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".

<a class="break-all" href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110608160754/www.equalities.gov.uk/PDF/Stern_Review_acc_FINAL.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">the stern report

if anyone wants to read it

From that 58 campaign thing

"I want to see a campaign that yells loudly about the 58% figure. One that says ?if there is evidence to take this to trial, you are more likely than not to see your offender convicted? ? but also one that is honest about the difficulties in getting a case to trial ? not to put people off making a complaint, but to enable them to make a proper, informed and educated assessment of whether they want to make a complaint."

WHAT? The author of that article is suggesting that it is right and proper that women have a good think about whether or not they should report a rape? The aim should be that ^all women (and men and children) who are raped should feel no trepidation about reporting that rape to the police! FFS what is that author ON?

Agree there, Nyac.

sorry, I know my post with the stats (second one) was a bit garbled. Point I was trying to make was that the less victims withdrawing reports, then surely the higher the conviction rate?

We also need to do something about the "no crime" on reports. 3 - 8% are false reports. Mostly for reasons that aren't malicious. (I can't remember who covered reasons for false allegations, but the reasons for false allegations include misidentifying the perpetrator, amongst other things - in other words, there's still a crime)

But 6% of all reported rapes ending in a rape conviction; not a substituted conviction, rape. That's pretty damn shitty. Even the 9.23% chance of a report which isn't withdrawn for whatever reason ending in a conviction is pretty shitty. Substituting victim's rapes for another charge is, again, pretty shitty.

We know that the cases that go to court are ones which are likely to convict
That they are ones which satisfy the myths surrounding rape
Stranger / dark alley / no drink or drugs consumed by victim / victim assaulted in other ways to the rape etc etc

So this blogger is suggesting that women have a good think about whether their cases meet that criteria before deciding whether to report. Well guess what, they do. And that is NOT a good situation.

It should be the case that all victims feel confident about reporting, and it should be up to the police to take the report seriously, gather evidence and support the victim and the CPS to decide whether to pursue the case. This is BASIC isn't it?

It is basic, Sardine, and it's so sad we have to keep going over this.

I've lost count how many times I've read a thread, in which the OP is asking if they were raped, and it sounds as if they're searching for excuses that it wasn't rape, or they were to blame somehow. I just hope that one day, we get past that. That one day, we'll get to the point where women trust that voice in the back of their heads which tells them it wasn't right in the first place, where they don't need telling that their rape was a rape, where the victims don't search for a million ways to blame themselves, before worrying that everyone else will do just that as well.

The 6% is the one that is most relevant to women thinking of reporting. Saying that it's 58% gives false hope, but the argument either way focuses on the women reporting not the police and courts side of it.
It doesn't matter what the exact figures are, more women will report if they feel the police will take it seriously and courts will try the suspect without dragging victims through the mud in the process. All the focus on the figures seem to be just a way to make it seem less bad without actually doing anything. The 6% is the number that matters and it should be pointed at the police with the purpose of making them do better.
When they start doing better more women will feel confident to report.

And some of the comments on that statistic site were vile.

Exactly giyadas

The conversation is all about reporting.

The statistic for seeing a conviction after reporting a rape, is 6%.

Not tricky.

A woman would presumably be heartened by the 58%, if and when the CPS told her that they were going to go ahead and prosecute.

That law article, and the guardian one, and the stats one, all seem to point in the same direction.

That women who have really been raped, who have experienced rape-rape, you know, proper rape, should be encouraged by the 58% stat.

Women who have experienced rape-lite, or who had done something silly like going out after dark by themselves or having an alcoholic drink or being alone with a man they had smiled at... They aren't really important as they haven't really been raped and that's why the 6% is irrelevant and why it must be struck off the record. The ones that don't go to court - they're not worth worrying about are they and that's why they say it's a "myth". None of them believe these women have been raped. Not properly. Probably not at all.

Which is why "We believe you" is so important.

Those of you who've taken the time to read the Stern report and think about it, what do you make of the recommendations? I've just looked at the intro and recommendations and I don't actually see Baroness Stern recommending that the 58% figure be adopted and the 6% be dropped, only that the public be made aware that there is a difference between the two and why that is. I think that could be a good thing, since it's the attrition rate that's the shocking thing about rape - it's beyond unacceptable that only 6% of women will see their rape go from initial report to successful conviction.

Is there another agenda or is the telegraph and guardian misreporting?

At the time the review was released, a lot of papers mis-reported the "headline" of "dropping" the 6%.

i imagine people just have memories of that.

"WHAT? The author of that article is suggesting that it is right and proper that women have a good think about whether or not they should report a rape? The aim should be that ^all women (and men and children) who are raped should feel no trepidation about reporting that rape to the police! FFS what is that author ON?"

She's basically telling victims to no-crime their rapes isn't she?

Pretty much, Nyac...

And that, to me, is abhorrent. :(

Yeah, it's just getting yourself into the percentage that goes to court in the first place though, isn't it?
And if there is a standard of rape-rape being applied before it even goes to court then 58% is a crap result too.

