Higher sentencing when victim is a man. Luiz Neto case

[FernlovingNodosaur]

While I do not of course have an issue with a rapist getting a long jail sentence, I cannot remember a comparable case when the victims were only women/girls, rapist getting any where near that amount of jail time.

To me it does feel that when men are raped, it is considered more of an outrage by both the criminal justice system and society in general than women.
I have heard on far more than one occasion that for a man, to be raped, is far worse for the victim than for a women, almost as if the raping women/girls is considered a mundane (no matter how serious the aggravating factors) rape compared to a mans and more harmful to the person, even though the women may well have the added hell of a potential pregnancy with her rapist child and physical biological vulnerability to injury.

I just wondered if any one else saw it the same way?

I wonder what the conviction rates are for both sex victims?

I suspect fewer male victims actually go to the police - so maybe it’s the more violent male rapes that are reported?

female rape seems to be so bloody commonplace.

The sentencing exercise is very fact dependent - to test your hypothesis, are you able to supply a link to the facts in the Neto case. (it's not on the Judiciary website at the moment) and then you'd need to compare that sentence to a sentence of a woman being raped and with similar facts.

A link to the current sentencing guidelines for Rape is below.

www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/crown-court/item/rape/

KittenKong

Thanks for responding.

I would say that a lot of female victims don't go to the police either.

I have on several occasions been physically sexually assaulted, including as a young child. Never reported those assaults' to any official body.

Because the depressing fact was that I didn't considered it be out of the ordinary Now you could say that was because, it was a less enlightened time for women's rights back then but the same thing and worse happened to my daughter and her girl/woman friends. They didn't want to report either.

Another reason I didn't consider reporting it was, I knew women and girls who suffered much worse sexual abused like rape, child incest etc. and those serious assaults were swept under the carpet for their own personal reasons. So mine seemed minor compared to them.

So I personally knew several women and girls in my life time who were actually raped and never reported it. I don't think my story is that unique either.

I agreed that the raping of girls and women is appalling common. Especially as my personal experience makes me feel it's underreported.

I can't shake the fact that if the two victims had been women. That sentence (22 years) for such a crime would have at least been halved or even less.

Look at worboys -

I have to be honest this did cross my mind when I saw this. I wonder if sexuality also makes a difference - the victims were heterosexual men in this case. If you contrast to the Stephen Port case where all the victims were gay men and the police weren’t all that bothered. (I know rape and murder are different crimes obviously, I’m just reflecting on ones I’ve seen in the news.)

I noticed in the DailyMail and probably all papers that if a rape is reported on about a woman I’m sure the always put allegedly but if the victim is a man they don’t. Also the comments if the victim is male are all how terrible it is and support for the person but if the victim is a woman many comments doubt it happened or criticise time of day she was out, clothes etc

Neto drugged men in London, abducted them and took them to a cottage in Oxford to rape them. That seems to rank quite highly in those guidelines.

Hapoydayz Yes I noticed there is different slant in the way it's reported when it's straight men raped. There is also almost no victim blaming in the comments either no matter what the man did prior to the attack.

SwissBall I have heard on more than one occasion that being raped is much worst for straight men than gay men and women. To my mind that kind of thinking is both sexist and homophobic.

BootsandRoots I can only find George Cummings from Glasgow who drugged and raped two woman many years apart. In addition he used serious physical violence against them and only got 12 years. He also had previous convictions though it didn't mention what they were.

Compare Reynhard Sinaga and John Worboys.
It took a lot to get Worboys kept in prison beyond the first 8-10 years. Sinaga on the other hand won’t even have a parole hearing until 2060.

Yes it does. But also Kittenkong mentions the case of Worboys and that had similar features. Back when Worboys was sentenced he received an indeterminate sentence - which were handed down to serious cases back then, the idea being that the prisoners would need to prove that they were no longer a danger, which hardly ever happened because the courses they were supposed to be offered were rarely available ( and very possible, because the prisoners could see thorough these course as being non-effective liberal wishy-washy nonsense). So prisoners were left in prison without any release date and no ability to do anything about it. Eventually the Govn't of the day was persuaded to stop imposing such sentences. Basically, the bottom line is, it's difficult to compare such sentences with straight forward custodial sentences.