Labour and Rape

[Rovinghawk]

Roman Rhodes said:

Are you so keen to promote this concept with regard to all and any criminal allegations?

Am I keen on the concept of innocent until proven guilty?

Yes.

[Derek Smith]

otherman said:

There's a big difference though, is why they're treated differently. If a car is stolen, there's some evidence in the form of a missing car, and the rectification is to get another car. With rape, evidence can be difficult, and the rectification is to jail someone. We can't give people the power to jail whoever they want, because some people abuse that power.

There's normally similar evidence of rape. In the case of a car theft, a missing car is only part of the evidence necessary for a conviction. There are five points needed to prove theft. In the case of rape, there are just the two, and 100% of that is normally apparent from the start. If anything, the report of rape should be accepted sooner. We would have evidence of sexual intercourse/penetration, and evidence of lack of consent, i.e. the victim's statement, there from the beginning.

Rape is notoriously difficult to prove. Further, there can be a victim but no offender.

We should not give anyone the power to jail without due process, but we should treat all complainants the same. By adding 'allegation' in front of rape but not theft, burglary, assault, etc there is immediate prejudice. Indeed, one could say the same about a murder.

Edited by Derek Smith on Tuesday 18th September 14:18

[Rovinghawk]

Derek Smith said:

We should not give anyone the power to jail without due process, but we should treat all complainants the same. By adding 'allegation' in front of rape but not theft, burglary, assault, etc there is immediate prejudice. Indeed, one could say the same about a murder.

They are all allegations prior to conviction.

Edited by Rovinghawk on Tuesday 18th September 14:33

[anonymous-user]

Bigends said:

La Liga said:

Peter911 said:

Derek Smith said:

The number of rapes reported are a small percentage of those that occur.

Is this a BBC statistic? I suppose it depends how you catagorise rape. In my day it was a man with a balaclava with a knife grabbing someone walking home alone late at night across an unlit park.

Nowadays it seems to be smiling at someone on a bus.

(Not making light of it, but some things do seem to be getting out of hand in the PC land)

Rape is clearly defined in law.

Few years old, but this concludes there are many more occurring than reporting: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/governmen...

This report is nearly nine years old. There have been significant changes made in relation to the recording of rape since then. Back then, many rape allegations werent recorded until the officers dealing were satisfied that an offence had occured and even then, many werent recorded . Rapes are now recorded at first point of contact with Police either by the victim or by a third party in some cases. Police now record and then investigate rather than investigating before deciding whether or not to record.

Edited by Bigends on Tuesday 18th September 01:10

It’s better, but the point still stands, the indications are there are a lot more sexual offences committed than reported (regardless of recording or not).

[4x4Tyke]

Roman Rhodes said:

Rather a disturbing post if your view is that rape can only take place if a balaclava and knife are involved. “In my day” means what exactly?

Old fashioned misogyny is huge problem in this issue, backed up by science.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/...

[Bigends]

La Liga said:

Bigends said:

La Liga said:

Peter911 said:

Derek Smith said:

The number of rapes reported are a small percentage of those that occur.

Is this a BBC statistic? I suppose it depends how you catagorise rape. In my day it was a man with a balaclava with a knife grabbing someone walking home alone late at night across an unlit park.

Nowadays it seems to be smiling at someone on a bus.

(Not making light of it, but some things do seem to be getting out of hand in the PC land)

Rape is clearly defined in law.

Few years old, but this concludes there are many more occurring than reporting: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/governmen...

This report is nearly nine years old. There have been significant changes made in relation to the recording of rape since then. Back then, many rape allegations werent recorded until the officers dealing were satisfied that an offence had occured and even then, many werent recorded . Rapes are now recorded at first point of contact with Police either by the victim or by a third party in some cases. Police now record and then investigate rather than investigating before deciding whether or not to record.

Edited by Bigends on Tuesday 18th September 01:10

It’s better, but the point still stands, the indications are there are a lot more sexual offences committed than reported (regardless of recording or not).

Agreed - I dont suppose we'll ever know the true figure. I dont see what else the authorities can do to encourage victims to report these allegations. It may well be that the rape subject of the original post has already been recorded - this can be done without victim confirmation if its felt to be appropriate and necessary to do so.

[TaylotS2K]

I abhor Labour. I could never vote for them, especially with Corbyn, McDonnell, Abbott and Lammy etc in the ranks.

