Channel 4, Rape 'Who's on trial'

[MrMrsJones]

Follows Avon and Somerset police after 2yrs investigations into 4 serious sexual crime investigations

[quote ScrollingLeaves]“@JazzyBBG
ScrollingLeaves was it Nazir Afzal?”

Nazir Afzal was one of the people at the debate afterwards. He was in charge when the Rotherham case was going on.[/quote]
He is amazing. So pro-women.

Why did it take so long for the rapist of the 16 yr old on the bus to be identified? His case officer identified him eventually....why wasn't it sent to them in the first place for checking ? Two years??

Wheresmywoolyjumpers
I still haven't watched the first programme yet - but need to

I don't think barristers/solicitors can imply what a person was wearing was provocative. I think the judge/magistrate would have the comment dismissed from the record and the barrister warned to be honest. I think from a legal stand point, that view is dead and buried - but again a jury member might not share that view.

Do I think there are just some officers who are biased/prejudiced? - I'd like to say no, not at all - but of course there will be some. I'd like to think its a very low figure though. I can't think of anyone i work with who is like that.

Perhaps its down to how a police officer is asking the victim 'what were you wearing'. The police officer is thinking about identification issues & CCTV - where as the victim hears 'are they suggesting it happened because of how i was dressed?'

They often say that the initial 20-30 minutes contact with a victim is important. Its like a 'bonding' time - so you don't just go straight in with a victim and start getting accounts etc. This initial contact is a good time to explain everything fully with the victim, i find its good to explain things such as clothing descriptions and how it helps the investigation.

@NecklessMumster

Why did it take so long for the rapist of the 16 yr old on the bus to be identified? His case officer identified him eventually....why wasn't it sent to them in the first place for checking ? Two years??

Not sure - could it be that the case officer has only just got him as a client?

There are lots of reasons why this could be. Felix 125 is right the case worker might only have began working with the offender. Officers get given circulations of lots of people every day in force wide emails sent out.

Plus the investigating Officers would not have known that the case officer could identify him. There are a lot of case officers managing lots of offenders.

“Felix125
The sending of the pictures. Again nothing wrong and certainly doesn't give anyone permission to do anything against the victim. But, if the victim has said that she has had no contact with the suspect, then the police find that victim has sent a number of photos/texts before the incident - then it casts doubt on her initial account. Now, that's not to say that it gave any permission to the suspect - but the defence will jump all over that and suggest to the court 'if the victim has been untruthful about that, what else are they being untruthful about'“

In this case the woman did relate everything that lead to going into the toilets:
the man whom she did not know coming over to her table at the pub.
Drinking.
Flirting with him.
Arranging to meet in the toilet
Flirty texts ( which he said in his defence, when questioned, included a topless one and bra one though he had deleted them due to being married she was then found to have this on her phone).

She never tried to make out she had not gone willingly into the toilets or been flirting before.going in.

What happened once she was in there, however, left her distraught and traumatised.
What happened to her in there?

CCTV corroborated the story she told up to entering the toilet, and on leaving it.

It showed her at the table. The man coming up. Hands touching and flirting. One of them leaving then the other following. One of them entering the toilet then the other going in.

At that point we can’t see anymore.

It then showed another man going into the toilet just as she had mentioned, whose interruption seemed to have lead to the alleged assaulter leaving suddenly. It showed the alleged assaulter going quickly out the pub door.

It showed the woman leaving the toilets visibly shaken and different from how she had gone in.

During the investigation we the viewers see a police woman say she believes her but then the tone change when the topless phone sext is found.

At that point a police man says that you have to wonder what message that sent?

I think you have to wonder if that topless sext, the flirting, and the going into the toilets - whatever ‘consent’ they conveyed- really gave the man the message that:
she consented to be flung against the wall,
have his hand around her throat, violent kissing, her tights pulled down and fingers pushed into her?

In my opinion, a jury might have at least been given the chance to consider that question.

Yes, @ScrollingLeaves - that was the bit I was uncomfortable with myself. Seems like explaining lines of questioning and the rationale behind them would help.

