Channel 4, Rape 'Who's on trial'

[MrMrsJones]

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

You didn't say they wouldn't have reported- you were very specific.

'I think in the case of that predator who drugged and raped a whole succession of men, none of them would have been believed/the assailant prosecuted (in practice) either - had there not been the miracle of the rapist picking up the wrong phone and the police finding his incriminating one.'

CheeseMmm
Are you muddling me with Felix125?

At 12.25 I uwas responding to Felix125 about victims who report but don’t want to carry the case further. Felix had mentioned this is often the case. I wanted to know from Felix ( as a police officer) if multiple reports on one man by different victims can mean accrued evidence against the assailant can eventually be used against him - should another victim of the same man want to press charges and should the case get to court.

What I wrote last night related to the serial rapist of males which you have quoted from me above was about some different issues.

Oh sorry yes I think so.

I'm also interested in your question.

I'm taken aback that all female reports are investigated but male reports in Felix opinion would be disbelieved etc.

ScrollingLeaves
Yes, reports such as this would be held by police. An investigation & prosecution may still proceed by going evidence led (ie the victim is not supporting a prosecution). Obviously this would be harder to secure a conviction, but anything from the investigation, intelligence etc will be filed and can be used as 'bad character' against the suspect in future.

Even if the victim just wants to log the incident, we still have to consider safeguarding for the victim and people around the suspect (vulnerable people, children etc) - so we still may arrest the suspect.

There are rules of course for introducing bad character against a suspect and it can be a mine filed to navigate, but it can be done - especially if there is a specific thing that connects all the incidents.

@CheeseMmmm

Oh sorry yes I think so.

I'm also interested in your question.

I'm taken aback that all female reports are investigated but male reports in Felix opinion would be disbelieved etc.

I'm not sure where you have read that.

Male & female victims will be believed in exactly the same way. The barriers to them reporting (such as embarrassment, trauma, guilt etc etc) will be the same for both.

My point was that it would have been interesting to have male victims on the program to hear if their experiences mirror the experiences expressed on the program by the female victims.

I would suggest that there are less support services for male victims as it stands, but perhaps that is another discussion to be had. Or perhaps the supports services could be more victim focused regardless of gender.

Felix125 17.21
“There are rules of course for introducing bad character against a suspect and it can be a mine filed to navigate, but it can be done - especially if there is a specific thing that connects all the incidents.“

That’s good so long as it isn’t such a minefield it is too difficult to use by police and CPS and in court, in practice.

Because it seems anything from the victim’s life can be used to make their testimony questionable.

Oh sorry Felix have looked back and totally cocked up! It was another poster. Genuinely sorry.

Felix I'm really interested in what seems to be a gap between your comments about procedure and your force, and information from govt reports, victims, media reports with police apologising for failures etc. Which have been happening for as long as I can remember.

On the one hand you state and I'm sure it's true for you/ in your force that reports are always investigated, evidence gathered etc and all is working as should be.

But then we have so many obviously really awful things.

The news at the moment about the man who killed 4 men. Both the coroner and various family members seem to have been way more effective than the police who admit they screwed it up.

Couzens had I think it was 3 reports of indecent exposure against him. The one days before he killed, and another earlier one where he was named, were not investigated.

The chap who had s string of sex offences and convictions as long as your arm. That's not just police but in my view he was just obviously dangerous. It's for the courts but him just out and about feels so wrong.

Years ago yes but warboys. Police fucked up from start to finish. And also complaints from victims when he was going to be released. I mean a total mess.

Reid as well same situation.

And from the news, reports, anecdotally. It's just not true that the police always follow the book when sex offences are reported. Even rapes.

What if sex offences seen as not of interest? Flashing etc? It's been known for decades these men often escalate. After couzens I felt sure the police would say. Yep indecent exposure is going to be treated more seriously now. But they haven't said that at least the met certainly haven't.

A high up type who did a report a year or 2 ago said rape was effectively decriminalised here.

Something is badly wrong.

Another question.

Is there a national system that collects all the report info etc and looks to match crimes? Obviously thinking about sex crimes.

Because if there is it's shite TBH.

CheeseMmmm
I think the gaps are where the human element comes into it. People make mistakes - either honest mistakes or mistakes which have come about by in-competencies by the individual. There will also be corrupt people in the police as there will be in any organisation and every group in life. And they some how manage to get into positions which they should not be in - Couzens is a prime example.

I don't think we can ever be in a position to eradicate this completely - even with check points, mistakes can filter their way through. And different forces will run themselves differently to others depending on their demographic.

All of this will bring in variations in figures. Perhaps we need to move like Scotland has and have one national police force for the country with one management structure - but the public don't seem to want this.

I think we do 'learn lessons' from incidents where mistakes have been highlighted. From the Allen case (accused of rape, but after text messages from the victim were highlighted to the court he was found not guilty) - from this disclosure is now a massive part of our case files for any offence at all. Basically you have to disclose everything and grade it as to its relevance. You have to go through all the phone calls, CCTV, body worn video etc and edit all the sensitive material out and print out a small rain forest for each case.

But we do this now to help prevent disclosure error/mistakes happening again.

The flashing thing is interesting. Yes i can appreciate the link that most sex offenders start this way - but do we need to have a zero tolerance to it? Stag nights, hen nights and similar parties sometimes have an element of nudity for dares etc - most of them young people. Do we need to put them all on the sex offenders register? Or can we introduce an element of common sense to it to establish if the incident is of a concern. And there will be obvious concerning ones - the 'traditional' man flashing at a young girl on her own is clearly not acceptable - but there will be a huge grey area between the two ends of the spectrum.

And there is a national system which does flag warning signs up for individuals. PNC logs all the suspects details and the method they have used for each crime whether its a conviction or not. We often use this as bad character submissions on them.

Felix125
Re;Flashing
Not stag nights
People mean finding a man standing in front of you with his penis out probably wanking.
I have had three in my life. Once a was a little girl; the other times I was a young adult. In one case he was blocking me on the staircase of a public lavatory; in the other I was alone on a bench reading in a public place.

ScrollingLeaves
I completely agree with you - and those are the obvious concerning ones which are clearly not acceptable.

All i am saying is that if we are to have a zero tolerance approach - it would need to include the stag night type ones

here's a thought......

If we say that rape conviction figures are at 2%
so 98% are undetected or not guilty verdict

From that can we say that 2% of victims who report a rape (or have the rape reported by a third party) are 'happy' with the outcome - and 98% are not happy with the outcome?

I know 'happy' is not the right word to use here - but just for the ease of the question.

I think if you asked all the victims who reported or had the report made on their behalf, if they were 'happy' with the outcome regardless of whether there was a conviction or not - what the percentage would be?

This would therefore include the victims who did not want to go as far as court and were happy to have the crime logged and have access to support services.