[4x4Tyke]

Derek Smith said:

Rape is under-reported. Only an idiot would say otherwise. Or the prejudiced of course. The only question is by how much and I reckon the true figures would shock most people.

There are also many cases of suspected rape murder, where the killer claims consent and she died by accident during violent sex games. The victim is not there to refute them.

A bunch of local cases with such unbelievable defences, some successful, some not.

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/hull-east-yor...

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/hull-east-yor...

http://www.itv.com/news/calendar/story/2015-06-18/...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1502447/Ma...

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/jun/21/ukcrime...

https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/tragic-twist-...

[Derek Smith]

4x4Tyke said:

Roman Rhodes said:

Rather a disturbing post if your view is that rape can only take place if a balaclava and knife are involved. “In my day” means what exactly?

Old fashioned misogyny is huge problem in this issue, backed up by science.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/...

I've had a number of suspects on ID parades make comments which exposes their attitude towards women. It's not evidence, although I've made a few statements on it. Many also act as if they are entitled to do what they did regardless of any wishes of the women. I often felt like asking 'WTF do you mean by that?' But SIOs don't like that sort of involvement by the ID officer. Mind you, the chap I replaced had one offender say 'she didn't refuse, she was too drunk.' The SIO enjoyed that, but it wasn't needed.

Whilst much emphasis is given, quite rightly, to the attitude of other cultures towards women, it is far from unknown in ours. Mark Clarke's IIP is hardly unique to him.

[Octoposse]

Derek Smith said:

It is true that the definition of consent has changed over the years, but that's hardly unknown in legal circles. It's what happens. One instance that sticks in my mind was a force pursuing a drugs offence on the hope of defining a field as premises. How we all shook our heads in disbelief.

Consent: ask yourself whether a trafficked woman in a brothel gives consent to penetration. She has no alternative, she is kept imprisoned and is within the definition of a slave. These women are penetrated a number of times each evening. One on TV said 'more than a dozen times' each day. Each one a rape. 12 x 7 x 52 is a lot of rapes that go unreported each year. There are sometimes dozens of women being raped day in and day out in some places.

Even when the women are freed the rapes are not reported (at least they weren't in my time). The number of such brothels is unknown but then I know two forces that have joined together to fight this horror. So that's two officers. We'll never know the full extent but there is ample evidence of lots and lots of them.

It is not an allegation of multiple rapes, it is multiple rapes. There is no consent.

There are other aspects to consent which are less obvious. A husband who runs his wife. Hardly unknown, and there's no bother as to whether the wife consents.

Do prostitutes generally consent? That's open for a bigger discussion and too deep for me and a PH thread I think.

Rape is under-reported. Only an idiot would say otherwise. Or the prejudiced of course. The only question is by how much and I reckon the true figures would shock most people.

The accepted figure for proportion of rapes and other serious sexual offences reported to Police is about 15%, which feels about right to me. But, no, you can’t actually prove it, but that’s what the best evidence points to.

Similarly, you can’t prove that sexual violence isn’t going up . . . there is a long term upwards trend in recorded Serious Sexual Offences, and - In the absence of evidence suggesting that underlying incidence is rising - we tend to regard this trend as positive due to well understood substantial under reporting (see the 15% figure above!), and by ascribing the recorded increases to:
• Increased reporting indicative of improving confidence and processes;
• Police improved CDI (Crime Data Integrity);
• Reporting of historical offences – the “Savile effect” (actually, when I look at the numbers, the bulk of the increase does not appear to be due to historical cases)

This positive view of the trend gains some support from the Crime Survey for England & Wales (CSEW) which in 2016 observed:
There was an increase of 21% in sexual offences recorded by the police in the latest year compared with the previous year (106,378 offences); this includes a 22% increase in rape and a 20% increase in other sexual offences . . . . . The increases are believed to have resulted from both an improvement in the recording of sexual offences by the police and an increased willingness of victims to come forward and report these crimes to the police . . . .

However, again, we have no statistical or other proof that the continuing increases are solely due to these factors.

In fact, when you talk to late teens / early 20s groups, some of the attitudes to consent, what characterises rape, etc, can be horrifying – we seem to have gone backwards in a decade. PhD in it for someone who can explain that, but I’d pin at least some of the blame on the squeezing out of the interpersonal side of ‘sex education’ in schools by a packed curriculum and league table fixation, at least partially. First year university students not understanding what consent is is actually a pretty sad indictment of a lack of vital core life skills imparted by schools, home, and the media.