ScrollingLeaves
I agree - and do I think there are some officers who are biased/prejudiced? - I'd like to say no, not at all - but of course there will be some. I'd like to think its a very low figure though. I can't think of anyone i work with who is like that.

This is why we need to change things - the decision process needs to include a larger group of people, but is the court the right place to do that? Should we have an intermediary trial before hand where all the evidence can be heard from both sides without the suspect/victim having to go? Then move to a full trial if need be.

I don't know - its difficult. Somewhere along the line a handful of human beings have to make a decision - and human beings (no matter how carefully selected) are not perfect decision makers.

ScrollingLeaves
I haven't seen it yet - but when the police man says that you have to wonder what message that sent?

Is this reference to her first account? ie has she said somewhere in her first account that no photos were sent to the suspect. And then these were revealed later on? Are they trying to say that her account differs in places?

Not that justifies what happened in the toilet - but they will need to disclose that discrepancy or at least explain it somehow.

“Felix125
ScrollingLeaves
I haven't seen it yet - but when the police man says that you have to wonder what message that sent?

Is this reference to her first account? ie has she said somewhere in her first account that no photos were sent to the suspect. And then these were revealed later on? Are they trying to say that her account differs in places?

Not that justifies what happened in the toilet - but they will need to disclose that discrepancy or at least explain it somehow.“”

Felix125,
I just watched it once. I do not think she gave two different accounts as such - meaning that a second account emerged only when they found the photos thus throwing doubt on her reliability. (A bad argument anyway imo a rape myth as she could have been covering up her shame)

She clearly described her general willingness to be with him alone in the toilets, for something like some kissing she guessed. She also said she had sent him texts before the meeting up in the toilets and that she had been flirting.

She did not say she had sent the sexy photos. They found this out later from the alleged perpetrator. However I think she may have said the texts were flirty right at the outset.

I have been thinking about how the barrister who has been defending men accused of rape for 20 (?) years said that victims are not being properly prepared for court. As a result gaps in what the alleged victim says only come to light during the trial, under her questioning. This means the jury may doubt their account. She thought the alleged victims could be better prepared and in such a way that did not hurt them so much.

It seemed that if someone like her (20 years experience, probably a first class degree in law) did the preparing the alleged victims, they might have a chance.

Of course it would never happen probably.

I didn’t see the programme but from the description above, was it the violence that affected the victim so badly? Rather than the sexual act itself? She thought there might be some sexual activity but not the choking etc Flirting and topless photos might make it seem to a jury that the man might have reasonably assumed she consented to a sexual act. But there is no indication that she consented to violence. Is that never an angle the courts look at?

The last case of the two friends in the hotel room...I felt the male detective in charge of the case really didn't seem very empathetic, I certainly wouldn't have felt comfortable dealing with him in the victim's shoes.

The woman in the loo with the texts...that made my blood run cold tbh. I felt so sorry for her. I guess indulging in any kind of flirting/sexting now is going to be another stick to beat women with, even though we're all supposed to be in charge of our own sexuality and how we use it these days.

It just feels like women can't win and it's getting worse.

I watched the programme with my 17yo DD who has aspirations to become a criminal barrister.

She'd mentioned beforehand that ultimately she'd like to set up a non-profit organisation to support women going through rape and sexual assault cases with the legal process. She's even more determined now.

*ScrollingLeaves
Better preparation will be another good move to improve things.
But it also relies on the victim being able to discuss the gaps in the evidence and not see it as the prosecution trying to doubt what they say.

Its possibly the photos which the defence will jump on at court. And they will be able to argue that the victim is being selective of the account she has given. If she is being selective about this - what else is she being selective about? - that's the defence barrister by the way not me saying that.

The police video interview is another mine field. When we do this, we can't introduce things to the victim to put in her account - this will be seen as leading. So, we can't ask the victim if she sent sexy photos of herself, this will have to be disclosed first by the victim before the police can obtain more details. If we bring it up, the defence will see it as the police asking a leading question.

Now, there may be a perfectly valid reason why she didn't want to disclose the photos to police, but she needs to explain that to us before the trial. We can't put words in her mouth and we can't lead her to it.

