Sunday, July 31, 2005

Is it any wonder...

...that convictions in rape cases are as low as ever and not improving? This article in the Observer today points out that a large number of judges consider the sexual history of the victim relevant to rape prosecution. We should just throw out judges like that.

11 comments:

handdrummer said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
simon said...

If the sexual history of a victim of an alleged rape is irrelevant, the jury of twelve good citizens and true will surely take no notice of such evidence. If the jury decide that the sexual history of the victim is relevant, then it is, as they are the people charged with making the decision about the guilt or innocnce of the defendant. I think it is better that sexual history evidence is allowed. It can be judged relevant or irrelevant by the jury as they see fit, just like any other evidence. To dictate what evidence or not is offered to a jury makes a mockery of the whole judicial system. If you don't trust your peers on a jury to deal properly with evidence, what is the point of a jury at all? As for judges, the only 'we' that can throw such judges out is the people, the electorate, the same people from whom juries are chosen. But you don't really trust them do you?

Cruella said...

The current conviction rate for rape cases is in the region of 5%. That implies to me that there's a problem with the system as it is. We need to improve the system. Very very urgently, at the moment the system is a licence to rape.

simon said...

From what I hear about the increase in reported rape allegations, the best method of reducing rape would be for more women to stay more sober more often. Alcohol seems to be a significant factor. Of course a women cannot be held responsible for being raped because she is drunk, but the fact remains that many fewer women would be raped if they weren't drunk. They should take better care of themselves. This attitude doesn't just apply to rape. If I wandered round a rough area late at night, every night, eventually I would be mugged or worse. I would not be to blame for this, but most people would regard me as being idiotic to have been there at all. As for the low conviction rate, in many cases it is merely the woman's word against the man's. In a strictly legal sense, it does not matter whether the woman was raped or not. What matters is the prosecution's ability to prove that a rape has occurred. Evidence of an offence is required, and if there is no evidence there should be no conviction. A womans claim that a rape has taken place is not independent evidence, any more than the man's claim that sex was consensual is independent evidence.

Cruella said...

Simon I find your comments on this one really very offensive.

Men are far more likely to mug, rape, attack and murder while drunk. Men are more often drunk than women and commit the vast majority of violent crime. I don't think women should be discouraged from going out and enjoying themselves just because men can't be trusted after a few lagers. I think men should be discouraged from drinking so much because it puts them at significantly increased risk of commiting an offence.

I have posted at greater length on the subject here:

http://cruellablog.blogspot.com/2005/05/blame-yourselves-girls.html#comments

simon said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Cruella said...

Sorry Simon, that's going to far. I know people who've been raped. I like to encourage debate on here but you cannot blame victims for being raped, which is ultimately what you're doing.

Also on another comment line you appeared to show support for the BNP which makes me think I should probably just go through and delete all your posts. I'll leave them for now but please don't bother posting rubbish.

simon said...

Cruella, you can't cope with opinions which differ from your own. Why do you have a blog which has a comments function if you don't like most of the comments you attract? I've no problem with you choosing not to publish my coments, but if you can't stand the heat..

Cruella said...

Simon please go away and stop posting on this blog. I am very open to opinions which differ from mine. Hence the blog. I notice you don't have one and don't have any other details about yourself logged on to the site. We've established now that you are a supporter of the BNP, we also know that you believe women are responsible for their own rapes. For me that pretty much invalidates the rest of your opinions. Sure I run a blog with a comment section, it also has a delete button. I am going to delete all your comments from now on because I'm not interested in your views or opinions.

simon said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
staghounds said...

One hopes that Mr. Trustthejury feels the same about the defendant's criminal history being provided?