Hospital told police patient not raped because attacker transgender

[Snoodsy]

A hospital told the police that a patient could not have been raped because her alleged attacker was trans, the House of Lords has heard.

The attack took place a year ago and the woman reported it but when officers contacted the hospital, which has not been named, they were told “that there was no male in the hospital, therefore the rape could not have happened”.

Baroness Nicholson of Winterbourne, who raised the issue during a debate on single-sex wards, continued: “They forgot that there was CCTV, nurses and observers.

“None the less, it has taken nearly a year for the hospital to agree that there was a male on the ward and, yes, this rape happened.

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20220317203204/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/03/17/hospital-told-police-patient-not-raped-alleged-attacker-transgender/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20220317203204/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/03/17/hospital-told-police-patient-not-raped-alleged-attacker-transgender/

This sounds like it could have been an ?unintended consequence of trans patients being able to change their sex marker. If the police contacted the general hospital administration, rather than the ward itself in the first instance, they could easily have been told "That's impossible. There were no men admitted to that ward" by someone who just ran a query against the hospital database. They would have no idea that one of the patients was a trans woman without manually going through the patient records - which could be a GDPR breach.

What a mess.

Indeed, @NecessaryScene - quite helpful for rape and sexual assault to remain discrete offences.

Wtaf?! That poor woman. As someone said above, this is evil.

This is the direct result of some appalling legislation and indoctrination by extremist lobby groups.

The absolutely nonsense idea (per the GRA) that one can keep one's sex private is at the root of this. The fantasy that people who perform the stereotypes of the opposite sex cannot, almost always, be easily and quickly identified as their true sex is not just laughable, it is dangerous.

Repeal the legislation and get lobbyists the fuck out.

There should be no sacred caste. This applies to trans people. This also applies to the NHS. Too many people on this thread saying "I wouldn't normally support suing the NHS, but in that case I'd make an exception".

No. The NHS routinely mistreats patients, then tries to cover it up, by gaslighting everyone in the process (and intimidating potential whisthle-blowers). It's got a huge budget to fight lawsuits (and pay compensation to victims...), and it loses many, many cases, because it is proven in court (often with overwhelming evidence) that they were indeed at fault, didn't follow due process and basic safety rules, etc. The NHS is largely dysfunctional when it comes to patient safety. Their default policy is denial and ass covering (and systematically lawyering up instead of accepting liability), not transparency. This has been proven times and times again. Lessons are not being learnt.

As it’s stonewall that have pushed this line so hard with the NHS then yes it’s everything to do with stonewall

The law on rape DOES says it's a man. How else do you read this?

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/1/crossheading/rape

"1
Rape
(1)
A person (A) commits an offence if—
(a)
he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,
(b)
B does not consent to the penetration, and
(c)
A does not reasonably believe that B consents."

I would also support legal action against the hospital. I would imagine it may not be being named because that means people who know this lady but don't know about the attack, might then be able to put pieces of information together. That's what I would guess.

This is where the “Why can’t you just be kind?” mantra has got us.

Women being raped in hospital and the hospital staff lying to the woman and police to protect the rapist.

“Be kind”
“No thank you”

he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,

Ooh, misgendering much, clearly the law is transphobic and should say "his, her or their penis"
Funny there's been no trans-advocate campaign asking for the phrasing to be altered...

@RobotValkyrie

he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,

Ooh, misgendering much, clearly the law is transphobic and should say "his, her or their penis"
Funny there's been no trans-advocate campaign asking for the phrasing to be altered...

Behind the scenes, there is. I wish I didn't know this but I do.

“...there was no male in the hospital, therefore the rape could not have happened”.

“...there was no male in the hospital, therefore the rape could not have happened”.

“... there was no male in the hospital, therefore the rape could not have happened”.

However, this is a ridiculous over-correction, where victims of a crime are ignored because it would be counter to an ideology that all trans people are saintly victims.

Yes this is a huge part of the problem IMO. Not only is the person apparently not male according to the NHS/it’s staff, but also this person simply cannot have committed a crime and the focus becomes all on gaslighting the victim.

If this alleged attacker was a woman, who was accused of a very serious attack on another woman on a hospital ward, then they would have looked into it and dealt with it and called the police as normal, and taken the victim seriously.

It is literally because this person is a TW and not a woman that they took this line. They focused on “it wasn’t rape because the person is trans” instead of “someone said someone else attacked them, let’s deal with this in the proper way like we would with anyone else.” We’re now in a place where institutions that have swallowed this ideology have to pretend that no trans-identifying male is capable of crime, so they don’t look bad when it turns out to be nonsense.

Unfortunately trans-identifying males appear to be involved in crime, especially sexual crime, quite frequently. Yes it still couldn’t possibly be that some predatory men will exploit self-ID. Oh no.

@couchparsnip

Hopefully what will come out of this is a change to the ridiculous law which says only males can commit rape. Anyone with a penis can rape.

And penises are male.

The law on rape DOES says it's a man. How else do you read this?

No it doesn't. For historical reasons, in the wording of UK law "he" can be taken to mean "he or she" whereever necessary, as a general principle.

Its use never means "must be male" - that would have to be explicitly stated.

Stonewall are directly responsible for women being raped in hospital and in prison.
And yet we're on the wrong side of history.

I hope they lose every bit of funding they ever had.

The absolutely nonsense idea (per the GRA) that one can keep one's sex private is at the root of this.

Yes.. and in the case of rapes,the rapist clearly isn't trying to keep his sex private anyway, if he was then he would keep his penis to himself.

Erm, what the actual fuck

Whatever it takes for this woman to get justice. Whatever it takes

And the people on the side of gaslighting rape victims: go fuck yourselves

“During that year she has almost come to the edge of a nervous breakdown, because being disbelieved about being raped in hospital has been such an appalling shock. The hospital, with all its CCTV, has had to admit that the rape happened and that it was committed by a man.”

Once the criminal case concludes, I hope that she sues the backsides off of them.

Its just awful, horrendous

I’ve typed 10 posts and deleted them all

@InvisibleDragon

This sounds like it could have been an ?unintended consequence of trans patients being able to change their sex marker. If the police contacted the general hospital administration, rather than the ward itself in the first instance, they could easily have been told "That's impossible. There were no men admitted to that ward" by someone who just ran a query against the hospital database. They would have no idea that one of the patients was a trans woman without manually going through the patient records - which could be a GDPR breach.

What a mess.

That's possible, and in some ways makes the situation worse. Whatever happened in this case, the possibility of that scenario highlights one of the dire (presumably) unintended consequences of leaving the 'sex' field in records blank and only filling in the 'gender' field in medical records.

I can't believe what I have just read....WTF!! I am so angry about this. That poor woman 💐

Brought to you by "the right side of history" in conjunction with "This never happens".

This is where we end up when we are forced to live in the pseudo realities of males with identities, this is the actual material harm it causes to women and girls.

I am so sorry that this women suffered like this, or any woman or child suffers, being made to pay the price of pandering to the preferences and desires of males that want us to call them women under the guise of inclusion and diversity.^^

Shame on those who created a system to facilitate this, and shame on those who think it's in any way acceptable.

Fucking clown world.

I'm speechless. So much harm caused by this ideology. Directly to this poor woman by allowing her rape, gaslighting her at detriment to her mental health and not allowing her justice. What other harms have been allowed by letting a rapist evade punishment?

I love how these people are trans when they want to be but as soon as they are accused of something they try and use technicalities to wriggle out of what they’ve done. Can’t have it both ways 🤷‍♀️