This is all one big fucking mess. There have been thread after thread and I could go on for hours. I don't have time to put down all the arguments so will just put my main points and comments on this.
Things that have been unhelpful.
The collapsed cases around mobile phone evidence. There was one particularly high profile one.
In the papers the focus was on the collapsed rape cases. The proportion of collapsed cases for other crimes was the same. The media focussed only on rape giving the impression it was peculiar to that crime. Then the thing where they were making women sign something which said if they didn't hand over their mobile at a really early stage, they were unlikely to investigate...www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/rape-victim-phone-police-investigation-form
All of this reporting sent a strong message to rape victims. Another massive barrier to reporting on top of the ones already in place
There was the ched Evans case and how the victim had to change identity 3 times. How he was convicted and then quashed. And the case with the rugby players in ?NI. Both heavily publicised again both really saying think twice before you report.
Going back a bit John warboys, Reid.
Sapphire unit fabricating evidence etc.
The no criming stats and how they varied around the country.
Reports of ? forget the name of the thing, sort of like a caution being given for rapes reported.
On and on and on drip drip
Cressida dick saying they weren't interested in historical cases (CSA?) Or where the victim knew the assailant (date rape)
...
What do you get? What the police etc want. Lower reporting. Lower prosecution.
In general society sees it as an occupational hazard of being a woman, rape myths abound. The police are interested in proper crime, burglery, drugs, etc. Things that are more cut and dried. Rape is tricky, really prevalent, and a pita for them. They've made it legal essentially.
That's kind of a brain dump sorry!