Anonymity for Rape Accused Watch

Kralizec
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#101
Report 8 years ago
#101
(Original post by missygeorgia)
Prosecutors have accepted a number of failures in dealing with rape, particularly since the publication in 2007 of the Without Consent report, which was highly critical of some aspects of the way the police and prosecuting authorities deal with rape cases.

One of the most serious problems has been the initial handling of rape complaints by the police. The 2007 report by Her Majesty's Chief Inspectorate and Her Majesty's Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate, the independent inspectorates for the police and CPS, found that many officers dealing with rape victims had "very little training in responding to rape cases" and a "lack of awareness" of the need to follow the relevant guidance.

Victims were found to experience delays, "unpleasant environments", inappropriate behaviour by professionals, insensitive questioning during interviews and "judgmental or disbelieving attitudes" when coming forward with complaints of rape.

As a result, between half and two-thirds of rape cases did not proceed beyond the investigation stage. The majority of victims decide to withdraw their complaints, while high levels of rape complaints are essentially ignored, with reports pointing to scepticism on the part of the police and "the view that the victim lacks credibility".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/ma...onvictions-low
This article has nothing to do with what I asked.

I asked for evidence that there is widespread distrust and disbelief of rape victims within society.
0
reply
Connor132
Badges: 0
#102
Report 8 years ago
#102
(Original post by missygeorgia)
It's a problem with the police, but also a wider problem with society in general, that will be reinforced by this legislation.
I (and essentially everyone on here) would agree that the conviction rate is terrible, but I really can't see how granting men anonymity will reduce that rate. Surely if anything it'll be taken more seriously without the multiple stories about women "crying wolf" and ruining men’s life. And if it isn’t about its affect on conviction rate, then I can’t see your reasoning. Being falsely accused, ruins innocent peoples lives and often they lose their jobs/family as well as receiving violence and abuse from others, in my opinion this is just as bad as rape (if not worse) and I don’t see how someone can support this, yet be against rape.

:rolleyes: oh yeah I see one (basically) affects women, while the other affects men...
0
reply
Ministerdonut
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#103
Report 8 years ago
#103
(Original post by missygeorgia)
Well then, read my previous posts or this article (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/20...ity-defendants) because I'm not explaining it again.

And I went into some detail in several posts as to why making the accused anon might improve conviction rates, why it is many times difficult to secure a rape conviction ,which has nothing to do with a bias against women and acknowledged myself the issue with the general public surrounding rape, but you failed to comment on it and I won't be explaining it again either.

I fail to see your logic on this and can only deduce it's sour grapes, I would say that the womens attitude in that article, isn't going to help a womans position in court at all. And quoting the guardian of all papers I could dismiss in a similar way to how many dismiss the Daily Mail,but I won't.
0
reply
missygeorgia
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#104
Report 8 years ago
#104
(Original post by Ministerdonut)
And I went into some detail in several posts as to why making the accused anon might improve conviction rates, why it is many times difficult to secure a rape conviction ,which has nothing to do with a bias against women and acknowledged myself the issue with the general public surrounding rape, but you failed to comment on it and I won't be explaining it again either.

I fail to see your logic on this and can only deduce it's sour grapes, I would say that the womens attitude in that article, isn't going to help a womans position in court at all.
Yeah I read your post and you actually had some good points, about false rape accusations and the media, but a reply would have been long and I'm getting frigging bored of this thread.

If you don't understand my point then there's not much I can do about it. I've repeated myself endlessly and used other people's explanations as well, if you don't get it there's no point discussing it further.
0
reply
missygeorgia
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#105
Report 8 years ago
#105
(Original post by Kralizec)
This article has nothing to do with what I asked.

I asked for evidence that there is widespread distrust and disbelief of rape victims within society.
Actually, you didn't. You asked for evidence that rape victims and their cases aren't taken seriously. Well, there you go, I gave it to you. Ta da.
0
reply
Kralizec
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#106
Report 8 years ago
#106
(Original post by missygeorgia)
Actually, you didn't. You asked for evidence that rape victims and their cases aren't taken seriously. Well, there you go, I gave it to you. Ta da.
No I didn't

(Original post by missygeorgia)
I'm arguing that it can only be applied to rape if it's applied to all other crimes, because of the attitude towards rape victims in our society.
This is the post I responded to
0
reply
missygeorgia
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#107
Report 8 years ago
#107
(Original post by Kralizec)
No I didn't



This is the post I responded to
I'm arguing that it can only be applied to rape if it's applied to all other crimes, because of the attitude towards rape victims in our society.

