Female judges only presiding over rape cases

[didihearthatright123456]

Not in the UK but based on this article is it time to stop male judges from presiding over rape cases as they are clearly incapable (in the examples given - I’m sure there are many more that are not in the public eye in the same way)

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/crime/drew-clinton-brock-turner-rape-b1993568.html

I'm not sure that would work theres plenty of handmaidens out there

I am sure there would be howls of outrage.

As all those feminist bitches put innocent men away for making a mistake, cos she REALLY wanted it; I slipped and my dick fell into her vagina; she was wearing a thong, etc etc etc etc.

I can here it now NAMAT NAMALT NAMALT NAMAT NAMALT NAMALT NAMAT NAMALT NAMALT NAMAT NAMALT NAMALT NAMAT NAMALT NAMALT NAMAT NAMALT NAMALT NAMAT NAMALT NAMALT NAMAT NAMALT NAMALT NAMAT NAMALT NAMALT NAMAT NAMALT NAMALT

Christ, what an idiotic proposal. Yet to see any evidence that the gender of the judge affects likelihood of conviction in that Uk and absolutely no reason why it should.

Sex. Sex of the judge.

And I doubt a woman would ever allow the defence of "I slipped and my dick slipped into her vagina"

So maybe there is some evidence of it being a good idea.

I doubt that would be a good idea. Some women are more misogynistic than men

@CuriousaboutSamphire

Sex. Sex of the judge.

And I doubt a woman would ever allow the defence of "I slipped and my dick slipped into her vagina"

So maybe there is some evidence of it being a good idea.

I don’t think distinguishing based on either sex or gender would be helpful.

And where is your evidence for judges allowing the “I slipped” argument? Full case references please.

I'm sick to death of the 'she was drunk and cried rape when she sobered up' excuse. That's exactly what the rugby player recently arrested is saying. Even though the police found date rape drugs at the property. Ffs.

Sadly there are many women that still victim blame.

In theory, if a judge (of any gender) misdirects a jury, or is unduly lenient in sentence, the verdict or sentence can be appealed/ reviewed. This needs to happen more in practice, as well as the process being more transparent and accessible to everyone.

PP may mean ehsan abdulaziz @janesmom I don't k ow the sex of the judge in that case though.

I don’t think distinguishing based on either sex or gender would be helpful.

What on Earth does that mean?

Full case reference? I suppose the thread on it (and other stupid, insulting defences) here wouldn't do? That had newspaper articles etc. But, as ever, Google is your friend. You REALLY could have done this yourself you know.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/i-fell-and-penetrated-her-by-accident-millionaire-rape-suspect-claims-a6767486.html

Or did you think I was making it up? This is Mumsnet FWR - we ALWAYS have the data!

@jessieminto

I'm sick to death of the 'she was drunk and cried rape when she sobered up' excuse. That's exactly what the rugby player recently arrested is saying. Even though the police found date rape drugs at the property. Ffs.

I never understand that or the 'she regretted it'. If I regretted sex the last thing I would want is the examination you have to go through, physically and mentally. The court case, the hate and abuse, the newspaper reports etc.

Oh, and it worked. He was cleared

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3361640/Saudi-millionaire-cleared-raping-teenager-telling-court-accidentally-penetrated-18-year-old-tripped-fell-her.html

If certain men are incapable of judging rape cases fairly and properly I think that begs the question of if they are capable of being judges full stop.

This would just be a sticky plaster instead of properly addressing the deep flaws in the justice system (particularly when it comes to rape and SA)

Without wishing to post a TAAT, I’m sick of the absolute rubbish posted about these cases, which has absolutely nothing in common with reality.

I’ve been a lawyer for many years and it frustrates the hell out of me that there are still people stupid enough to believe this stuff.

And the judge was male, Martin Griffiths. He pandered to the millionaore during the trial and, I think, had his decisions challenged.

During the trial, Judge Martin Griffiths permitted the rare step of allowing 20 minutes of Mr Abdulaziz's evidence to be heard in private.

@Janesmom

Without wishing to post a TAAT, I’m sick of the absolute rubbish posted about these cases, which has absolutely nothing in common with reality.

I’ve been a lawyer for many years and it frustrates the hell out of me that there are still people stupid enough to believe this stuff.

So, no quotes from the trial or anything like that will be evidence enough then?

Look at it reasonably, with your lawyer head on.

It IS somethingth defendent said.

It IS something the judge allowed.

The judge DID take an unusual step in this case.

He WAS cleared.

I said such a thing was used as a defence. It was!

[quote CuriousaboutSamphire]Oh, and it worked. He was cleared

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3361640/Saudi-millionaire-cleared-raping-teenager-telling-court-accidentally-penetrated-18-year-old-tripped-fell-her.html[/quote]
It absolutely beggars belief that he was cleared given the evidence reported in both articles. The defence was basically that the teenager was embarrassed that a middle aged man didn't want to have sex with her?

Is there any statistical evidence that demonstrates that the sex of the judge is in any way a determining factor in the outcome of rape trails?

No @Waitwhat23 You and I are both too stupid to understand what was written. I mean as @Janesmom says, that's just more of the absolute rubbish posted about these cases, which has absolutely nothing in common with reality.

So that must mean that none of the examples I gave have ever, ever been used as part of a man's defence against a rape accusation, in a court of law, not ever! Nope! Never!

Pshaw!

a more constructive approach (and one more likely to happen) would be to educate both judges AND jurors about rape myths

@Effic

Is there any statistical evidence that demonstrates that the sex of the judge is in any way a determining factor in the outcome of rape trails?

I doubt anyone has looked for such data. There may not be enough data to make meaningful analysis - given the relatie paucity of women judges in general

Government statistocs as at April 20201 39% of all judges (courts and tribunals combined) were women. In the courts, there was a lower representation of women in the more senior posts (29% for the High Court and above).

Link for our judicial friend

www.gov.uk/government/statistics/diversity-of-the-judiciary-2021-statistics/diversity-of-the-judiciary-2021-statistics-report#:~:text=5.3%20Judicial%20Office%20Holders,the%20High%20Court%20and%20above).

I am confused. Don’t all rape trials have a jury? Isn’t it the jury then that decided guilty or not guilty? The judge doesn’t make the decision. The judge is there to ensure that prosecution and defence done properly, the jury selected and instructed fairly and to decide sentence if the jury decides guilty.

So I don’t see how making all judges on rape cases female would affect guilty or not guilty as it’s the jury that makes this decision not the judge? And does this proposal then mean that cases where a man is the rape victim would have a male judge?

@StillWeRise

a more constructive approach (and one more likely to happen) would be to educate both judges AND jurors about rape myths

Make that society as a whole.

A public information film using every stupid, crass attempt at rape defence. On a month would do it. Of course they'd have to use a lot of historic cases, there being so few rape cases that actually get to court in the first place.

@CuriousaboutSamphire ah, I see. And presumably also bamboozled by the strict media guidelines for reporting court proceedings, in particular those involving sexual offences.

By the way, loving your work - it's always glorious seeing the women of FWR in action.

Don’t all rape trials have a jury?

Yes. Sadly this specific case meant that not only was a rich man brass necked enough to use it as part of his defence but that 12 jurors didn't immediately think "Twat!" and find him guilty - because, let's face it, a very rich man showing such casual disregard for the humanity of a young woman is not going to be honest if lying well enough will get him off free.

It is a stupid, vacuous, self centred, arrogant, entitled, male twat defence. And should be labelled as such at every opportunity.