All current rape and sexual assault cases to be reviewed - BBC

[UpABitLate]

here

This raises a massive amount of questions and will be taken by many quarters to mean that most accusations are malicious and that lots of men are in prison for nothing / can be sent to prison on a "woman's word" (the evidence is fitted to make sure of that).

There is a line in the article which says:

"It also begs the question of why the review is to rape and sexual assault cases when many believe the problems of disclosure are systemic, he added."

I think this just shows up that our justice system has deep issues and worst in the area of sexual offences. We seem unable to "get it right" and the entire thing is already balanced on a foundation of laws evolved from property law, a societal tendancy to disbelieve victims, and here by procedural cock-ups.

I also note that new evidence that weakens cases does not mean it didn't happen - but of course this is how it will be taken. Undermining victims massively.

And yes - why only these types of cases when the problem is systemic? Because of an underlying perception, again, that women and girls lie (them being the majority of victims in court).

I think we need an overhaul of how approach sex crime. Trying to tackle it in our adversarial system, with the cultural underpinnings we have, is just not working. These crimes are effectively legal, the difficult in prosecuting is so high. It's only really if there's lots of evidence of other simultaneous crimes (other physical harm from violence, threats with weapons that are found, murder) that our laws are suitable.

Other countries have an inquisitorial approach, maybe we need to look at that.

And the agencies involved in all of this need to sort their shit out. On the one hand we have withheld evidence, on the other hand we have warboys. The system is not working for lots of people.

I'm annoyed because the review only comes after 'those poor boys were let off after those nasty women lied' about what happened but where is the outrage at the lack of cases coming to court in the first place and the ridiculously low rate of conviction on the slim chance the case gets that far?

Yes -

This is all heavily underpinned by very deeply held societal ideas about men & women & sex offences.

I don't imagine that any juries will be prepared to convict now, in all but the most extreme cases. And the fact it is all crimes, but the authorities are looking into sex crimes, implies that there is a good reason for this which will be taken to be that most of them are dodgy.

The authorities are deliberately reinforcing the "women and girls are vindictive liars" attitude and I don't know why. They must have their reasons. I suspect they want to go back to the old days where only the most serious indisputable perfect victim crimes got to court? The rest are very expensive and difficult for them and make their stats look shite.

100% agree with you OP. And very pleased the correspondent pointed out that disclosure issues are systematic.

UpaBitLate

The authorities are deliberately reinforcing the "women and girls are vindictive liars" attitude.

That's simply not true. I think the media are doing that by focussing on this so much, not the authorities.

I completely agree that the problem with selective/late disclosure should be addressed across all categories of crime, not just sexual assault/rape.

Even if it was though, that doesn't change the fact that there have been cases where evidence has been deliberately suppressed in order to secure a rape conviction. We can only speculate as to why that would be, but I'm sure there are plenty of theories out there.

Now that doesn't automatically mean the complainant is lying in every instance, but it is shocking and makes a mockery of a judicial system that is supposed to be impartial and work on the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty'.

Even if you have a woman's word, DNA evidence, a previous malevolent pattern of behaviour from the accused AND a whole fuck load more women's words ... society will still, much more often than not, contort itself to find a way to believe the man.

At the core of our society and justice system seems to be the belief that women will make up lies about men on a whim, like a toddler. What isn't seen is the agonising that many women experience around reporting, especially rape and sexual assault, but also D.V.

"What if it was a misunderstanding?" "We were on a date, maybe he didn't know I didn't want it?" "He's really a good man, how can I do this to him?" "Was that really bad enough to ruin his whole life over?" "He did it in front of everyone at the work do, so it couldn't be that bad, he's a good guy really." "He was drunk, he didn't mean it, he's not normally like that." "He has a wife and kids, I can't put them through this." "He's so lovely, usually, this would just break his heart." "He's family, I can't do this to my family." "He's such a good dad, I can't do this to the kids."

If anything, women are too nice. Too "honest". Too concerned about others' feelings. Too reluctant to report. Too reluctant to condemn the "nice man" for the not so nice thing he did. We see this in mumsnet threads every. single. day.

Men have no idea how good they've got it. Can you imagine if women stopped giving two shits about others' feelings and spoke the bare honest truth? The justice system would collapse overnight.

I am not a criminal lawyer so might be very wrong, but I’m also hoping that this exercise might result in proper disclosure in advance of trials with the result that fewer trials will collapse due to the prosecution failures, and the jury will have the opportunity to decide.

But yes, this problem is an issue not limited to rape and sexual assault cases. The criminal justice system is on its knees and barely fit for purpose.

When adult men can walk away from raping underage children, then yes the system is biased in their favour.