As the enquiry goes on where more and more things get revealed like this - the police will need to ask the victim about the gaps in the case. So, the victim might take that as the police not believing them - which I don't think is the case, its just we need to make sure we have a strong as possible case.

If at this point the victim wants to drop the complaint and not go to court, should we try and persuade the victim to go through with it or not pressure them further?

Coronawireless
That's the difficult argument. There is no written or verbal agreement between them as to who can do what to who. The male can not assume that he has consent to perform a sexual act on the female in this case. But you have to convince a court & jury that the female didn't consent and that the male believed no consent was given. And the jury are just human beings who bring with them their own prejudices & assumptions.

@Felix125

*ScrollingLeaves Better preparation will be another good move to improve things. But it also relies on the victim being able to discuss the gaps in the evidence and not see it as the prosecution trying to doubt what they say.

Its possibly the photos which the defence will jump on at court. And they will be able to argue that the victim is being selective of the account she has given. If she is being selective about this - what else is she being selective about? - that's the defence barrister by the way not me saying that.

The police video interview is another mine field. When we do this, we can't introduce things to the victim to put in her account - this will be seen as leading. So, we can't ask the victim if she sent sexy photos of herself, this will have to be disclosed first by the victim before the police can obtain more details. If we bring it up, the defence will see it as the police asking a leading question.

Now, there may be a perfectly valid reason why she didn't want to disclose the photos to police, but she needs to explain that to us before the trial. We can't put words in her mouth and we can't lead her to it.

As the enquiry goes on where more and more things get revealed like this - the police will need to ask the victim about the gaps in the case. So, the victim might take that as the police not believing them - which I don't think is the case, its just we need to make sure we have a strong as possible case.

If at this point the victim wants to drop the complaint and not go to court, should we try and persuade the victim to go through with it or not pressure them further?

Coronawireless
That's the difficult argument. There is no written or verbal agreement between them as to who can do what to who. The male can not assume that he has consent to perform a sexual act on the female in this case. But you have to convince a court & jury that the female didn't consent and that the male believed no consent was given. And the jury are just human beings who bring with them their own prejudices & assumptions.

Yes but whereas she may be suspected of having consented to sex, there is NO evidence she consented to violence.

“Felix125
*ScrollingLeaves
Better preparation will be another good move to improve things.
But it also relies on the victim being able to discuss the gaps in the evidence and not see it as the prosecution trying to doubt what they say.”

I think I forgot to say that the barrister said that with preparation before the court case these ‘gaps’ often have a perfectly good explanation.

Thank you Felix125 for explaining how it all works.

One thing you mentioned, omissions by the claimant at the initial taped interview, which will be later used to discredit them, and which the police cannot prompt, play into rape myths.
Eg someone could have forgotten in that moment or Be covering up shame.

It sounds as though they should get advice from a lawyer first before talking to the police!

The CCTV showed she was upset, and showed him making a sharp exit. The police woman believed her when she saw it. Thank

I despair for teenage girls who are sending nude texts to boys because that’s now expected. Then those photos stored on their phone could be used to show they might be the sort of girl in general who was asking for sex (which was actually an assault or rape); or if they send one to a boyfriend that will be potentially consent to rape. In such an event, should they be too embarrassed to tell the police about the photo during the interview, or just forget seeing they are in shock, then their account about everything else will fall into doubt.

In general i think these progs cause more harm than good.

I also don't believe that 70% of police time is on rape! I mean only a fraction of victims report. If her own unit then well if it's sex offences then. Not a shocker! Would have helped if she had been a bit clearer by the sound of things!

Didn't see it btw.

On the wearing. I read a thing... Somewhere. That said while in general clothes cannot be just brought in randomly. They can if get judge to deem relevant. And that's the first thing any rape defence tries to do. Also iirc if you could get clothes in as evidence it greatly increased chances of not guilty.

ScrollingLeaves
One thing you mentioned, omissions by the claimant at the initial taped interview, which will be later used to discredit them, and which the police cannot prompt, play into rape myths.
Eg someone could have forgotten in that moment or Be covering up shame.