And I gave you evidence of this attitude towards rape victims in our society.
0
reply
Kralizec
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#108
Report 8 years ago
#108
(Original post by missygeorgia)
And I gave you evidence of this attitude towards rape victims in our society.
No.

You gave an example of poor conduct and handling of rape cases by some police officers.

If you can't see the difference then there is no point in continuing this discussion
0
reply
missygeorgia
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#109
Report 8 years ago
#109
(Original post by Kralizec)
No.

You gave an example of poor conduct and handling of rape cases by some police officers.

If you can't see the difference then there is no point in continuing this discussion
I gave you a study where the overwhelming evidence was that the justice system is not taking rape cases seriously. Are you saying that the rape victims described were being taken seriously? I don't understand how you can dispute this. You're blatantly just being obstinate now.

I've clearly proved that point anyway, and this is boring unless you have anything new to say.
0
reply
Kralizec
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#110
Report 8 years ago
#110
(Original post by missygeorgia)
I gave you a study where the overwhelming evidence was that the justice system is not taking rape cases seriously. Are you saying that the rape victims described were being taken seriously? I don't understand how you can dispute this. You're blatantly just being obstinate now.

I've clearly proved that point anyway, and this is boring unless you have anything new to say.
You are just making things up now. It doesn't say that at all.

Prosecutors have accepted a number of failures in dealing with rape, particularly since the publication in 2007 of the Without Consent report, which was highly critical of some aspects of the way the police and prosecuting authorities deal with rape cases.

This does not translate to "overwhelming evidence that the justice system is not taking rape cases seriously".

No one is disputing the fact that there are problems but if you think that innocent men who have been falsely accused of rape should be punished for that then you are insane.
0
reply
Advanced Subsidiary
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#111
Report 8 years ago
#111
Misandrist alert.
0
reply
Thrasymachus
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#112
Report 8 years ago
#112
(Original post by missygeorgia)
Possibly, yes. If the proposals were for anonymity for all crimes, I don't think I'd have a problem with that. But they're only doing it specifically for rape, and this obviously implies that a lot of women lie about being raped. In a society where rape victims are simply not taken seriously, we shouldn't be furthering these views.
I think if anything it implies that lot people hate rapists so much (or believe that rapists get away with it more often than not - 'no smoke without fire' etc), that even if you're found innocent, you're still ******.

I agree though that it really should be something that applied to all crimes.

Lets be honest though, when it comes to media fanning flames and the no smoke without fire assumption, the only people you really hear talked about (and remembered for) are people accused of rape, paedophilia and murder - and rape is the most common crime out of all of them.

While it can be considered a shame that this issue is being addressed before the issue of a lack of training and understanding of authorities dealing with rape cases - a solution for this problem is far, far easier to implement, and to put it off because it might be seen as implicitly reinforcing a view that women often lie about rape, would just be an injustice.

The fact is, if there is widely held attitude against women who haved claimed to be raped - that is a so much more complicated and vague problem to solve because it is so ingrained - I mean it would be nice that instead of granting anonymity to those accused of rape, we could counter the whole 'no smoke without fire' attitude when it comes to these cases - but anonymity is simpler, easy solution that will help in the short term.

Also, if men are granted anonymity, then those who are falsely accused won't be reported, we would only ever hear of men who did rape, never men who were falsely accused - I would consider the media not being able to report false/failed rape accusations of benefit to rape victims.

There is very rarely a perfect solution to a problem, and this certainly isn't one of them, but I can't see how someone can maintain an overall argument against this desicion.
0
reply
missygeorgia
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#113
Report 8 years ago
#113
(Original post by Kralizec)
You are just making things up now. It doesn't say that at all.

Prosecutors have accepted a number of failures in dealing with rape, particularly since the publication in 2007 of the Without Consent report, which was highly critical of some aspects of the way the police and prosecuting authorities deal with rape cases.

This does not translate to "overwhelming evidence that the justice system is not taking rape cases seriously".

