Page 1 of 3
#1
http://www.theyorker.co.uk/news/news/4838

Remember, this is anonymity for rape defendants, not those found guilty.

I'm not quite sure about this. The UK (alongside pretty much every other country in the world) has extremely bad rape conviction rates. However, when one man who had apparently raped a ridiculous number of people, just for the police to drop each and every case when the man was accused by many women, the man was helped to be prosecuted by other women coming out to give testimony against him, including many who were previously silent (indeed, many women never raise up rape charges).

However, on the flip side of the coin, a rape accusation can potentially ruin a person's life in a local community. He might find himself in harms way which would be illegitimate whether or not he was guilty (if we assume a state sentence against a rapist is just, then anything more and over is unjust). It's a civil rights issue there. But then again, we don't give this right to those accused of murder.

Another potential point is, considering how awful we are for prosecuting rapists and treating those who give rape accusations, we'd just be giving more lee way for a system which makes it hard enough for women to be taken seriously and to get justice handed, when in fact we should be helping women further.

Feel free to discuss. However, I will delete this thread without warning if it gets consumed by douchbaggery.
#2
innocent until proven guilty. I'm all for it.
You're using UG classic, congratulations.
You should be using UG classic.




E-Married to Guitar0Player

http://the llama forum because its gone forever which sucks and I hate it.
#3
One problem I always find in debating rape is there are a shocking number of men who seem to think false rape accusations are commonplace amongst these evil slutty bitches the world is filled with.

I think this will help to combat that, and in the rare cases where a defamatory claim is made just to be defamatory, it won't destroy someone's reputation.

Whether or not this is going to improve the conviction rate of rapists I don't know though. I don't think it's that great a move, more protection needs to go to the victims not the perpetrators.
#4
Thus Anon shall remain.
Quote by thanksgiving
I'm coming for you with a castrator!
You sick bastard.



Watch that video below

If this video reaches 1000 views before Christmas, I'll play with my titties on cam.

#5
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
Whether or not this is going to improve the conviction rate of rapists I don't know though. I don't think it's that great a move, more protection needs to go to the victims not the perpetrators.

And general treatment to the victims. The two things are not mutually exclusive but such a reform would be symbolic against such efforts. And unfortunately, like you, I'm not informed enough to say what impact it would have on conviction rates, so I'm still stuck.
#6
Quote by jgbsmith
innocent until proven guilty. I'm all for it.

this. if he didn't do it his name would be posted up in relation to a rape case, people just assume he's guilty and his reputaion goes to hell.

i kinda support this idea
Gotta keep my eyes from the circling skies...
tounge tied and twisted just an earth bound misfit...

>CRYPTIC METAPHOR<


Quote by ilikepirates
ilikeyou.

not hated
#7
Quote by Craigo
And general treatment to the victims. The two things are not mutually exclusive but such a reform would be symbolic against such efforts. And unfortunately, like you, I'm not informed enough to say what impact it would have on conviction rates, so I'm still stuck.


It seems to me like allowing defendants to be anonymous legitimises the crime, because even if the woman does report it and get taken seriously by the police, the perpetrator will still remain anonymous and get away with it if he can pay for a good enough lawyer =/
#8
I think it's great. A bullshit rape accusation still ruins your name for years, if not forever.
Quote by Spitz13
**** you, i live in uruguay.
#9
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
One problem I always find in debating rape is there are a shocking number of men who seem to think false rape accusations are commonplace amongst these evil slutty bitches the world is filled with.

I think this will help to combat that, and in the rare cases where a defamatory claim is made just to be defamatory, it won't destroy someone's reputation.

Whether or not this is going to improve the conviction rate of rapists I don't know though. I don't think it's that great a move, more protection needs to go to the victims not the perpetrators.

I fully agree with everything you said.


I'm agreeing an aweful lot with you, lately
You always seem to post what I want to say.
#10
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
One problem I always find in debating rape is there are a shocking number of men who seem to think false rape accusations are commonplace amongst these evil slutty bitches the world is filled with.


While I don't disagree, it annoys me even more when people pretend that women never cry rape just because they want money/attention/revenge for something unrelated etc.

