Guardian publishes misleading article about rape

[Nyac]

Claims the conviction rate for rape is 58% when in fact only one in ten reported rapes are prosecuted, so the conviction rate for reported rape is 6%.

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/mar/19/myths-about-rape-conviction-rates

Also called the reactions to the prosecution of a women who withdrew her rape allegation as "hysterical".

[SardineQueen]

The author of the piece that started this conversation has a problem with it.

She doesn't think it should be made too readily available, basically. She wants the press to use other stats.

[SuchProspects]

I didn't think that was being disputed SQ.

[SardineQueen]

But a woman who reports a rape stands a 6% chance of seeing someone convicted.

That is a plain fact and I don't see why anyone has a problem with it TBH.

[SuchProspects]

"They need to get that figure up before they start claiming the low conviction rate is because of victim non-reporting."

Who was claiming the low conviction rate was because women don't report rape?

"What you're doing there is victim blaming SuchProspects."

No I am not. I am pointing out the logical truth that the process for getting a rapist convicted starts with the rape being reported. I have not said, and do not think, that women who do not report rape are doing anything wrong or are at fault for not reporting. I do think that changing the environment so women are more comfortable reporting is generally a good thing and I think that is what the author is after though I disagree with some of her proposal.

[Nyac]

Once again people are already reporting rapes. There is already a huge pool of victims that the criminal justice system needs to achieve justice for. However the conviction rate stands at 6%. They need to get that figure up before they start claiming the low conviction rate is because of victim non-reporting.

More women should be reporting rape if they are raped, but they won't whilst the process is so useless and there is virtually no chance of receiving justice.

What you're doing there is victim blaming SuchProspects.

[SuchProspects]

"however one of the reasons they do is because they virtually never get punished, which takes us back to the criminal justice system."

And they won't be punished if people don't report their rapes.

Improving the criminal justice system is important. That doesn't mean that someone wanting more women to report rape is trying to avoid that improvement.

[Nyac]

In the context of this discussion where we've been discussing the media's handling of this particular issue about rape (the conviction rate, the attrition rate), their coverage hasn't been poor.

You're right that the issue is the men who rape women, however one of the reasons they do is because they virtually never get punished, which takes us back to the criminal justice system.

[SuchProspects]

I think the real issue is that men rape women.

I think the criminal justice system is appalling at investigating and prosecuting rape. I think media coverage of rape and of the criminal justice system's handling of rape cases is also poor.

[Nyac]

This woman is a former barrister, and I've heard similar arguments before from that quarter.

Do you agree that the real issue is not media coverage of rape but the fact that the criminal justice system is still on the whole pretty useless at either investigating or prosecuting rape? And that this is basically a distraction at best, an obfuscation of the true situation at worst?

[SuchProspects]

Where was the criminal justice service whining about media coverage?

[Nyac]

Instead of whining about the media coverage, the criminal justice system needs to pull its socks up when it comes to rape.

It would be impossible to argue that it's working at the moment.

[SardineQueen]

suchprospects I have read it again and you are right - the first time I misread it.

I really don't know what was wrong about the way sarah's case was reported. And she's not the only woman who has been failed by the criminal justice system when it comes to rape - there are stories every week.

I think that the real problem with the media is that they report as many stories about women making false accusations as they do about men being convicted of rape, and this skews the way the public think. I don't think that their reporting things when they go against what you would hope is a bad thing.

[SuchProspects]

SQ Of course what happened to Sarah was horrific and outrageous. But from a news perspective there were other ways of reporting it that would have been (IMO) better for women. The change in process could have been a headline piece with Sarah's experience mentioned as the reason for the change, but with the story focused on what has really changed within the criminal justice system and why. Or, particularly earlier on when Sarah was first being prosecuted, the story could have been about how we could have so many people in places of power who were prepared to make decision after decision that would revictimize Sarah, and a strong editorial voice demanding justice. It was an outrage but there was no call to action by the mainstream press (unless I missed it - I certainly saw calls to action from women's groups).

"And as the woman herself points out in the article, the change in teh CPS guidance does not mean that this can't happen again.".
Where do you get this from? She says the ex-solicitor general thinks the police will work around it using wasting police time, but points out that that is incorrect. I don't see her say anywhere that the CPS guidance won't work.

[SharonGless]

Sardine we had the first SARC centre which does help massively. The work the staff do there is amazing and even if the victim really can't go through with going to court they do support them. In addition our domestic violence conviction rate is at 58% which has improved. I can't tell you off top of the correlation between the two but I can say the police are taking rape within relationship seriously. There are so many women in abusive relationships who ate being raped However as Sardine says it is a postcode lottery and on the occasions I have dealt with other forces the attitude has been appalling. More work needs to be done to ensure each victim, no matter where they live, gets the very best service.

[SardineQueen]

I think that the charge rate of 60% that Sharon cites is the most pertinent and interesting statistic of all.

That means that if you report a rape there is a 6 in 10 chance that someone will be charged with the crime. that is encouraging.

