506f622c
XPost: aus.legal, misc.legal, soc.men
XPost: talk.rape, uk.legal
From: reality@check.it
"Webmanager_CritEst" wrote in message
news:af8a4097-7cf3-496b-a24a-e273cf5b4a02@k8g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
June 15, 2009
Beware rape myths, judges to tell jurors
A rape victim waits to be seen by the doctor
Jurors will be told not to judge a victim by the way she was dressed,
her behaviour or her demeanour
Frances Gibb, Legal Editor
Juries are to be instructed to ignore myths surrounding rape in an
attempt to raise Britain’s low conviction rate for the crime.
Under new directions to be given by judges in rape cases, jurors will
be told not to assume the victim was “asking for it” because of the
way she dressed, her behaviour or her demeanour.
The directions will address popular misconceptions, for instance that
in a “real” rape a victim will struggle and be injured, or that a
victim’s consent can be inferred from provocative clothing or
flirtatious behaviour.
Such myths are said to be exploited by defence lawyers who play to the
public’s views that the stereotypical rape involves a stranger at
night, violence and injury, and that the victim will report it
immediately.
The initiative has been promoted by Vera Baird, QC, the Solicitor-
General, because of continuing concern that rape convictions in the UK
remain the lowest in Europe.
The idea of judicial directions has been developed over recent months,
Ms Baird told The Times. A small group, including psychiatrists,
researchers and a “shadow jury”, had looked at what influenced
people’s views.
A second group, including judges, lawyers, Treasury counsel and Ms
Baird, then drew up draft judicial directions to cover some half dozen
of the main myths about rape.
These have been seen by the Lord Chief Justice and are with the
Judicial Studies Board, in charge of training judges and consultation
between judges.
“It is very hard to draw a line to stop judges from giving evidence,
which they are not allowed to do, and letting them give directions
based on judicial wisdom,” Ms Baird said. “In their training judges
are taught about these myths, and it doesn’t seem right that they
should know about these but not be able to do anything about them. I
am hopeful we will have a body of work ready by the autumn.”
At present 6.5 per cent of reported rapes end in a conviction, she
said, but that compares with 5.2 per cent two years ago. Ms Baird
said: “When people say that the rape conviction rate has plummeted
from 19 per cent two decades ago to 6.59 per cent now, you have to
remember that there were far, far fewer cases of rape reported two
decades ago.
“Rape within marriage was not even a crime — and almost all the cases
were stranger rapes in dark alleys that were relatively easy to
convict.” She added that, although 6.5 per cent of rapes reported to
the police resulted in a conviction, 34 per cent of all rapes
prosecuted resulted in a conviction — the highest rate for ten years.
The idea of draft directions has been prompted by a recent landmark
case in which the judge ruled that jurors could be told that a genuine
sex attack victim is sometimes slow to come forward because of the
trauma she has experienced. Usually any delay in reporting an assault
is seized on by the defence to undermine the credibility of the
complainant.
Judges and the Attorney-General have agreed a policy position: “The
courts are alert to the need to ensure fairness to complainants in
rape cases as well as to defendants. The Court of Appeal has recently
confirmed that in a case where a defendant raises the issue of delayed
reporting to undermine the credibility of a complainant, a judge is
entitled to direct juries that delay can also be due to the traumatic
feelings that follow a rape.”
But Peter Lodder, QC, chairman of the Criminal Bar Association, spoke
of dangers of a move which might upset the balance of a fair trial.
“Of course, moves to increase the effectiveness of prosecutions in
rape cases are to be welcomed. But any initiative to make sure that
all rape allegations are tried and tried effectively must be counter-
balanced by the importance of ensuring that a fair trial for a
defendant is not undermined.”
He said the problem with judges giving template directions to juries
was that every trial was “case-specific” and a general direction might
not help. “Such directions would have to be treated with care and we
should not undermine the common sense of juries who can form a view as
to what is normal, or abnormal — what is acceptable, or unacceptable,”
he said.
Myths to be challenged
— A genuine victim will report rape at once The Court of Appeal has
recently confirmed that juries can be told that delay can be down to
trauma after the rape
— False allegations of rape are common There is no reliable evidence
that more false complaints are made in rape cases than in other
serious crimes
— Most rapes are committed by strangers
— Most rapists are known to the victim: a partner or former partner,
friend, colleague, acquaintance or professional
— Rape victims should put up a fight and show signs of struggle, and a
victim will sustain genital injuries Not all victims resist, many
fearing the consequences. Many women freeze
— Consent to sex can be assumed from dress, flirting, drink
— Juries would be told that if a man flashed his bulging wallet around
in a pub and then had it stolen, no one would say that the person who
stole it was not really a thief
— Stranger rape is more traumatic than rape by a known person
— Sexual assault is a traumatic experience whoever the perpetrator and
sometimes more traumatic if a breach of trust is involved
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6499404.ece
*****
— Many are lying harlots.
WM
www.critest.com
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
