Rape cases in front of a jury.

[MsMarvellous]

I have just read this bbc article about the case being brought against the CPS for its failure to bring rape cases to trial (that's the essence, there's more detail in there):

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48574813

One comment that got me is that they would t bring a case as messages from the victim to defendant would be misinterpreted by the jury. Messages sent to placate him presumably in an effort to reduce the violence.

Surely it's time to look at whether a jury trial is the right way to run a rape case.

I come from a legal background. I know the notion of removing the jury of peers from a criminal prosecution cuts deep into the history, tradition and criminal justice framework. But how is it fair to women that violence almost exclusively against us a sex cannot be punished in part because of a lack of understanding.

It's different to murder/manslaughter to me. Either way with those crimes someone has died and it's usually, if not always, fairly easy to determine if it was natural or not. Then you are digging into how, who, why and when.

With rape the basic concept of consent is so skewed by individual and societal expectation and judgment of women, E.g. "She was wearing a mini skirt so was asking for it", that it's almost impossible to determine if a crime was committed just on the fact if the act of sexual intercourse taking place.

Wouldn't a panel of specially trained judges and medical and psychological experts be better to decide these cases. It still wouldn't be perfect but it might give women a fighting chance.
I would also remove cross examination in a public court. Examine the witnesses just with legal representation in a hope of removing the showboating character assassination of victims, though removal of a jury should do that too.

I wondered what others thought. Would it even be feasible? I'm so outraged at how dismissed women are. Just always, every day. And today I'm really grumpy anyway!

I’m not disclosing what I do on MN. However, up until a few years ago one of my roles involved working with victims of sexual offences to get cases to and through the courts.

As for increases to innocent men being convicted of we lower the burden of proof, it’s already happening so would increase if we did.

If you'd been a witness who'd seen the woman breaking into your house you'd have been believed. The same isn't true for rape victims, so the situations aren't comparable.

Says who? Surely objective evidence is better than a witness statement because it is unequivocal? I couldn't be mistaken or confused about this person having my bank cards or driving my car. She had no good reason for having them. If she'd had one of the two then maybe claiming that she found it or whatever but why would she have 2? And using my bank cards is theft or fraud or something. Why not charge her with that?

Whatever the reasons, I don't think you can say that the police or the CPS are picking on rape and choosing not to prosecute. It seems to be the same for all crimes.

I agree with you on the limitations of jury trials. It's certainly possible to do it a different way. The legal system I grew up with doesn't have jury trials at all. The courts use a varying mix of professional judges and volunteer judges. Lower courts use more volunteer judges, higher courts use more professional judges. So a case that could result in a sentence of up to four years prison will be decided by one professional judge aided by two volunteer judges and a murder trial will be judged by three professional judges aided by two volunteer judges.

However, while that may be a good solution for rape cases, until the previously thoroughly misogynist law on rape there was changed 18 months ago, that wouldn't have made a blind bit of difference, I don't think.

Until then, in order to be able to argue rape, the rapists had to have used violence to subdue the victim (ie the victim actually had to have bruises or had to prove that she tried to fight the attacker off). If a victim's fight or flight response* actually was a freeze one, the courts were not a good bet for a rape victim.

*really rather misnamed, isn't it? Freeze is an incredibly common response.

I think it was Andrea Dworkin who said legal procedure was established to protect men from the state. It was never set up to protect women from men.

Manclife you say you read the article and the examples, which is what this thread is about.

You are still on the same track.

Is it fair to say you suspect the women in the article are lying, and that is the reason their cases were dropped.

Whatever the reasons, I don't think you can say that the police or the CPS are picking on rape and choosing not to prosecute. It seems to be the same for all crimes.

Do you have more examples or stats other than just your one isolated experience?

"I’m not disclosing what I do on MN. However, up until a few years ago one of my roles involved working with victims of sexual offences to get cases to and through the courts.

As for increases to innocent men being convicted of we lower the burden of proof, it’s already happening so would increase if we did."

Which "innocent" men in particular were you thinking of?

Your attitudes are like those of the police in the Home Office Report I linked to. Finding every reason to disbelieve women, whilst crying about "innocent" men. Rapist walk free because of these woman-hating beliefs. It's scary that you were in any capacity to work with rape victims, but that's the criminal justice system for you.

Someone who knows a lot more than me about the issue told me juries believe rape myths and one of the most pernicious is that if it was rape then why didn't the victim at least try to fight him off?

Rape myths are so common and widespread that I do no think any one could possibly get a fair trial for rape. The myths don't apply to men, so they might. But women are judged by a lot of people before even they hear the story..I would say that huries on rape cases are biased to begin with. Which clearly does not help matters.

Something has to change. I have no idea what though.

Finding every reason to disbelieve women, whilst crying about "innocent" men.

Yup. The upshot is, people like it as it is now, making it easy to get off rape so that these billions of innocent men don’t get punished for ‘something they didn’t do’. I mean, what women doesn’t like putting themselves through invasive rape kits and humiliating police questions, then horrific trials with bastard defence lawyers, just for kicks?

