is unfortunately more in the victim to support the case than would be the case in a burglary or mugging, say.

The video evidence is to get a statement that relates to there having been no consent to the sexual activity. In order to be able to investigate and hopefully charge and later convict the rapist the police need to have the video statement as a jumping off point for the investigation.

Being black and blue can be additional evidence about the violence of the rape. But does not directly correlate to there having been no consent to the sexual assault. I.e. I could have consensual sex with a partner and then he could go nuts and beat me up. I would have been beaten up, but not raped.

It's a horrific situation and definitely worth speaking to the DI who may be able to explain in greater detail and clarity the processes involved.

You would complain through their Professional Standards Dept. You can always copy in your Police and Crime Commissioner - they will not be able to get involved but they might want to be kept informed, esp given the fact it's a rape case.

I don't agree with the process. That's my point. So speaking to the police is not going to help me.

Fuck the lot of them. I can't be arsed.

I'm so sorry OP for what happened to you. It's disgusting and awful and I'm so sorry you've been forced to endure this.

On a more trivial note though, I have been burgled (whilst I was in bed asleep, on my own) and the police do nothing. There's no opportunity for a video interview because they don't give that much of a shit! The policeman that came out to me said that without CCTV they can do nothing. Apparently since then (I was burgled 18 months ago) they don't even bother to come out to burglaries any more.

Not meaning to derail just trying to give some context.