Peer calls for radical steps to reduce rapes
Introduce free late-night transport for women and teach boys about consent, says Baroness
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
Google
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Twitter
Independent Minds
enlarge
Rapists will continue to walk free from British courts in the future, the peer leading a government review of sex crime admitted this weekend.
Lady Stern said last week that while some progress has been made on the issue, radical measures are needed, in prevention, policing and prosecution. Free late-night transport for women would go a long way to reducing attacks; as would education for boys, teaching them the importance of sexual consent.
As the Government prepares this week to launch its strategy for the next 10 years to tackle violence against women and girls, Baroness Stern, a cross-bench peer, said some cases would always be beyond the power of the courts. The problem is "you have to prove beyond reasonable doubt something which happens in private between two people. A ceiling may exist beyond which a system cannot adjudicate," she said.
The review was announced earlier this year amid concern about how the police, local authorities, health providers and the Crown Prosecution Service respond, individually and together, to rape complaints. Britain currently has the lowest rape conviction rate in Europe. Some women's groups estimate that only 15 per cent of rapes are reported to the police; 80 per cent of those that are reported do not make it to court. Just 6.5 per cent of reported rapes end in a conviction.
While Lady Stern, who is a senior research fellow at the International Centre for Prison Studies at King's College London, acknowledged some cases could not be prosecuted successfully, she said changes in police and prosecution practice could improve conviction rates.
Her review is intended to encourage more women to report attacks, as well as to improve the performance of public bodies dealing with rape. It will also consider the role of victim support organisations, such as sexual assault referral centres and rape crisis centres. The number of rape crisis centres fell from 68 in 1984 to 38 in 2009 due to lack of funding.
Many of the 44 police forces in England and Wales have been criticised for their handling of rape cases in the past.
The peer has spent the past few weeks visiting police forces in cities such as Newport, Manchester and Blackpool, focusing on examples of good practice, rather than investigating forces with bad track records.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited
Comments
Over here it appears castration is the only solution that will appease the female of the species. But I supppose they think that would make them equal!!
I do wonder if Britains courts have such a low rate of conviction using the above method of adjudication, how do continental countries have higher rates, and if it is by just believing the woman, is that the kind of justice we want for all our soon to be EU enforced criminal cases? Don't get me wrong, I want all rapists convicted and if the truth were told hanged as well as it is a despicable act, but I would also act on another premise, better ten guilty men go free than one innocent man go to jail, and remember, in a lot of European countries you are guilty until you prove yourself innocent. We have to be very very careful on how we go with this subject as it could alther our age old system for ever. I would suggest we concentrate on prevention and education rather than bugger about with a perfectly good legal system to improve conviction rates.
1. wasting police time,
2. a rapid 136 Section (Mental Health Act).
The big issue here is the so called "grey area". Which can come from a cocktail of different things, from drunken consent (with perhaps an equally intoxicated partner) to miscommunication between the two parties. It should never be a defense for a rapist. But it is the important thrashing ground for rape prevention that is a two way street. Both parties are responsible and should exercise their own relevant form of risk avoidance.
The policies stated are heavy handed and offensive to both sexes IMHO. For men, they are being tarred as rapists in the making, for women it treats all women as too dumb to look after their personal safety. It's also an unequal policy, with men at risk from rape and violent attack. Feminists campaign to be given an equal playing field because they (and I) believe that women are truly equal. Why then do we see an example of special treatment for women who are adamant about their equal standing in society
Also as a foot note, and on a slight tangent. It really is a shame that when appears to defend the rights and needs of their gender consideration of the opposite sexes needs fly out of the window (this applies to both sides, and not just of this comment thread). This is a grey area (the way of dealing with and preventing rape) with central ground where the needs of both sexes need to be represented. Partisan attitudes do not help anyone