*Men who rape drunk women face tougher law
"Men who have sex with drunken women face a higher risk of being convicted for rape even if the alleged victim appears to give her consent, under reforms suggested by the government.
A new white paper is expected to propose that judges should give far firmer guidance to juries in cases where there is a question over whether a woman claiming she was raped was capable of giving or withholding consent to sex.
If she was deemed so drunk she was incapable, the man would be far more likely to be convicted of rape.
The change would mark a significant departure from the current law, under which a man can escape conviction if he can convince the jury he believed a woman wanted sex, even if she was drunk.
Police recorded 14,449 allegations of rape in 2005, one of the highest figures ever. However, only a fraction of rape cases ever reach court – about 12% – and few of those which do result in convictions.
The white paper will leave far more discretion to judges and juries than would have been the case under an earlier proposal to have legally determined thresholds of alcohol consumption above which a woman would be deemed incapable.
The government’s decision will disappoint those demanding more hard and fast rules to ensure more convictions. But the final version of the white paper follows a pivotal ruling by appeal court judges earlier this year.
They declared it would be “unrealistic” to create a “grid system” on alcohol consumption in rape cases, because people’s ability to cope with drink varies so greatly.
Ministers describe the appeal court decision in March as “incredibly useful” because it set a legal precedent. They say it has exposed the need for more help for juries considering such cases.
Benjamin Bree, a 25-year-old software engineer, was initially sentenced to five years in jail for raping a 19-year-old student in her halls of residence at Bournemouth University after she convinced a jury she was too drunk to consent to sex.
But the deputy lord chief justice, Sir Igor Judge, sitting with Lady Justice Hallett and Mrs Justice Gloster, overturned the conviction, arguing the jury had not been given clear enough directions.
They ruled that capacity to consent “could evaporate” well before someone became unconscious, but whether this was so “depended on the actual state of mind of the individuals involved on the particular occasion”.
A minister involved in the proposed rape law reforms said: “On cool reflection, it is clear we cannot have some sort of hard and fast law about how much drink is too much drink. What we need to do is provide better training for judges and juries on how to decide whether a woman was capable of consent.”
Other proposals in the white paper include the introduction of a “victim’s advocate”, who is not a lawyer, to give practical support to rape victims through bringing their cases to court and to help them see their way through fears and doubts about the court case.
A pilot project in which alleged victims of domestic abuse were assigned such representatives led to a significant increase in conviction rates.
However, the white paper is not expected to include proposals floated last year to allow expert witnesses to explain the psychological impact of the crime on women in court.
The government examined whether this might help juries understand why some rape victims show little emotion when describing their ordeals in court. In some cases, defence lawyers have successfully argued that the woman’s behaviour is inconsistent with someone who has suffered such a trauma.
However, ministers have concluded that allowing psychologists to give evidence would be fraught with difficulty and could lead to an American-style “trial of expert witnesses”.
I would like to hear your opinions about this topic before I share mine! :D I am leaning one way with what I think but before I share I would like to hear your take on the issue! I know you have an opinion...so...lets hear it!
1 comment:
I am absolutely for strict punishment for people who abuse other peoples rights. What frustrates me is that there are factors to this behavior that if dealt with properly would at the very least greatly lessen this sort of behavior. However since we all know that isn't going to happen. So we must protect people no matter what gender they are from getting their rights and bodies abused. Here are some of my thoughts. There are people who go to places where alcohol is served for the purpose of getting stone drunk, and to meet someone with the intent of having intercourse later. Alcohol impedes a persons judgment after as little as three beers. There are already a ton of statistics available about a persons ability to think rationally or react appropriately due to the drunk driving issue. These statistics need to be used in these cases where a persons ability to make a decision is questioned. Also Judges and juries need to be highly trained and informed to be able to judge individual cases on their own merit by proper information and checks and balances. It is an excellent idea to have a victims advocate to help through this process, both for the emotional health of the victim, and the judicial process. Victims must be protected, offenders must be punished. My concern is that to many people wake up the morning after realize they are next to someone the wouldn't have been if they were sober and cry rape. This statement does not imply that rape does not occur. We must however use every method available to us to judge each case appropriately. Because there are statistics to support the fact that people do cry wolf so to speak. As a final thought I believe that the establishments who provide the service of alcohol must be held accountable for their business. The court can only convict once a crime has been committed. There need to be steps taken to prevent these crimes from happening. Business owners already have cameras for their security. These could be used to give an overview of behavior and show a pattern of decision making. They could also be used at the door to see the way someone has left. Added security, and the type of establishment where it is extremely difficult to perpetrate these acts are invaluable to preventing these atrocities! In my opinion should be mandatory. A construction business or manufacturing business are responsible for preventing accidents that cause personal injury, and creating an environment where sexual harassment is not tolerated. Why aren't places who serve alcohol made to uphold such standards.
Post a Comment