AIBU to think rape is now legal in the UK?

[verdantverdure]

If there's almost no chance of a rapist being caught and punished then rape is legal, right?

Less than 0.7% are ever convicted.

Less than 1.4% are ever even charged

I'm not sure this is a government that cares about women, you guys.

I see PACE has completely passed you by.

If there were contemporaneous photos of a black eye and a split lip and testimony from a medic about vaginal or analysis tearing it would at least give the jury something to consider.

L1ttledrummergirl
Women need to know before it happens, that if it happens, it's not their fault.
Women carry no blame if they are raped.
Women carry no shame if they are raped.
Women need to know that if they are raped, they call the police straight away and they will be believed.
Women need to know that the police will do everything possible from the minute they call to gather evidence for a prosecution.
Sadly, Women need to know ahead of any rape occurring that any evidence will be on their clothes and body and need to be preserved.
Women should be able to get a fast prosecution, they should not have to face the perpetrator in court.

I agree with the above

I always speak to victims/survivors in the initial contact that their account is not to be challenged - and i don't challenge unless there is something really obvious.

We do gather as much evidence as we can in the initial contact - clothing, scenes, medical examination, early evidence kits. The suspect is arrested as soon as possible as they are a scene in themselves. They get medically examined, clothing seized, their home often becomes a scene, etc etc

Safeguarding will be put in place with support services - there are also a host of measures that are put in place at court - video links, screens etc etc

GobbieMaggie
What section of PACE are you referring to?

Apologies, i haven't read the full thread but remember the Belfast trial with the rugby players? That tells you everything you need to know about how victims are treated. You can absolutely see why women don't put themselves through that.

A good friend of mine was raped, violently. She will never be the same again. She did the right thing and reported it straight away, she had wet herself while she ran from the property.

It went to court. He was let off. It turned out he had been in court five times for rape. Got off every time. Absolutely sickening

That's awful

verdantverdure
If there were contemporaneous photos of a black eye and a split lip and testimony from a medic about vaginal or analysis tearing it would at least give the jury something to consider.

I agree - but if the suspect denies he has caused the black eye and the vaginal tear its still going to be one word against another. The jury can consider it, but it has to add to the burden of proof.

I am not agreeing with it - but the law currently stands by proving beyond reasonable doubt.

What can be put in place to change this?

In the legal aspects of this for many years, but no longer working in the UK, but still have good contacts in the areas/teams I worked with (SE England).

I'd have huge amount to complain about with respect the system, enough to write a book! But I also think (subjectively) the situation is better now than at any time in the past. This is not in any way meant to suggest the situation is acceptable, it IS NOT.

But there is more police training, medical training, support services, more integrated police services and improved tech than at any point in the past. The different between 30 years ago and today is staggering.

Radi0 · Today 16:01
A good friend of mine was raped, violently. She will never be the same again. She did the right thing and reported it straight away, she had wet herself while she ran from the property.

It went to court. He was let off. It turned out he had been in court five times for rape. Got off every time. Absolutely sickening

Horrendous - i would want to put him behind bars for the rest of his life

But the court 'system' will need to change to do this. The fact that it has got to court means that the police & CPS have supported a prosecution against him every time, its at the court where the conviction fails.

Possibly a stupid question as I'm no expert, but could they change the system to allow those past accusations to be re-taken into account? Rape is usually a pattern of behaviour, and whilst an individual incident might come down to "one person's word against another", over the course of a decade it's often many victims of the same man describing the same pattern.

Julie Bindel said the exact same thing in 2007
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2007/feb/01/penal.genderissues

The issue mentioned the prvsious poster resonates with me. There are several people that have been suspects in multiple crimes, but there is not enough evidence, and in my heart I know they are guilty. So many repeat offenders.

Also, I'd also add that the reported crimes (subjectively, from what I've seen) seem of a much more serious nature. I won't be explicit, but rape cases today typically involve a lot more "activities" than 20+ years ago. I strongly believe this is the influence of porn. In the past, the standard case involved what everyone understands as standard male->female rape, now there is a lot more, which has a huge impact on victims.

Why don't you go and have a read about what Starmer did as DPP and what was immediately reversed when he left?

Heres some material to start you off:

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-did-rape-conviction-rates-fall-when-starmer-led-the-cps

https://www.bevanfoundation.org/news/2014/01/keir-starmer-urges-protection-for-victims/

https://www.thejusticegap.com/analysis-has-the-cps-changed-its-policy-on-rape/

https://www.civilserviceworld.com/professions/article/director-of-public-prosecutions-alison-saunders-to-step-down

All civil servants enact the policy of the government in power so let's not pretend that politics has no impact on rape convictions

Yes.

As a slight aside (not to.derail) but a PP mentioned someone not being picked up for priors. The problem is there are lots of things these men do that aren't 'worthy' of complaint, i hesitiate to call them 'micro' agressions but stuff that really wouldn't be entertained in the police station. So there probably is usually a pattern, it just may not be immediately obvious when you don't know the person.

Like non-crime hate incidents - perhaps against an individual or a group

The problem with rape is that it's pretty much 'he said she said' and bloody hard to prove. I really don't know what the answer is :( it's terrible :(

As I said upthread, prior allegations/Convictions aren't admissible as it might prejudice the jury.
However the victims sexual history is absolutely fair game.

The ulster rugby trial was a good case in point. The victim spent 2 weeks being cross examined in minute detail, while evidence about the misogynistic attitude of the defendants was not admitted

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-43739323.amp

It does seem biased, doesn't it.

I'd love to understand why this is the case and whether it can be changed.

Just read the full article, it's horrifying. Particularly the challenging of the victim on her wording, at the end. It's a completely normal way to talk about a traumatic event.

I think the right to a fair trial is important so not admitting certain evidence is reasonable.

What I'd like to see is rape victims being treated the same way as any other victim. So their statement is admitted to court and they aren't cross examined unless there is very good evidence that they are lying

I'd also like to see certain things being unacceptable as a defence. Previous sexual history being one of them.

In Ched Evans appeal, his conviction was overturned because the defence found a previous partner who testified that the victim said "fuck me harder". Evans claimed she said that to him, and the fact she said it in other sex proved his intercourse was consensual.

I think a really common phrase like that should not have been grounds for appeal. If he claimed she said "spank me with a mackerel, this is fucking great" then maybe her previous partner saying she said the same to him was relevant.

Basically "rape myths" should be barred from defence

Not going to happen though as there are enough sexually predatory men out there that it suits them to make out consent is somehow confusing and women lie

AIBU to think rape is now legal in the UK?

Only if the perpetrator has a penis.

@Felix125 what do you think needs to be done to improve our dreadful rape conviction statistics?

Wow.