Say sorry - don't get charged for rape.....

[Greydog]

I've just come across this - I've not seen it mentioned before, and if it has been I apologise...........but I'm just stunned - www.itv.com/news/calendar/2022-06-08/police-force-defends-use-of-apologies-to-deal-with-sex-offenders

Also we need to put those decision into the context of the whole justice system being short of money, delays in crimes going to tribunal etc….

Those systems are good to lighten the load of the justice system who is already overwhelmed. And it might well be that this is really what they are used for.
It doesn’t mean it’s a system that is good for the victims (to at least get recognition that this was not right). It doesn’t mean it’s a system that will protect women from further sexual offenses. But it certainly is a system that tells some offenders that what they did wasn’t actually that bad.

Apologies for typo mania in previous post.

I’d like to live in a world where sexually assaulting someone was treated as more serious than say taking your children on holiday during term time or stealing sweets from a shop. What is the downside of more people being prosecuted?

So, two girls at school share an explicit photo between each other which has been sent to them.

You're saying that the police should not be able to make a judgement on this and they should be sent to court for prosecution and adding to the sex offender register.

Both for possession of an offensive image and one for distributing an offensive image.

Are you saying female minors should be allowed to share sexually explicit photos? Why? If it’s harmless why do we have specific laws to prohibit this behaviour?

And how about the victims in all of this.

What if the victim does not want to attend court and is happy for an out of court disposal - do we ignore their wishes?

So, the person who puts his hand around the waist of a nurse. Nurse believes it was for a sexual gain but doesn't want to purse it further.

Here's another one we have come across - person takes a photo on holiday of the family - not realising in the back ground he has captured a female sunbather who is topless. He then sends the photo to his friends before he realises the sunbather in the back ground. Does he get prosecuted should the sunbather find out?

So, one girls gets sent an image. She is shocked by it and posts it to a friend saying "OMG LOOK AT WHAT I HAVE BEEN SENT - WHAT SHOULD I DO - IS THIS A USUAL THING TO HAPPEN"

Seemingly quite innocent reaction to it

Now, the actual original image being sent to her is a straight up offence - but by sending the image on, the girl commits an offence also, together with her friend who is now in possession of it.

So, if you want this sending to court without the police being able to make a judgement on it - we need to prosecute all 3 people involved and have their phones downloaded as this is the primary evidence.

Is it really in the public interest to prosecute the two girls? Or should we see them as more of a victim of the original image being sent to them.

A send B image, B sends it to C

if you prosecuted presumably B would not have sent on image, it would not be viewed by C, and B would have demonstrated her lack of intent

if you didn’t and don’t the image goes (at least) twice as far, another child is involved, and B is now in a greyer area where she has done what A did.

so which process limits the damage done and the number it’s done to?

if it’s your child’s photo which option do you prefer?
if you are the parent of A, B or C, which plan is best?

I would suggest that the circulation of photos of this nature would be massively reduced if you prosecuted

SY police said this system could be used with teenagers. At no point did the article say that it was ONLY used with teenager.
What SY police said is likely to be what is supposed to happen. The really tame stuff.

In reality, we know that it has used when there was a rape. We can also assume it has been the case with adult women being assaulted etc…. Does it suddenly sound as ok? Of course not!

Same with ‘people who have some SN’. What does that mean? That’s a really big group of people.
Eg one adult man has some severe learning difficulties and is behaving inappropriately. Do we think him saying sorry is enough? Is there not something else to put in place? For example, where was his carer, what should be out in place so he isn’t a risk to other women? What if the victim is also having learning difficulties or SN. Are we saying the case shouldn’t be prosecuted because of their disabilities? And then what? Leaving things as they are so the victim is still at risk?

Lets be honest here. The article has very little information. But the fact some women have an issue with it and have felt ket down by the system is telling me it’s not two under age teenager who didn’t know better….

So, B in her naivety has sent it to C. C has then informed parents/police

So, its in the best interests to the public to prosecute all is it?

So A, B and C get arrested and have their phones downloaded. The court will ask if there is any other evidence to suggest that this is a pattern between them - so the police will have to seize computers/laptops at their address and have them downloaded.

The length of time to send these away for forensic downloads is months & months and the cost is huge - and during this time A, B & C will remain on police bail. We will have to consider safeguarding during this time until there is a court appearance - so they will be excluded from school.

As a parent of A, B or C you would want the best for your child and not have to put them through a court case - so an out of court disposal will be more applicable i would suggest in this case - or would you suggest that the parents thoughts are not taken into consideration on this case and we should just prosecute.

I really don't think that this is in the public interest or the interests of B & C to go down this route. You will have an argument to prosecute A - but not B & C

Yes it’s all very protect the future careers/schools rep/sweep it under the carpet because it’s so long and expensive and arduous to actually uphold the law. It’s the argument for the gagging orders at Oxford and the similar put up and shut up so many young women are expected to do in US universities.

while you’re allowing people to continue in their lives as though little has happened you are also allowing sexual predators to hone their skills and victims to internalise just how little you care about their experience and you are condoning sexual assault.

While men are being given suspended sentences for raping babies, I highly doubt anyones going to prison for pinging bra straps.

also, no one should be pinging bra straps anyway, shame nobody taught you that

I don't think that it is the norm to get a suspended sentence for rape of a baby.
Have you got a link to the case?

So you have a very 'zero tolerance' approach
If you were the parent of child B or C - would you support their prosecution and adding them to the sex offenders register?

i think that’s up to a court. But we don’t (or perhaps we do given the attitudes displayed on this thread) decide they are innocent and “didn’t realise mean it” until the evidence has been considered. It’s like you want to set up a pre gate keeper.

I don’t think there is a down side to more prosecutions, but the prosecution rate is dire and a lot of women dont report because they are frightened of the court case

i don’t know what the answer is

So, if you were the parent of child C.

They came home and said "I was sent this image of an underage child by my friend and I didn't know what to do - so I told the teacher who said that I should tell you when I came home"

Your response to that is - "...well we should report you to the police, so they can prosecute you for possession of indecent images. Start an investigation which will mean downloading all your phones, computers etc put you on bail for a time and then get you to court to answer to your charge."

Is that really proportionate and in the public interest?

Child C is in exactly the same situation that child B was before they decided to contribute to things by passing the image on. If some twit was sending my child indecent images I definitely would want it investigated and dealt with. What parent wouldn’t?

Yes - prosecute A, that's no problem or argument

But both child B & C commit offences

As a parent of child C - would you support them being prosecuted for their offence through the courts?