A better phrase would be "innocent rapists" wouldn't it? Because that's what they are.

Do you have more examples or stats other than just your one isolated experience?

It's common knowledge that conviction rates for all crimes is appallingly low. In lots of burglary cases the police no longer even attend, just give the victim a crime reference number - do you think that's ok?

@MenuPlant it’s not fair to say any such thing! I’m talking about the process overall not individual cases that I’ve no personal involvement with.

Is the conviction rates for all crimes as low as rape, are they dropping at the same rate?

No I don’t think it’s ok. Police are clearly struggling to cope and need more resources. All crimes are not equal though. Violent and sexual crimes should take priority.

@Erythronium

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-41060237

As for my ‘woman hating beliefs’ that’s nonsense with no evidence to support it. I’ve enough thank yous from victims for me to treat you it with the contempt it deserve.

The system is flawed, all I’ve done is point out what those flaws are from a different perspective. As it stands it doesn’t get justice for victims (though what justice actually looks like is subjective). But I would not want to see a system that increased the likelihood of innocent people going to jail.

Alienating those who understand the problems and who try to change things from inside the system with snide comments will do nothing to further your cause.

@JessicaWakefieldSV domestic violence and SO crimes do. There’s still not enough police though. The move towards asking ALL victims of domestic abuse if they’ve been raped has sent the number of disclosures through the roof! The system can’t cope with how many. It needs proper funding and better training.

"’Ive enough thank yous from victims for me to treat you it with the contempt it deserve."

The lurkers support me in email. If they knew how you'd been talking about them on here they might have different feelings about proffering their thanks to you.

though what justice actually looks like is subjective

Rapists going to jail isn't actually subjective. I wonder what you were thinking about?

Justice in rape cases would be the rapist going to prison for a very long time. I can’t think of a woman that disagrees with that. Some men do though. Some men care more about a system that protects men.

Your comments show that you’ve little to no experience of dealing with victims of SO crimes. Each victim has their own idea of what justice is and it isn’t always about going to court and long jail sentences.

www.urban.org/urban-wire/what-do-victims-want-criminal-justice-reform

Oh, and I haven’t been ‘talking about them’ in a negative way so please stop attacking the person not the argument. You clearly don’t like people disagreeing with you so will leave you to your echo chamber.

Another ‘echo chamber’ comment on a rape thread. How utterly gross.

Your comments show that you’ve little to no experience of dealing with victims of SO crimes

I am a victim. I have also supported many other victims. Stop making assumptions.

Your comments reveal that despite having dealt with many many rape victims, most of whom will have never seen justice for what happened to them, your concern is with "innocent men". You're running away because you don't want to talk about which "innocent" men who've been jailed for rape you're thinking about.

"Echo chamber" when directed at feminists is MRA-speak. You need to disguise yourself more carefully.

Women have to settle for less than justice because the justice system fails us when we're raped. I suppose you could call the results of that "subjective" but it's more like realism as regards to what we can expect.

I've been reading everything. Thank you so much to those who have experienced the system first hand for their comments.

It's so depressing reading wider about exactly how secondary women still are. I feel like somewhere there's a trigger. One thing that will start a snowball of understanding until there is actually equality. Of how we are perceived, valued, and thought of and not just attempts to pay us the same. Clearly attempts to value women's work haven't led to the higher value of women in the world.

I don't see how we can fix the woeful state of the way the criminal justice system treats sexual assault victims until we are actually viewed as equal.

Ive long thought that all gendered crime should have a separate process completely. Involving intensive psychological testing. Any man accused of da and/or rape should be happy to submit to such to prove his innocence, if innocent.

The adversarial system is not the best way to address a massive issue that too many with power in it still dont understand, and the basis of it doesnt hold water (beyond reasonable doubt)

There are certain profiles that make it a reasonable assumption that such behaviour would be expected. So based on a mans beliefs it would be reasonable to expect xyz.

There are commonly demobstration by perpetrators in court and within the court premises of perpetrator behaviour or stalking and abuse, which shows a perpetrator to be what they are, all ignored.

A pp commented on nit understanding why women dont come forward, and the reason is the very essence of abuse, fear, bullying and gross harm.

I feel like somewhere there's a trigger.

Perhaps women ought to abandon the Criminal Justice system altogether, until it can make itself fit for purpose.

I'd like to see a parallel system piloted.

One where the rape victim bypasses the police and criminal courts and uses a properly funded Rape Crisis centre - for healing, counselling, care.

One where there is an opportunity to have her story recorded by trained professionals, and evidence gathered, - to leave open the option of criminal proceedings at a later date.

One where (if she wants) she is supported by lawyers in taking her case to the civil court where 'a balance of probability is the test, rather than 'beyond reasonable doubt'.

One where accurate data is captured about the extent of rape - because official stats don't reflect the huge number of unreported crimes.

There is a Government Violence Against Women Strategy. Every police force, every council and every NHS has one too. Police and Crime Commissioners throw money at projects and intiatives to improve poor performance - but few people are thinking radically.

As with everything, women have to plug the gaps themselves when institutions fail them. Maybe we should walk away and build an alternative.