Agree the 'I believe you' campaign is fantastic. Just reading the words I believe you on the campaign thread sent chills down my spine. Just reading it on a forum means so much.

I had another think about this last night. The "conviction rate is 58%" is the misogynists playing field, isn't it?

Firstly, it's so easy to play that card against women who don't report their rapes. Telling them they have a 58% chance of conviction is misleading, as it doesn't take into account the number of cases that don't get to court. It deflects from the failings of the legal system up to that point; the failings that cause victims to withdraw and retract complaints, the complaints that are no crimed, and the rape cases that fail to make it to court in the first place. We need to hold the legal system to account, from the initial account to how victims are treated in court, to find out exactly why 35% of reports are no crimed, withdrawn or retracted. That's 35 out of 100 reports. We need to find out why, exactly, only 20% of all reported rape cases fail to make it to court, and hold those who are making the process more difficult accountable for the effects. Feminists aren't responsible for the 6% of reports resulting in a conviction; the legal system is, through all it's failings.

I think this thread is being unfair to the author. I don't think her intent is to tell people to no crime their rapes. Or to offer a get out clause for the criminal justice system. I read the article as her wanting the 58% number to be out there so that more women would report rape, and I read into the piece that she sees this as a way to get more prosecutions and more rapists convicted and punished. She sees the negative talk inMaHelen public domain about conviction rates as being a way to suppress women and stop them pursuing justice.

I think it's the wrong way round, and she is ignoring the reason women faught to have the attrition rate measured and reported, but I don't think her intent is bad. I tend to think it would be a good thing for the public in general if more women reported rape.

I also agree with her that some of the reporting over Sarah's case concentrated on the wrong aspects and gave a false picture of the current state of things. I dislike the use of the word "hysterical" because of its use to silence women. But it was done in a "get all worked up over the wrong things" way. Coverage didn't talk enough about how unusual the prosecution was (because Sarah isn't the first woman to retract under pressure) or how the guidelines have been change and what impact that will have. And it concentrated on Sarah's report and retraction, not on the people who made the terrible decisions that resulted in a patent miscarriage of justice or the lack of process in our system to put it right.

I think the 6% figure is important, but I am a bit concerened by the idea it may discourage women pursuing justice. I think the way to deal with that is to change the 6%, but I can also see that fewer women reporting is likely to make things spiral down, not improve.

I'm not arguing that I agree with the author, but the comments on this thread seem like a bit of an attack on the character of the woman, and I don't think that's justified, or a good way for women who disagree on tactics and approaches to treat each other.

Can I just point out the attrition rate, as noted by the article actually puts it at 12% not 6%.

Flapper the higher attrition rate includes convictions for any charge. If you look at the number of convictions for rape the attrition rate is 6.5%.

Where do you get that figure from SuchProspects?

Fewer women aren't reporting rape - more are. The problem is the legal system doesn't want to punish rapists.

Could you also point out the attacks on the character of the author on this thread.

Because as far as I can see there aren't any.

Sorry, that should have been 6%. Not sure why I typed the extra .5

There aren't any direct attacks, it just seems like the tone of the thread to me. I read a woman who is concerned that women are put off reporting rapes to the police because the media frequently report on the negative aspects of reporting rape and so build a sense of hopelessness in women. Analogous to the way they report the negative aspects of violence against women - they sensationalize and distort. Concentrate only on the bad.

Personally I don't think the use of 6%/58% is the key part of the negative expectations women have of the criminal justice system in regard to rape. But I think she might have a point that a negative portrayal of reporting rape is detrimental to the cause of getting more rapists behind bars.

Just had a quick google about the number of reported rapes over the last 2- years and it seems they've risen year on year quite dramatically, so clearly women are not put off from reporting, it's just that for the vast majority of them little happens as a result of that.

No there aren't any direct attacks. In fact there aren't any attacks. Just disagreement, which is absolutely OK in an opinion piece that invites comment. Tone arguments are usually about not having much of an argument.

Where did you get the 6% attrition rate in rape cases SuchProspect. Because I don't think that's correct.

I'm a bit confused Nyac. The 6% is the one that's been used throughout this thread, 6% of recorded rapes end in a conviction for rape. I wasn't particularly trying to champion one number, just going with what has been used throughout this thread and pointing out to Flapper30 why people were using 6% not the 12% mentioned in the article. Is it the semantics of the term attrition you're questioning, or do you think the rate is different? If the latter, which rate do you go with?

Tone is a big deal. Tone is often used to stop women feeling like they can speak, or to make others thing women's words aren't as important without directly attacking them. Arguments being ignored or misread. Assumptions about bad intentions rather than assumptions of good faith. The idea that a feminist being sensitive to tone on a feminist forum is about not having much of an argument is sad. So while an opinion piece certainly invites comment, and in a place of free speech everyone is entitled to comment as they please, it doesn't make for a useful or enlightening discussion if the tone is to be dismissive of the point the author is trying to make. And when aims of the author are in keeping with goals that this forum generally in favour it seems particularly absurd to be combative about it. I know it's been a hard week here, but it would be a shame to eat ourselves up getting defensive.