OT I'm completely on the fence here... I can't decide
Quote by UraniYum
Fuck you I'm trying to be caring and shit


Quote by Cb4rabid
Okay guys, I have a confession to make. Not really a confession since it's something that's been bugging me for awhile but I've always been in denial about it.

**** you gilly, it's not what you think
#11
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
It seems to me like allowing defendants to be anonymous legitimises the crime, because even if the woman does report it and get taken seriously by the police, the perpetrator will still remain anonymous and get away with it if he can pay for a good enough lawyer =/

So wait, you're saying that it's bad because the perpetrator will be treated as if he didn't commit the crime if he was found to be innocent? That's bad?
Quote by Spitz13
**** you, i live in uruguay.
#12
Quote by gilly_90
While I don't disagree, it annoys me even more when people pretend that women never cry rape just because they want money/attention/revenge for something unrelated etc.

No-one says that, and to say that is to be redundant and to give too much emphasis on the few who do. It's damaging for the actual victims.
#13
Quote by Craigo
No-one says that


I've heard people saying that
Quote by UraniYum
Fuck you I'm trying to be caring and shit


Quote by Cb4rabid
Okay guys, I have a confession to make. Not really a confession since it's something that's been bugging me for awhile but I've always been in denial about it.

**** you gilly, it's not what you think
#14
it is still possible for someone to be arrested on a rape charge but not have raped someone. There are many reasons why this could happen, and a false accusation is only one of them. There's a reason why we have trials rather than just throwing them into prison. While I do agree that the victim's safety is more important, an arrest for rape, even without charge can destroy your life.
You're using UG classic, congratulations.
You should be using UG classic.




E-Married to Guitar0Player

http://the llama forum because its gone forever which sucks and I hate it.
#16
tell me about it
Quote by UraniYum
Fuck you I'm trying to be caring and shit


Quote by Cb4rabid
Okay guys, I have a confession to make. Not really a confession since it's something that's been bugging me for awhile but I've always been in denial about it.

**** you gilly, it's not what you think
#17
Quote by CoreysMonster
I fully agree with everything you said.


I'm agreeing an aweful lot with you, lately
You always seem to post what I want to say.


It's because I'm in your head!

>_>

Quote by Uranutan
So wait, you're saying that it's bad because the perpetrator will be treated as if he didn't commit the crime if he was found to be innocent? That's bad?


This is an extreme rarity, and people fail to notice because of their blind-sighted misogynism.
#18
As I've said before, the problem with conviction rates being low is due to the nature of the offence.

i.e. usually between 2 people behind closed doors and the most important part of the encounter is whether or not the parties say 'yes'.

I don't think this is really necessary, but it's not exactly a heinous miscarriage of justice. It's in line with the 'innocent until proven otherwise' principle. We've been operating on that principle for years and I don't really think we can make an exception purely because this happens to be a difficult crime to convict for.
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
#19
Innocent until proven guilty all the way. If he did it, then by all means, parade his name through the streets, but to save a potentially innocent man's social world, keep him anonymous until you can prove he actually committed the crime.
#20
I'm unsure about the necessity of this and worried about the effect it'll have on conviction rates, which are disproportionately low already.

Quote by *anonymous*
Of course this is how it should be, and it should be this way in america too.

If the "2%" false accusing statistic is really true out of 85,000 accusations a year in the UK, that means 1700 men have had their reputation destroyed a year.

That's ridiculous. I vote yes, and hope this change comes to America as well.

Well not all of those men will actually have a reputation to destroy...
Last edited by red157 at May 21, 2010,
#21
Quote by *anonymous*
Of course this is how it should be, and it should be this way in america too.

If the "2%" false accusing statistic is really true out of 85,000 accusations a year in the UK, that means 1700 men have had their reputation destroyed a year.

That's ridiculous. I vote yes, and hope this change comes to America as well.


And how many of those 85,000 men will get away with it because their lawyer claims the woman was a slut, and then as they were not found guilty they will remain anonymous to go out and rape more women?
#22
Quote by Lemoninfluence
As I've said before, the problem with conviction rates being low is due to the nature of the offence.