Broad figures, my research (part number crunching, part sampling), pretty clearly identifies that ‘stranger’ crimes are 10-12% of the recorded total of rapes and serious sexual offences. And since it’s a fairly safe hypothesis that victims are more likely to report sexual violence if the perpetrator is not known to them, so combine that with the 15% of actual rapes being recorded, indicates what a small proportion of the total these are.

• In about 20% of recorded rapes / serious sexual offences the offender is the present or past partner of the victim, slightly less again other ‘Family Member’;
• ‘Friend / Acquaintance’ about 25%;
• Other ‘known’ (through school, work colleagues, shared accommodation) another 20% +;
• Sex worker / prospective client 1-2%.
There are obviously grey areas between these categories, but the ‘bloke with a knife’ is fantastically rare.

[The Selfish Gene]

Nath911t said:

I'm confused why it wasn't reported to the Police and just the Labour party official?

Who are Labour to deal with something like this and not the Police? Or have I just read it wrong?

ok - so what if as someone else said - the CPS didn't have enough evidence to even arrest the alleged attacker..........

then the victim, assuming it's true comes forward to the Labour party.

I'm not condoning the alleged attacker, but surely, this chap could have his life ruined if he was innocent of the assault - and if the CPS can't prosecute as there isn't enough evidence, should the alleged attacker be protected from the private 'witch-hunt'

Can't think of a better word that won't be prosecution because there isn't enough evidence.

A tricky situation indeed when one takes the emotion out of such a hideous crime.

[The Selfish Gene]

TaylotS2K said:

I abhor Labour. I could never vote for them, especially with Corbyn, McDonnell, Abbott and Lammy etc in the ranks.

1million x this ^^^

I would never vote for someone I didn't respect. Your list above are the sort of people , if they worked where I work, I know would be totally fking useless and a burden on everyone else.

hateful politics and useless humans.

The only possible use of them would be to melt them down and use them as glue, but they're so useless nothing would stick together with it.

Pathetic packets of blood and bone.

[Derek Smith]

The Selfish Gene said:

Nath911t said:

I'm confused why it wasn't reported to the Police and just the Labour party official?

Who are Labour to deal with something like this and not the Police? Or have I just read it wrong?

ok - so what if as someone else said - the CPS didn't have enough evidence to even arrest the alleged attacker..........

then the victim, assuming it's true comes forward to the Labour party.

I'm not condoning the alleged attacker, but surely, this chap could have his life ruined if he was innocent of the assault - and if the CPS can't prosecute as there isn't enough evidence, should the alleged attacker be protected from the private 'witch-hunt'

Can't think of a better word that won't be prosecution because there isn't enough evidence.

A tricky situation indeed when one takes the emotion out of such a hideous crime.

A victim surely should have the choice of how an offence should be resolved? A victim might, in the early post attack phase, not want to do anything but try and get over it. Later they might feel that they are now strong enough to try for retribution. Who knows? We certainly don't know whether, in this case, the woman did make a complaint so the suggestion of witch-hunt is not necessarily correct. There are many other possible reasons why she has chosen this route.

[The Selfish Gene]

Derek Smith said:

A victim surely should have the choice of how an offence should be resolved? A victim might, in the early post attack phase, not want to do anything but try and get over it. Later they might feel that they are now strong enough to try for retribution. Who knows? We certainly don't know whether, in this case, the woman did make a complaint so the suggestion of witch-hunt is not necessarily correct. There are many other possible reasons why she has chosen this route.

fair - and I wasn't hugely happy with my use of 'witch-hunt' either.

I worded it badly - but surely , if there isn't enough evidence to convict or even arrest the alleged attacker, he may be innocent (until proven guilty) and thus should have some form of protection from the 'victim' accusing him publically or privately in his place of work (in this case the Labour party). That would have serious affects on his career.

[hutchst]

I fully understand the need for victim anonymity is these cases, but can't see why it isn't given to all parties until a conviction is secured, given the extreme consequences of being falsely accused.

[Derek Smith]

The Selfish Gene said:

fair - and I wasn't hugely happy with my use of 'witch-hunt' either.

I worded it badly - but surely , if there isn't enough evidence to convict or even arrest the alleged attacker, he may be innocent (until proven guilty) and thus should have some form of protection from the 'victim' accusing him publically or privately in his place of work (in this case the Labour party). That would have serious affects on his career.

We don't know if there is insufficient evidence, or indeed what evidence there is.

