@Otherstories2002 you seem to be suggesting that the fast tracking of the riots cases has materially delayed rape cases, to such a degree that shows negligent disregard for the importance of pursuing convictions in those rape cases.
You seem to tacitly agree that the approach taken against the riot cases - swift, harsher sentences designed to counter and reverse the moment behind the disorder - will have a deterrent effect, and appear to be making an equivalence to rape cases, in other words that fast tracking rape cases would have similar deterrent value.
Your initial, substantive point wasn't that there is some sharing of resources between policing and criminals justice between the paths for cases whereby rioter pleads guilty, and a rapist who pleads not guilty, as obviously that would be such a facile point that nobody would be bothered to make it.
Instead, you were saying that resources had been reassigned from rape to riot to such a degree that any deterrent effect in the rape cases would be reduced. Instead, you wonder why there instead hasn't been a reassignment of resources towards the rape backlog, as you would like to see a similar deterrent to rapists.
The fact is, the transfer of resources to these riot cases is temporary and tiny in the scheme of things, and the intention is to reduce pressure on the system over the medium term. By "nipping it in the bud", there will be fewer cases overall, and therefore more capacity to pursue other cases, such as rape. This is pretty obvious, no?
Meanwhile, the rape backlog is so large, that in order to make any difference there would be MASSIVELY more resources needed. It's just not comparable with the "spike" we have seen for the riots in recent days. Any meaningful improvement to the rape backlog will take a lot more money and a lot more time. For example, they might need to set up a load of new rape courts, which would take time. And, as you have read on this thread, that is exactly what this government are doing.
Finally, rape conviction rates are notoriously low. There are a whole host of specialists required to secure a conviction, from lawyers to police officers. They can't just transfer over PC Plod to the rape cases, we need specially trained, experienced police on these cases, same across the rest of the system. So yes, there very much are, effectively "different" police forces, not across the whole lifecycle of a case, but certainly in the bottlenecks that are actually causing the delays, which is the big that matters. Again, this seems to be obvious to anyone with a grain of sense; I can't believe you're not aware of this.
You seem to have shifted your point from "there aren't two separate police forces, why don't they just transfer police to rape cases" which is obviously just wrongheaded, to "there is some sharing of resources" which is so irrelevant to your initial point that I can't believe you are making it in good faith.
Sorry about the long post, everyone!