No one is disputing the fact that there are problems but if you think that innocent men who have been falsely accused of rape should be punished for that then you are insane.
and "judgmental or disbelieving attitudes" when coming forward with complaints of rape
high levels of rape complaints are essentially ignored, with reports pointing to scepticism on the part of the police and "the view that the victim lacks credibility".
If this isn't police not taking rape victims seriously, what on earth is?

If you think that my prioritising of rape victims over defendants is wrong, then say that. I'll defend myself, but it's a valid criticism. At the moment, though, you're just saying the opposite of everything that I say for the sake of it, which means that I can't engage with you. To say that suspected rapists should be protected is one thing, it's a valid and constructive point. To deny that rape victims are treated badly at all, or that there's any kind of prejudice against them, or a failure to take them seriously, is just obtuse and fricking petulant. I'm not asking you to agree with me, but if you won't even concede that there's prejudice against rape victims, well, all you're doing is being aggressive and arrogant, and I don't really want to debate with you.
0
reply
Kralizec
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#114
Report 8 years ago
#114
(Original post by missygeorgia)
If this isn't police not taking rape victims seriously, what on earth is?

If you think that my prioritising of rape victims over defendants is wrong, then say that. I'll defend myself, but it's a valid criticism. At the moment, though, you're just saying the opposite of everything that I say for the sake of it, which means that I can't engage with you. To say that suspected rapists should be protected is one thing, it's a valid and constructive point. To deny that rape victims are treated badly at all, or that there's any kind of prejudice against them, or a failure to take them seriously, is just obtuse and fricking petulant. I'm not asking you to agree with me, but if you won't even concede that there's prejudice against rape victims, well, all you're doing is being aggressive and arrogant, and I don't really want to debate with you.
The only thing you have proven here is that you lack any form of reading comprehension.

I refuse to have a discussion with someone who doesn't even have the decency to read my posts properly.
0
reply
missygeorgia
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#115
Report 8 years ago
#115
(Original post by Thrasymachus)
I think if anything it implies that lot people hate rapists so much (or believe that rapists get away with it more often than not - 'no smoke without fire' etc), that even if you're found innocent, you're still ******.

I agree though that it really should be something that applied to all crimes.

Lets be honest though, when it comes to media fanning flames and the no smoke without fire assumption, the only people you really hear talked about (and remembered for) are people accused of rape, paedophilia and murder - and rape is the most common crime out of all of them.

While it can be considered a shame that this issue is being addressed before the issue of a lack of training and understanding of authorities dealing with rape cases - a solution for this problem is far, far easier to implement, and to put it off because it might be seen as implicitly reinforcing a view that women often lie about rape, would just be an injustice.

The fact is, if there is widely held attitude against women who haved claimed to be raped - that is a so much more complicated and vague problem to solve because it is so ingrained - I mean it would be nice that instead of granting anonymity to those accused of rape, we could counter the whole 'no smoke without fire' attitude when it comes to these cases - but anonymity is simpler, easy solution that will help in the short term.

Also, if men are granted anonymity, then those who are falsely accused won't be reported, we would only ever hear of men who did rape, never men who were falsely accused - I would consider the media not being able to report false/failed rape accusations of benefit to rape victims.

There is very rarely a perfect solution to a problem, and this certainly isn't one of them, but I can't see how someone can maintain an overall argument against this desicion.
I just read this Julie Bindel article that pretty much sums it up for me:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...ape-defendants

We differ in the way we see the problem facing rape victims. For me, the prejudice and skepticism they're approached with is really, really important, and really, really needs to be sorted out, before any measures that might hinder this are taken. I think rape and violence against women are some of the most important things we need to sort out, and we can't approach this properly when the attitude towards women is as it is, and so for me, currently, the possibility that this legislation might reinforce this prejudice rules it out for me, even if it does have its benefits.

Even if it wasn't rape being targeted, if it were all crimes, I still don't know if I'd condone anonymity for defendants. The arguments being put forward for transparency are very persuasive, and I think that to an extent the public has a right to know if someone's being charged with something, and make their own decision about it. I would want to know if a friend or a colleague of mine was being charged with rape or paaedophilia or terrorism or something- if I had kids, or might potentially date them, or let them babysit, or let them walk me home, or lend them money. Sure, innocent before proven guilty, but I think that in a lot of cases the public has a right to know so that they can decide how to react. At the same time, it's really unfair on those who are innocent. Like you said, there's no easy solution, but I would err towards transparency.