If a person's actions fall short of breaking a law then the only 'protection' is via civil courts. Or, to put it another way, hardly any at all. I've been threatened with legal action, only via a 'legal' letter. I'm in the right, of that there appears little doubt, but there's no way I could take it any further because of the costs involved if the 'little doubt' satisfies any court. I've spoken with someone who knows about these things and he reckons I'm spot on but even his business, quite big as businesses go, would give into the threat.

When the fire service retirees discovered they'd been short-changed to many thousands of pounds, one >£60,000, they put their case to the government. There was overwhelming evidence against the government but they were told 'tough'. The only redress was via the civil courts and their union did not have sufficient funds. A 'class action' was decided on and they went in jointly with other retirees similarly done out of money and nearly ten years, and many, many court cases later, the government was told to pay up. Another year or so went past, the claim being that they had to work out who was owed what - despite them having ten years - and then they paid up. Interest on the sums was calculated at about a third of what one could get in an ISA.

There's no justice in civil courts. It's all a power game.

I feel sorry for the bloke, with the caveat that he is innocent. But that's is, I reckon, life for all of us. Or at least, all of us plebs.

Sometimes the plebs fight back, but only occasionally. We just can't afford justice.

[nikaiyo2]

Derek Smith said:

The police don't need the cooperation of a victim to pursue a suspected rape. However, it is difficult to prosecute without the cooperation of the victim. A year or so ago the CPS stated that if a rape victim did refuse to cooperate, they could be imprisoned. A few years ago a victim did refuse in court to testify and the judge threatened to imprison the victim for contempt.

I feel that one should not force a victim to give evidence of the crime, but there is the thought that if an offender gets away with such a serious crime once, they will go on to offend again.

I can't blame a victim for not wanting to proceed. Complain you've been burgled and everyone sympathises and tutts. Say you've been raped and there are those who want to treat such a report differently to any other crime and refuse to believe them. This despite the number of false burglaries easily exceeding the number of false reports of rape. On top of that, there's the invasive investigative procedures. They are bad enough, especially as they are normally immediately after the offence, but they are nothing compared to the legal procedures.

I think the imperative for the victim is to their own health. The pressure of being a victim of rape is tremendous. I see no reason for this woman to be forced to report the rape.

However, how do we know she has not reported it already to the police? We don't. If this happened in a situation where she and the bloke were alone then there's every chance that the CPS would not run it.

The number of rapes reported are a small percentage of those that occur.

Sorry I forgot about this lol

I was certainly not trying to blame the victim, but cant quite get my head around how a seemingly smart educated woman would think that reporting a rape to the party before the police was the correct thing to do.

I take your point about not knowing if it was reported to the police, but would that not have been mentioned, that it had been reported and no action taken or reported and he is "in the system."

I dont know it just seems weird.

[AJL308]

hutchst said:

Derek Smith said:

I think you are making light of it.

I ran ID parades for Sussex for two years. I ran 2.7 parades for rape a week. That's a lot of rapes for just the two counties. I've seen women too terrified to walk along the ID suite for fear of seeing the offender. I've had one collapse for 7 minutes, another not be able to stand. However, there's no argument that the majority of rapes do not get reported. Not sure why you should bring the BBC into the argument, but I do hope they reported the findings of the many investigations regarding rape victims.

There can be no doubt that there are many more rapes than those reported to the police.

Rape is quite easily defined, and I would assume you know that it is penetration without consent.

It's a difficult subject, I know. But how do you define consent? There are extreme limits, obviously, but there is a huge grey middle ground. Where, precisely, do you draw the line for a crime that has such far-reaching and life-changing consequences.

You apply the normal English definition of the word.

Was there consent - yes, or no?

[AJL308]

Octoposse said:

Derek Smith said:

It is true that the definition of consent has changed over the years, but that's hardly unknown in legal circles. It's what happens. One instance that sticks in my mind was a force pursuing a drugs offence on the hope of defining a field as premises. How we all shook our heads in disbelief.

Consent: ask yourself whether a trafficked woman in a brothel gives consent to penetration. She has no alternative, she is kept imprisoned and is within the definition of a slave. These women are penetrated a number of times each evening. One on TV said 'more than a dozen times' each day. Each one a rape. 12 x 7 x 52 is a lot of rapes that go unreported each year. There are sometimes dozens of women being raped day in and day out in some places.