That reduction is far too simplistic and doesn't correspond with qualitative data which has been taken into consideration on the subject. It's fine to even give a fair sway towards the nature of the crime, but not a reduction like that. This is especially true when you only look at conviction rates and don't consider all the cases (the majority of cases actually) where police do not take things further.
Last edited by Craigo at May 21, 2010,
#23
It's also worth noting that women who fail to successfully prosecute also have great social damage done against them, even though we have a 'prove guilt or assume innocence' system with low conviction rates. They get given the persona of a whiny, lying slut in a lot of cases. It is possible that women already might potentially be hit harder with social damage than men, although I can't really confirm this.
#24
Quote by Craigo
That reduction is far too simplistic and doesn't correspond with qualitative data which has been taken into consideration on the subject. It's fine to even give a fair sway towards the nature of the crime, but not a reduction like that. This is especially true when you only look at conviction rates and don't consider all the cases (the majority of cases actually) where police do not take things further.

...because of the lack of evidence.

it essentially comes down to one person's word against the other.

Yes, evidence can back up one person's version of events but because of the nature of the crime is both stories fit the evidence it's a case of person A v Person B and you can't prosecute unless it's proven.
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
#25
Quote by *anonymous*
What? The 2% number represents women who admitted they lied. So that means 1700-1800 men are falsely accused by women who ADMITTED it.

So now they are labeled as a "rapist" from the news papers. The news paper is quick to run a story about the accused, but not running the story when found not guilty by a recanted statement.

Being found not guilty does not represent the "2%" number the uk is using. Don't be confused. 1700 men are falsely accused by admittance from the accuser of lying.

Edit: Also, one false accusation can easily lead to another driven by lust for money. Have a somewhat believable story even though it's not true and somebody is already being sued or in criminal trial for it? After a criminal trial finds the accuser guilty it's so easy to win a civil court, even with a bullshit story.

It happens all the time.


No I think you are confused.

I mean that if the men who are accused NOT falsely - the ones who are actually rapists - can afford a good lawyer to destroy the victim's credibility, they will remain anonymous despite being guilty and can go back to their lives and rape more women. That doesn't seem fair to me.


And Craigo, the responses in this thread actually confirm your assumption of the woman getting more social blame. Really sickening, but it's come up after like 10 posts in this thread

Quote by Lemoninfluence
...because of the lack of evidence.

it essentially comes down to one person's word against the other.

Yes, evidence can back up one person's version of events but because of the nature of the crime is both stories fit the evidence it's a case of person A v Person B and you can't prosecute unless it's proven.


That to me is wrong, the defendant should have to prove it didn't happen, not the other way around.

It's also horrible how many cases are turned away because of how the victim was dressed, or a certain shortcut she took home from work that she should have "known better" than to take... the amount of blame put on victims is terrible.
Last edited by Mistress_Ibanez at May 21, 2010,
#26
Quote by *anonymous*
This is the problem and why it needs to be changed. You're assuming when ones found not guilty he really is guilty.

You have proven my point. Protect the identity of these men.


You really think that over 80% of all rape victims are liars? What's wrong with you?

Do you have any idea what you are talking about?




Are that many people really liars?
#27
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
That to me is wrong, the defendant should have to prove it didn't happen, not the other way around.

It's also horrible how many cases are turned away because of how the victim was dressed, or a certain shortcut she took home from work that she should have "known better" than to take... the amount of blame put on victims is terrible.


why?

every crime is prosecuted on the basis of innocent until proven otherwise.

You have to prove that the person committed the crime, otherwise you get false convictions. You can't just have an exception because this crime happens to be difficult to prove.
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
#28
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
That to me is wrong, the defendant should have to prove it didn't happen, not the other way around.

Steady now.

That should never be the case in law, not even for something as difficult to gain evidence for as rape.
#29
Well it is just sickening to me that a rape victim can report the crime and be told - in the overwhelming majority of cases - that they don't believe him/her.

Maybe guilty until proven innocent isn't the answer, but something has to change because the current system clearly isn't working.
#30
Quote by Lemoninfluence
...because of the lack of evidence.

it essentially comes down to one person's word against the other.