We expect men to lie in court, honest rapists plead guilty.

Oh FFS. They should just write "Welcome to the UK, if you're a woman you're a worthless piece of shit and we fully intend to make sure you realize that" on the tarmac at Heathrow at this rate.

Angry - most sex offences are carried out by, I think you are referring to immigrants? So, not immigrants.

This is far more beneficial for all of our home grown sex offenders.

I also (and this is a guess) think that home grown sex offenders are better at getting away with it for a variety of reasons but that's not really what this post is about.

I'd rather keep ideas about "what sort of men" are rapists out of this because frankly the answer is "any sort of men" and the sort of men who commit most sex offences in the UK are British.

John warboys, jimmy saville etc etc

McTufty - yes that would be the hope.

I don't think that's going to be the result somehow. Especially given the focus on sex offences only - the message that sends is so clear, I think it must be deliberate. There's no way they didn't think about that.

No, I'm saying that the British government is making its contempt for women very clear. Nothing to do with immigrants.

Police forced are struggling with the increased numbers of reports as women are encouraged to come forward through a variety of mechanisms. They can't cope. One senior officer said on record that trying to cope with the volume was preventing them investigating other crimes, the implication was clear. I'll see if I can find it.

(I am a Brit currently living overseas and wondering if I really want to move back with the way things are currently going. Person potentially stepping onto the tarmac at Heathrow = me.)

Can't find it now, sorry.

I welcome it. I agree there are not enough convictions in rape cases, but equally you cannot put innocent men behind bars.

I am puzzled. Some men early went to jail because evidence of their innocence wasn't disclosed. Some men were in jail because evidence of their innocence wasn't disclosed. Some men may be in jail because evidence of their innocence wasn't disclosed. But #patriarchy. But society will find a way to believe the man. But "any sort of man is a rapist".

Stunned. You would let innocent men be jailed and their lives be destroyed because a completely different man may have a poor attitude and treat women badly, or yet another completely unrelated man raped someone else?

The problem lies not in the decision to review the cases, which is absolutely right and proper. It does sound as if there has been a consistent and systematic police culture of "hiding and losing" evidence which might help the defence case, and that desperately needs to be exposed.

The problem is that (a) this is focusing exclusively on rape and sexual assault (when I bet the police involved have been engaged in similar tactics with other types of case) and (b) without careful reporting, it feeds into a media position that women often lie about rape (when in fact they are no more likely to do so than the average person in the street is to lie about, say, burglary in order to pad an insurance claim - the Home Office estimates the rate to be round about 3% for both).

The issue is that the way it's being framed makes it seem like it's only sex crimes where police reporting and investigation and the testimony of victims can't be trusted. Because women lie about rape, you see, and it's important that we as a society focus on that.

Meanwhile back in reality land rape is still massively underreported and most rapists will never see a single day in jail.

How fortunate we are to have a Wise Dad here, to school us out of our hysterical, man destroying ways.

Thank you Wise Dad. I have seen the light.

Agree rape is under reported, but women do lie about rape or distorts the truth and what really happen though they don't always take it to court but can sure create a lot of damage.have seen it close up many times through work and it really damages a man's reputation forever due to the no smoke without fire factor. Its hardly the same as lying about a burglary.

have seen it close up many times through work

Interesting job you must have.

When rape convictions are overturned or cases collapse, I try to take a look at whether the evidence shows a.victim was lying, rape was impossible, victim wasn't in the country at the time etc...or b.victim 'had a normal sounding conversation with their rapist afterwards which the justice system will falsely assume to be evidence she couldn't have been raped. Or c. Victims previous sexual history deems her unrapeable.

It always seems to be b or c. And I watch the 'poor boys' on tv lamenting their unjust treatment and i think, "rapist who got off".
Miscarriages of injustice are not evidence of innocence. They mostly seem to be a members pass into the 96% club.

It is 96% is it not? The percentage of rapes that go unpunished?

I don't buy the "being accused of rape is the worst thing ever" view point. Yes, it is utterly horrible. But there are countless examples of men in the public eye where either a rape case has collapsed and they've gone on to have perfectly satisfactory careers, or even where they've been convicted of rape (or admitted to it) and gone on to have stellar careers nonetheless (Roman Polanski? Mike Tyson? They hardly seem to be struggling).

Barrack - this is exactly the issue. Once you are accused of rape, the accusation sticks.

If this is your DH or you DS, not much fun.

Angry - not sure what your post means. Yea I deal with accusations of harrassment, assault in work capacity. Has really opened my eyes to the fact women do fabricate. Often.

This does not mean I don't think rapists should be convicted before anyone puts words into my mouth.