Unfortunately most of those charges come to nothing, which is discouraging. But the 60% shows that hopefully you will be taken seriously. Although having said that some of the "no crime" figures are appalling. I suspect there is a "postcode lottery" as to how well rape cases are handled (or if indeed they are handled at all).

[SardineQueen]

But what happened to Sarah was totally outrageous. Of course people got "hysterical" about it. A woman went to PRISON because it was accepted that she had been raped, but withdrew her accusations because of his family. Further, the children (some of whom had witnessed at least one attack) were given to the HUSBAND to look after, even though there was an order that he should not care for them. The whole thing was a fucking disgrace and damn right people got "hysterical".

As for the CPS guidelines changing - well that has been reported - people know. It shouldn't have bloody well happened in the first place though. And as the woman herself points out in the article, the change in teh CPS guidance does not mean that this can't happen again.

[SuchProspects]

So your argument is that the point of this article is stop feminist analysis of rape investigation and persecution?

While I say the point of this article is to counter the media narrative that discourages rape reporting. I don't think the article does a great job of making its point, especially with the conviction rate bits. And some of what she is saying comes across to me as suggesting the media should simply spin the story so women feel better about reporting rape, which I strongly disagree with.

But I think her issues with the Sarah case reporting were reasonable. I thought it was reported in a salacious and negative way that would inappropriately make make women fear about reporting rape now. There was little focus on either how this particular prosecution came about (the focus was all on Sarah, not the decision makers who were responsible) or how a country-wide change to process has been brought in because of it.

[Nyac]

I'm just not sure what the argument is here.

If you report rape at the moment you have a one in twenty chance of seeing a conviction. You are more likely to have your report no crimed, or not investigated properly or not prosecuted.

It's pretty simple.

The fact is women don't report rapes in part because of the pathetic outcomes the legal system produces. The fact that there is almost always a witness to the crime of rape, surely suggests that the conviction rate should be much higher. It's not because a large number of people, including people in the criminal justice system, subscribe to rape myths and believe that women lie about it.

There seems to be a backlash against feminist analysis of rape investigation and prosecution in this country. This article is part of that.

[SuchProspects]

I think the Home Office Conviction Rates are wholly misused by the press in general and there ought to be a lot more pressure for the government to calculate and report more fully on what happens to reported crime than it currently does. The Home Office Conviction Rates are really only useful in terms of measuring whether CPS are good at deciding whether they have reasonable chance of conviction for cases. Very high rates would indicate they were only going to court with completely sure things, very low rates would indicate they were taking every case they could to court, regardless of whether they had the evidence and skill to prosecute it with a reasonable expectation of success. This isn't a figure that is particularly interesting, for any crime, except when talking about how well CPS perform in this aspect of their role.

6% is a truer indication of what people mean when they talk about conviction rates in everyday conversation. And I agree that women don't generally misunderstand this figure.

But we don't hear in the media about the also exceedingly low rates of reported burglaries, car crimes, assaults, or any other crime that end with a conviction. This means that there is skewing in the way the resolution of rape cases is portrayed compared to other crimes that may deter more women from reporting.

I disagree that she talked about Sarah in an unsympathetic way - I thought talked about the media reporting and official reactions, not the case itself or Sarah. And I thought her points (though, again, I don't like her use of hysterical) about the media coverage are salient.

[SharonGless]

In our area 60% of rapes reported have been charged year to date which is in an inner city area. I obviously can't give you attrition rates.

Has anyone ever seen the documentary " bowling for columbine " Regarding gun crime in America? The theory was that society is more fearful depending on how the media portray crime.

This is interesting based on the discussion above on how you portray outcomes of reporting rape.

[SardineQueen]

But her argument is that saying 6% (or even 12%) is the conviction rate is simply wrong, as the conviction rate is usually defined as the amount of cases that are prosecuted that result in a conviction.

So she is quibbling over the use of the term "conviction rate" for the 6%, even though that is the % of rape reports that end up in a rape conviction.

And I don't think many women misunderstand the 6%, TBH.

She has however totally misunderstood what a very important figure - attrition rate - actually means. So pot kettle frankly.

Fact is that rape reports are increasing. And the way she talks about the woman who was imprisoned for a false retraction is unsympathetic, to say the least. Both to the woman and the people who were horrified at what happened to her.

[SuchProspects]

SQ ^"Seeing as the crux of her article is that the language used is misleading..."

I don't think that is the crux of her argument. Her argument is that reporting rape is always shown negatively in the press. Her examples include the 6% vs 58% conviction rate and she defines the 6% as "attrition", but her argument isn't simply that it should be called "attrition", her argument is that using that number instead of focusing on the other adds to the negative presentation and will deter people from reporting rape.

[FrothyDragon]

It's ok. sorry if the first bit of my reply sounded snappy... dyslexia's playing up today, and can affect the way I reply... Just re-read it and thought... "oops..."

[SharonGless]

Thanks frothy, was half way through Stern review then got sidetracked trying to get head round attrition rates

[SuchProspects]

oh wow. Cross post lots. sorry.