Yes, evidence can back up one person's version of events but because of the nature of the crime is both stories fit the evidence it's a case of person A v Person B and you can't prosecute unless it's proven.

Not just lack of evidence. All sorts of reasons. The police have commonly dropped cases because a) they've slept together before, b) how the woman was dressed, c) how intoxicated the woman was, d) how sexually active the woman has assumed to be and more. These have been recorded. Like it or not, there's a fair amount of institutionalised sexism, which has also been recorded in the court room. Independent police reports have reiterated the need for scepticism but have harshly criticised how easily police would drop cases and their unwillingness to believe in rape claims. There's work that needs to be done.
Last edited by Craigo at May 21, 2010,
#31
Quote by *anonymous*
I never said 80%, let's run with 10% of accused found not guilty, are really NOT GUILTY.

That gives you the right to assume there guilt? This is the problem. I understand your concern for the remaining 70% that are guilty, but you can just look at the other 10% and say "**** em". No, that's ****ed up.

Out of the 15,000 you displayed me, 10% would mean 1500 men are really not guilty. What gives you the right to assume their guilt?


The mistake you are making here is assuming that the people a court rules not guilty are really not guilty.
#32
" A news report on BBC One in 2007 painted a much bleaker picture. The report stated that 85,000 women were raped in the UK in 2006, which approximated an average of 230 cases everyday. While it reported that one in every 200 women in the UK was raped the previous year, only 800 people were convicted of rape crimes in that year. Furthermore, rape cases only have a 6-7% conviction rate."

That is nuts!! Why is the conviction rate so low and why are few women coming forward. The two are obviously linked and probably leads us to the police officers on the ground and their attitude toward victims, their investigative skills, and the resources of lawyers to handle the case load of so many victims. It appears to be an institutional problem, but shifting blame to someone who was not convicted makes no sense, and fudging the notion of innocent until proven guilty to score political points (I know it sound cold but that is politics) leads to crappy policy and will lead to wrongful convictions.

One thing that might help the situation would be to take the victim and their post rape trauma out of the equation as much as possible, providing more emotional support after the fact, and shielding them from the judicial process as much as possible during the investigation and trial.

One thing we have here in Canada, I think, are provisions where police can charge someone with domestic violence even if the victims does not press charges. If the evidence exists and work can be done independently of the victims participation aside from clarifying certain facts as needed that might help.The police can collect samples from hospitals, check out the surrounding area from clues as to who the attacker was, they can look at past offenders who have been released from prison, they can do a general survey of area residents to gather information that might help. Also in Canada, rape victims past sexual history is omitted from trial as irrelevant, and they are allowed to testify from another room via closed circuit TV to avoid being intimidated by the accused in court. I would like to know more about how the UK protects the victims after the fact and how these women can be protected during the trial process to put them at ease as much as possible. That might play a role in increasing the conviction rate.
#33
^ The UK is not this weird country where we're really bad at treating rape victims. No country in the world actually is - other countries follow similar trends even if we are one of the worst in Europe.

Women not coming forward to report rape happens for a lot of reasons, including social stigma and even a belief that they weren't raped. The numbers are, unfortunately, probably higher.

EDIT: Though those Canadian laws do sound pretty sweet.
Last edited by Craigo at May 21, 2010,
#34
Quote by Craigo
Not just lack of evidence. All sorts of reasons. The police have commonly dropped cases because a) they've slept together before, b) how the woman was dressed, c) how intoxicated the woman was, d) how sexually active the woman has assumed to be and more. These have been recorded. Like it or not, there's a fair amount of institutionalised sexism, which has also been recorded in the court room. Independent police reports have reiterated the need for scepticism but have harshly criticised how easily police would drop cases and their unwillingness to believe in rape claims. There's work that needs to be done.


a) weakens the claim to a normal person

b) the same

c) same

d) same

It's not necessarily the police. You have to realise that the police or rather the crown prosecution service have to decide whether there's enough evidence to gain a conviction. If they don't think that a jury will find the defendant guilty, they don't proceed with the case. As I've said, it usually comes down to one person's word against another (most cases are a grey area remember) and if there are factors that would cause the 'normal' person to doubt the victims sequence of events, the CPS will decide that there's not enough evidence.

