This is for Andy and the others who were in creative writing today. And actually, for anyone who happens to be interested…
Today we had a discussion in Creative Writing about rape/the safety of women in England now. I’ve found some links that I think are relevant:
- Government money for rape centres
- Rape conviction rate: 37% in 1977, to 5.6% in 2005
“While they conclude there was some evidence of poor investigation and lack of understanding of the law, the main problem was the culture of scepticism among both the police and prosecutors.” (Second source above)
- The rape conviction rate for the last couple of years has proven much more difficult to find than I anticipated. I think we may be wrong in saying that it is as low as 2%, I think it is actually more likely that it has remained at 5 or 6%. (This, from 2007, says 5%…) This is still shocking, as the rate has dropped. By 31.4%.
- This, from 2007, covers a great deal of the issues and inbuilt stereotypes in society RE rape, and discusses both the issues and solutions.
“Judgements about the credibility of charges of rape are often influenced by impressions of the woman’s attractiveness, demeanour, dress and alcohol consumption which are in fact irrelevant to the real issue of consent and the perpetrator’s culpability.”
“Prevalent public attitudes about rape also have a clear influence on the investigation and prosecution of rape cases and at court, and contribute to the low rape conviction rate. Police, prosecutors, judges and, perhaps most importantly, jurors are as likely as any other members of the public to internalise common attitudes about rape, and misconceptions about who are ‘real’ rapists and victims.”
- Responses to the question ‘Why are rape conviction rates so low?’, this January.
- An incredible performance poet, speaking about rape (in fact, check out her site cos she really is amazing)
- And finally (as I think I’ll have to continue this another time because I’m getting so tired and depressed), this – it shouldn’t still need to be said, hell it should never have needed to be said, but it is still relevant and a pretty powerful post. Also the source of my title – see the comments.
On a completely unrelated (and yet, as ever, related in some way) point: this guy’s poem is really powerful.
And on that note – adieu.
15 comments
Comments feed for this article
March 26, 2008 at 10:56 pm
Jacob Ward
An article I read in the Economist last summer suggested that the fall in conviction rate is due in part to the massive increase in reports, as women feel more able to tell the authorities, and the novel notion that women can be raped by their husbands. I don’t think it’s just about prejudices when it comes to juries; it’s probably the hardest crime to be called to judge on; so often it’s just one person’s word against another. While vindictive accusations of rape are rare, they do still occur, and when you’re not sure who to believe, you really shouldn’t post a verdict of guilty just as a guess, because while that would mean a lot of rapists would be imprisoned, so would a lot of innocent men, which would frankly be unforgivable.
It’s a tough one really. I should probably finish learning my essay, given I have to write the second half out at 9am :S
March 27, 2008 at 12:24 pm
Caitlin
‘Novel notion that women can be raped by their husbands’
Novel? Please, do explain.
No, it’s not just about prejudices of juries/judges. But does that suddenly make it ok for there to BE such prejudices in the first place? They need to be fought and changed. Also, sure sometimes (RARELY) women vindictively claim to have been raped – does this justify victimising all women that have suffered such an injustice?
Look at other crimes – say, child abuse. If you look at the Michael Jackson case, it could have been claimed (and, indeed, was by some) that the children’s families just wanted to get money from the rich supposed abuser. This doesn’t mean that all cases of child abuse are treated as though the child is lying, because it is an exceptional, unusual case for someone to make up something so hideous.
So no, you shouldn’t ‘post a verdict of guilty just as a guess’ – was that ever suggested? What is wrong with the system is the assumption that the man’s word is better than the woman’s, that it was in some way the FAULT of the WOMAN that a man was so morally deficient as to think that raping someone was acceptable. It should not be assumed that all of the accused are guilty – innocent until proven otherwise and all that – but the victim should NEVER be automatically treated as the perpetrator, or the cause of the violent crime.
March 27, 2008 at 1:30 pm
Jacob Ward
By novel I meant in terms of recognition by the legal system that this too constitutes rape.
No need for the caps lock my dear, I too acknowledged that vindictive accusations are rare. My point was that this flagrant, albeit occasional, abuse of the legal system must, and indeed should, make jurors particularly cautious, as to condemn an innocent man (to a prison where he will likely be raped himself) is a terrible thing to live with. It’s not treating every case as if the woman is lying, but being open to the possibility that she might be.
I don’t think prejudices play as great a role as has been suggested. Prior to the case the jury will have had the definition of rape carefully explained to them and they then must decide whether what has occurred fits that criteria. It’s nothing to do with ‘the assumption that the man’s word is better than the woman’s’;if it’s just one testimony against another then you often cannot fairly decide which one to believe and so you are obliged to find the defendant not guilty. Otherwise you would be guessing, hence my comment. To automatically take the woman’s word as truth and convict her alleged assailant is to completely undermine the principle of fair trials which everyone should have a right to.
Like I said, it’s one of the most difficult crimes to try and I think that, rather than prejudices, accounts for the low conviction rate.