Absolutely - and its not a memory test on the victim. And traumatic incident details often come back to the victim in bits & pieces and often not in order.

This is often where the 'skill' of the interviewer comes into play and why some victim video interviews take a long time to do. We can't ask them directly 'did you send any sexy photos' but we can ask 'what did you send - did you send anything else - those were the text messages you sent did you send anything else after that'. But sometimes if we ask loads of questions like that and the victim still doesn't mention the photos, there is nothing else we can do.

The photo thing - just because they send a nude photo of themselves it doesn't mean they are consenting to anything. Strippers are not consenting to anything either even though they are dancing around the stage stark naked often in a sexually provocative way. If the photo was sent ages ago, then it should not form any part of a recent incident enquiry where consent is questioned. And i can understand them being too embarrassed to mention such photos to police, but it should be explained that if they know it exists, they need to mention it. To be fair, i found that of recent times more & more victims are not afraid of mentioning such things now.

And yes - i can see why this will add to the rape myths. Perhaps we need more discussions & debates about what the prosecution, police and victims are up against.

Out of interest why would questions about text messages be asked? To find out if there's anything that would make it unlikely to get far?

I thought you had to hand your phone over now. If it was going to get anywhere.

Presumably the man she is reporting will be interviewed and if asked he will quickly tell about any sexts etc?

CheeseMmmm
Clothes might be relevant for things such as identifying the victim or suspect on CCTV. There also might be forensic evidence on the clothes. But I don't think can bring clothes into a trial just to say that the victim was wearing a 'skimpy outfit'

It depends what the text messages say - were they sent before or after the incident.

The only way we can take messages from the phone of the victim initially is if the victim allows it. So, for example the victim has a message on the phone that they think is important and they send it onto to us. Or allow us the photo the screen of the phone.

Anything beyond that (ie anything that the victim hasn't voluntarily disclosed) falls into RIPA applications. These applications are scrutinised for proportionality, necessity, relevancy and any collateral intrusion. We can't just 'routinely' down load phones unless the victim has specifically allowed us to do it. So, this maybe the route we need to take if the suspect has raised something about text messages in his interview.

I recently put on another thread on this subject that today The World at One had the former Chief Constable in charge of investigating porn say that it is causing harm without any doubt: 80% Porn Hub shows violent sex, and things such as hand around the girl or woman’s throat when kissing - just as described by the poor woman in this case.

He also mentioned the sending of nude photos.

He definitely said that sexual violence against girls and women has been escalating.

Basically something that looks like rape and feels like rape is now normal sex.

That sort of sensibility will be spreading out to police and CPS as well as jury members.

I think one of the women from the hotel assault had a good point about society being at fault. The police and prosecutor can do everything right but if the jury think drunk women are asking for it etc then convictions aren’t going to rise.
In her case a man her and her friend have never met tails them to their hotel room and he kisses one. She’s so drunk she falls down. Later he leaves their room so quickly he hasn’t put most of his clothes on. Plus he admitted trying door handles of rooms to see if they’re open. And the jury finds him not guilty.

@ScrollingLeaves

I recently put on another thread on this subject that today The World at One had the former Chief Constable in charge of investigating porn say that it is causing harm without any doubt: 80% Porn Hub shows violent sex, and things such as hand around the girl or woman’s throat when kissing - just as described by the poor woman in this case.

He also mentioned the sending of nude photos.

He definitely said that sexual violence against girls and women has been escalating.

Basically something that looks like rape and feels like rape is now normal sex.

That sort of sensibility will be spreading out to police and CPS as well as jury members.

I watched both shows. The stats are shocking. I really felt for all the women who bravely featured in the first show, and of course those who waived their anonymity to appear in the later debate. @ScrollingLeaves you raise a really valid point here re porn. And I’m surprised it didn’t feature in the debate. Something has to be done about the normalisation of it. Plus misogynistic lyrics in songs, general shit stereotypes re women in music videos etc…. All must be contribute to the belief, by some, that women are a sub-class.

• must be contributing