to do otherwise would place an unreasonable burden on the courts, CPS and the legal aid provisions.
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
#35
TBH, I think anyone charged with any crime ought to remain anonymous until convicted.
#36
About those sweet canadian laws, a husband was able to rape his wife up until 1970 I believe, until that was addressed. We still have a long way to go. One thing we have is a general policy of no means no, and that includes after sexual touching has begun. At anytime a women says no more a man has to stop, it is something along those line anyway. The onus, at least theoretically is place on the man to show that valid consent to sex was given. You are also not allowed to mention how a woman was dressed; a short skirt is not an invitation!! Like you said and I implied about police attitudes, institutionalized sexism is a massive problem for women. That is why post rape trauma responses would be a way to help women come forward and prevent being emotional raped after being physically raped.
#37
Quote by Lemoninfluence
a) weakens the claim to a normal person

b) the same

c) same

d) same

Do you honestly think that how someone was dressed on the evening the night they were raped means they deserve to have their case dropped? Do you think being married to a person deserves your rape case to be dropped? Do you think the fact that you had a drink earlier in the evening means your case deserves to be dropped? And just to be clear, I don't mean 'deserve' in some moral sense, I mean deserve as in, the case deserves to be dropped because it seems too dubious. If your answer is yes to any of those questions, I'm not going to harbour nice sentiments towards you as a person.

That's what you're reply to, by the way. I was referring to common cases on why police would drop off hand rape accusations.
It's not necessarily the police. You have to realise that the police or rather the crown prosecution service have to decide whether there's enough evidence to gain a conviction.

You're going against qualitative data which has been taken into consideration and against independent police reports which have, once again, reiterated the case of scepticism but have issued harsh criticisms against the police force.

Once again, I've shown acknowledgement how difficult the crime is, but it doesn't justify how appalling our police system is against rape victims. This has been something which has been acknowledged in independent studies over and over again.
#38
Quote by MightyAl
TBH, I think anyone charged with any crime ought to remain anonymous until convicted.

I can agree with this.
"Why should we subsidise intellectual curiosity?"
-Ronald Reagan

"Knowledge is in every country the surest basis of public happiness."
-George Washington
#39
Quote by TwistedLogic
he onus, at least theoretically is place on the man to show that valid consent to sex was given.

I agree that rape prosecution needs to be sorted out, but this is in all practicality pretty much impossible in any other way that "my word against hers".
"Why should we subsidise intellectual curiosity?"
-Ronald Reagan

"Knowledge is in every country the surest basis of public happiness."
-George Washington
#40
Quote by Craigo
Do you honestly think that how someone was dressed on the evening the night they were raped means they deserve to have their case dropped? Do you think being married to a person deserves your rape case to be dropped? Do you think the fact that you had a drink earlier in the evening means your case deserves to be dropped? And just to be clear, I don't mean 'deserve' in some moral sense, I mean deserve as in, the case deserves to be dropped because it seems too dubious. If your answer is yes to any of those questions, I'm not going to harbour nice sentiments towards you as a person.

That's what you're reply to, by the way. I was referring to common cases on why police would drop off hand rape accusations.


I personally wouldn't drop them but then I'm not the body responsible for prosecuting all crimes in the country. I'm just telling you what the CPS has to take into consideration in order to prosecute. They have to consider whether there's enough evidence to get a conviction and whether it's in the public's interest to prosecute.

That means taking into account the weight the victim's statement will have. Unfortunately those sort of things mean the average person is less likely to take that person's word as gospel. Combine that with a lawyer who's going to pick holes in any story you give them and you have an unlikely conviction.

You're going against qualitative data which has been taken into consideration and against independent police reports which have, once again, reiterated the case of scepticism but have issued harsh criticisms against the police force.

Once again, I've shown acknowledgement how difficult the crime is, but it doesn't justify how appalling our police system is against rape victims. This has been something which has been acknowledged in independent studies over and over again.


And what could they do?

take on more cases, only for the person to be found not guilty. It's all well and good saying "this isn't good enough" but there's not realistically much that could be done. even if more cases got to court, you'd face the same obstacles.
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
Page 1 of 3