Also, regarding rape cases- the argument about more rape victims coming forward if they hear their rapist is on trial is a very convincing one.
0
reply
kamc
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#116
Report 8 years ago
#116
(Original post by missygeorgia)
I just read this Julie Bindel article that pretty much sums it up for me:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...ape-defendants

We differ in the way we see the problem facing rape victims. For me, the prejudice and skepticism they're approached with is really, really important, and really, really needs to be sorted out, before any measures that might hinder this are taken. I think rape and violence against women are some of the most important things we need to sort out, and we can't approach this properly when the attitude towards women is as it is, and so for me, currently, the possibility that this legislation might reinforce this prejudice rules it out for me, even if it does have its benefits.

Even if it wasn't rape being targeted, if it were all crimes, I still don't know if I'd condone anonymity for defendants. The arguments being put forward for transparency are very persuasive, and I think that to an extent the public has a right to know if someone's being charged with something, and make their own decision about it. I would want to know if a friend or a colleague of mine was being charged with rape or paaedophilia or terrorism or something- if I had kids, or might potentially date them, or let them babysit, or let them walk me home, or lend them money. Sure, innocent before proven guilty, but I think that in a lot of cases the public has a right to know so that they can decide how to react. At the same time, it's really unfair on those who are innocent. Like you said, there's no easy solution, but I would err towards transparency.

Also, regarding rape cases- the argument about more rape victims coming forward if they hear their rapist is on trial is a very convincing one.
You are getting more and more ridiculous.
0
reply
ChrisBan
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#117
Report 8 years ago
#117
(Original post by missygeorgia)
Even if it wasn't rape being targeted, if it were all crimes, I still don't know if I'd condone anonymity for defendants. The arguments being put forward for transparency are very persuasive, and I think that to an extent the public has a right to know if someone's being charged with something, and make their own decision about it. I would want to know if a friend or a colleague of mine was being charged with rape or paaedophilia or terrorism or something- if I had kids, or might potentially date them, or let them babysit, or let them walk me home, or lend them money. Sure, innocent before proven guilty, but I think that in a lot of cases the public has a right to know so that they can decide how to react. At the same time, it's really unfair on those who are innocent. Like you said, there's no easy solution, but I would err towards transparency.

Also, regarding rape cases- the argument about more rape victims coming forward if they hear their rapist is on trial is a very convincing one.

The policy resolution stated that defendants should remain anonymous in rape cases unless and until they are convicted.
From the BBC article, so you will know if a colleagues are convicted of rape.
0
reply
Square
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#118
Report 8 years ago
#118
this is long overdue. I also think that anyone who is found to be lying about being raped should have to spend as long in prison as a rapist.
0
reply
Qoph
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#119
Report 8 years ago
#119
(Original post by Hopple)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8695367.stm

Do you think this is right?

It's argued in the article that the conviction rate won't be raised, and even might be lowered because of this. This could be countered by showing rape victims mugshots of rapists after they've given their sketch, and continuing to encourage rape vicimts to come forwards.

It is also argued that giving the accused anonymity will suggest that rape victims are lying, though they do have anonymity themselves and the current suggestion is that any accused are guilty.

I think I'm in favour of anonymity, but I do feel that if it goes through there needs to be extra effort to encourage victims to come forwards.
It could be a way to dispel prejudices against the defendants especially if their were acquitted and furthermore against their family. Moreover I would suggest to expand the anomynity to the culprits, too, because if their name is published, there is no possibilty for them to get a second chance after they're released.
0
reply
Thomassss
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#120
Report 8 years ago
#120
(Original post by DJkG.1)
The lives of a hell of a lot of completely innocent men have been ruined by bogus rape charges, with the lying party getting a comparative 'slap on the wrist' in the form of usually a fine or community service.

Something definitely has to be done to rectify this injustice. :yes:

why have u banned ur account ? i need to PM u !
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Brexit: Given the chance now, would you vote leave or remain?

Remain (481)
80.03%
Leave (120)
19.97%

Watched Threads

View All