March 28, 2008 at 7:41 pm
Caitlin
Prior to the case the jury will have had the definition of rape carefully explained to them and they then must decide whether what has occurred fits that criteria.
No, Jakey, sadly this is not the case. As seen in so many reports as to why the rape conviction rate is so low, the preparation that the jury/judge is given for a rape case is minimal, if anything at all. This is one of the issues. While I concede that this has surely improved in some respects (at least it is acknowledged by many that there should be some kind of briefing when it comes to a rape case as to how to handle it etc), I think that this is actually one of the big issues, as it is prejudices or mere ignorance that adds to the failure to convict rapists. I’ve read that in rape cases, the victim is often seen to behave *strangely* when testifying – laughing, appearing uncertain. This is a result of great trauma, but when faced with a jury that have not been prepared for this, or indeed with a judge that does not specialise in such a case, this kind of behaviour can be misinterpreted.
I agree that rape is a difficult crime to convict. But that doesn’t mean that we should declare it impossible – and one way in which conviction rates can be improved is by educating not only the judges/juries on such cases, but the everyday woman or man too.
Also, I don’t think that there is one big reason that answers the problem of the low conviction rate – there are many factors. The difficulty in producing evidence is certainly one of the reasons that many cases aren’t successful in their prosecution. But so is the inbuilt social prejudice of many of our people, which can be confronted.
March 28, 2008 at 8:54 pm
Jacob Ward
We shall have to disagree on that score then. It still seems to me that it is overwhelmingly the difficulty of such cases to decide upon, rather than prejudices, which accounts mainly for the low conviction rate.
March 28, 2008 at 9:12 pm
Jacob Ward
Also, tempora mutant – link
March 30, 2008 at 7:46 pm
Julaybib Ayoub
Regarding poem by AG… When I was in my early twenties (now 44), I was asked to read out a bit of nonsense for a pirate radio station. Next on mic was a woman giving out info about a local rape crisis centre or something – I don’t remember exactly what she said (this was 20 years ago), but I do remember her demeanour. I knew, through a friend, she had been raped twice in as many months. She was a real mess.
Prior to this, I had been working in mental health, but nothing prepared me for the level of mental anguish this lady was experiencing – I would guess 24/7. It took a lot of courage for her to come to that gig, even with a friend on each arm, but I’m glad she did. It changed me and inspired me. And it’s one reason why I sent both my daughters to karate lessons.
March 31, 2008 at 7:00 pm
Caitlin
That’s a powerful story – and she sounds like an incredibly brave woman. I can’t say that I’m an expert on rape, but I believe that the psychological damage inflicted by being raped, as AG points out in her poem, never leaves you. All of the accounts that I have read by women express their subsequent fear of men, or distrust of people generally. It is a terrible, terrible thing to do to someone.
I think it’s great that you made sure that your daughters could protect themselves – it shouldn’t be down to women to have to protect themselves, but until society changes its attitude to women, some form of self-defence is pretty much a necessity for women.
March 31, 2008 at 7:06 pm
Caitlin
Jakey – generally you don’t continue an argument straight after you agree to disagree!
But regarding your link:
It was written in November 2007, and was about plans. Is there evidence of this having been imposed? I hope so…
“Ministers will outline plans this week to boost the rate of convictions in rape cases by countering myths that may sway juries in cases of sexual assault.”
“Vera Baird, QC, the Solicitor-General, wants juries in rape trials to be issued with “myth-busting” packs”
“Details of the proposal have not been finalised because there is some concern that pretrial information given by the prosecution could be regarded as prejudicial.”
“But the proposals have run into opposition from judges and lawyers who said that they would make little difference to the conviction rate.”
[emphasis all my own]
Need I continue?
March 31, 2008 at 7:14 pm
Jacob Ward
That’s why I used ‘mutant’ (present continuous – ‘the times are changing’) rather than ‘mutaverant’ (perfect – ‘the times have changed’). Things take a lot of time in parliament…in the fullness of time I’m sure this measure will be introduced.
I added that because I came across it after I’d posted the comment and I thought you might find it interesting.
Let’s put it to bed now eh?
March 31, 2008 at 7:16 pm
Caitlin
Yup, agree to disagree.
Oh Jakey, sure, I’d have known what you meant by tempora mutant *sigh*
March 31, 2008 at 7:19 pm
Jacob Ward
Surely you must have a Latin dictionary somewhere in the house? Shock horror.
March 31, 2008 at 7:23 pm
Caitlin
Probably. But you forget – I am not in my house, I am in my room. With no plans of leaving any time soon either.
March 31, 2008 at 7:33 pm
Jacob Ward
And you forget – I wrote that on Friday; you’ve had three whole days to get a dictionary. Honestly Cait, it’s just lazyness
March 31, 2008 at 7:34 pm
Jacob Ward
(please don’t kill me, I’m well aware you’re ill and would anyway have had better things to do than find Latin dictionaries
)