Rape conviction FactCheck response

Here are some of the letters we received:

I was framed by the police

In seeking to write a balanced article what you have actually done is write an article that is preposterous. The police do not investigate rape cases. FULL STOP. They used every argument and trick in the book to shame, humiliate, lie, brow beat and ball victims out be being able to pursue a case. They act as the legal defence team for the defendant. There is no impartiality as your article seeks to create. The police obstruct all avenues of enquiry to create a case and prevent there being evidence for the CPS to be able to prosecute.

I have experienced this first hand. There are prepared to even interview you and then undermine you by presenting you with a falsely written up statement that they tell you must sign, and if you don't they will submit their statement to the CPS, with your statement to frame you as a liar!

Victims are screwed over. This is a widespread/ endemic problem.

Your conclusions are even more misleading

Hi,

I saw the interview with Theresa May last night on Channel 4 News and was a bit startled at your claim that the rape conviction rate in Britain is actually about 'half way' in comparison with other European countries, rather than being bottom as David Cameron claimed.

I am concerned that while you are right to express caution about comparing conviction rates across countries with different legal systems, your conclusions are (in my view) even more misleading. I don't think it's particularly meaningful to compare countries in relation to per head of population, rather than recorded crime. Your statement following on from this that the low conviction rate could in fact mean that rape victims in countries with low conviction rates could have more chance of finding justice left me quite puzzled.

I am presuming that your logic is that low conviction rates could be due to more women reporting so-called acquaintance rapes which are harder to prove; whereas in other countries with higher convictions rates there may be fewer women in these circumstances reporting, therefore our low conviction rate may be a sign women feel able to report, rather than a sign our justice system is failing to provide justice to rape survivors. I may have misunderstood you, but if this is right I think is based on quite a bit of supposition rather than fact.

The fact we do know is that in Scotland less than 3.9% of reported rapes lead to a conviction. I don't see how anyone could turn this into a positive, or claim that it's a sign women here have more justice than elsewhere (I'm saying women as our rape definition is still gender specific and doesn't yet include male rape).

I also wanted to clarify that there is no such thing as a British rape conviction rate: Scotland has a separate legal system, different definition of rape, different legislative framework and lower conviction rate than England & Wales. When David Cameron said that England and Wales had the worst conviction rate of any leading European countries, he obviously wasn't including Scotland is his definition of leading European countries.

Sandy Brindley National Coordinator Rape Crisis Scotland

From the man's perspective...

After being convicted of attempted rape 20 years ago by a scorned lying, drunken 'young lady', my message to the ill-informed 'hug a hoodie' David Cameron is, 'I hope you or someone close to you get to taste the receiving end one day.'

His statistics are from a primary school. After loosing your liberty, good name, friends (me shying away from them) my business and in the end your self confidence and ability to socialise you may end up with an alternative view.

What about contributory negligence/provocation - e.g. lying there in the "perpetrator's" house without clothes on? There are two sides, you buffoon. I could go on...

A solution - Written consent?

Let's have written consent! Just a small simple form to be signed and dated by both consenting partners, before each act or as an open consent for a specified time.

Forms would be included in every packet of contraceptives and freely available from outlets selling these, plus family planning clinics, GPs etc.

Men would be exposed to the almost certain risk of prosecution for any complaint made by a woman who had not given written consent. Plainly some couples would choose to have an unwritten contract as they continue to have unprotected sex - but responsible people could at last take some action to reduce the statistics.

I'm a man and this seems reasonable to me, OK so it might be a turn-off for some people but in that case, the true motivation to perform the act itself must be in doubt? Cases involving vulnerable victims who had been coerced into written consent could still be taken to court for a jury decision as at present.

Let's fix this distasteful problem for the good of all.

Share this article

Send this article to a friend »

• Del.icio.us
• Digg
• Reddit
• Facebook
• StumbleUpon

What are these?