Even when the women are freed the rapes are not reported (at least they weren't in my time). The number of such brothels is unknown but then I know two forces that have joined together to fight this horror. So that's two officers. We'll never know the full extent but there is ample evidence of lots and lots of them.

It is not an allegation of multiple rapes, it is multiple rapes. There is no consent.

There are other aspects to consent which are less obvious. A husband who runs his wife. Hardly unknown, and there's no bother as to whether the wife consents.

Do prostitutes generally consent? That's open for a bigger discussion and too deep for me and a PH thread I think.

Rape is under-reported. Only an idiot would say otherwise. Or the prejudiced of course. The only question is by how much and I reckon the true figures would shock most people.

The accepted figure for proportion of rapes and other serious sexual offences reported to Police is about 15%, which feels about right to me. But, no, you can’t actually prove it, but that’s what the best evidence points to.

Similarly, you can’t prove that sexual violence isn’t going up . . . there is a long term upwards trend in recorded Serious Sexual Offences, and - In the absence of evidence suggesting that underlying incidence is rising - we tend to regard this trend as positive due to well understood substantial under reporting (see the 15% figure above!), and by ascribing the recorded increases to:
• Increased reporting indicative of improving confidence and processes;
• Police improved CDI (Crime Data Integrity);
• Reporting of historical offences – the “Savile effect” (actually, when I look at the numbers, the bulk of the increase does not appear to be due to historical cases)

This positive view of the trend gains some support from the Crime Survey for England & Wales (CSEW) which in 2016 observed:
There was an increase of 21% in sexual offences recorded by the police in the latest year compared with the previous year (106,378 offences); this includes a 22% increase in rape and a 20% increase in other sexual offences . . . . . The increases are believed to have resulted from both an improvement in the recording of sexual offences by the police and an increased willingness of victims to come forward and report these crimes to the police . . . .

However, again, we have no statistical or other proof that the continuing increases are solely due to these factors.

In fact, when you talk to late teens / early 20s groups, some of the attitudes to consent, what characterises rape, etc, can be horrifying – we seem to have gone backwards in a decade. PhD in it for someone who can explain that, but I’d pin at least some of the blame on the squeezing out of the interpersonal side of ‘sex education’ in schools by a packed curriculum and league table fixation, at least partially. First year university students not understanding what consent is is actually a pretty sad indictment of a lack of vital core life skills imparted by schools, home, and the media.

Broad figures, my research (part number crunching, part sampling), pretty clearly identifies that ‘stranger’ crimes are 10-12% of the recorded total of rapes and serious sexual offences. And since it’s a fairly safe hypothesis that victims are more likely to report sexual violence if the perpetrator is not known to them, so combine that with the 15% of actual rapes being recorded, indicates what a small proportion of the total these are.

• In about 20% of recorded rapes / serious sexual offences the offender is the present or past partner of the victim, slightly less again other ‘Family Member’;
• ‘Friend / Acquaintance’ about 25%;
• Other ‘known’ (through school, work colleagues, shared accommodation) another 20% +;
• Sex worker / prospective client 1-2%.
There are obviously grey areas between these categories, but the ‘bloke with a knife’ is fantastically rare.

I agree based on recent experience.

A couple of years ago my ex pissed off after a good number of years together. Since then I've met various women via various means but have been amazed how many much younger women there out there who want to go out with much older blokes - I'm mid 40's. The overwhelming reason for this seems to be that guys their own age are at best immature and are very often abusive dheads with a completely fked-up sense of how to behave towards the opposite sex. They seem think that women are simply there to be used as they please. I've heard some horrible stories from some very nice girls who have been basically treated like st by lads their own age. I know several who have most certainly been raped or seriously abused by guys they know.

I don't know what has caused this but there has definitely been a huge change in the attitude of young men towards women over the twenty plus years since I left school. None of my friends ever treated girls like that when we were young. I'm quite thankful that I don't have a daughter as I'd be a nervous wreck worrying about her.

[Zod]

Peter911 said:

Derek Smith said:

The number of rapes reported are a small percentage of those that occur.

Is this a BBC statistic? I suppose it depends how you catagorise rape. In my day it was a man with a balaclava with a knife grabbing someone walking home alone late at night across an unlit park.

Nowadays it seems to be smiling at someone on a bus.

(Not making light of it, but some things do seem to be getting out of hand in the PC land)

Just because your own ordeal was at the hands of a man with a knife doesn't mean that all rapes are like that.

Try giving the matter some thought.