View previous topic | View next topic

Assault vs Sexual Assault - a civilised debate

Page 8 of 9
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

Jenny
1373515.  Wed Feb 03, 2021 5:25 pm Reply with quote

Celebaelin wrote:
Insisting that Rape is a separate crime in a category all of its own seeks to by-pass any comparison with other forms of crime against the person and de-contextualise the offence from any scale of seriousness of crimes of this general nature and I don't believe that is appropriate.


That's your opinion. I don't share it. I think this is the heart of where I think a lot of this discussion has not come home to you.

You ignore victim blaming and frankly thinking of it as 'a general objection to pleas of mitigation' is a joke.

https://www.denverpost.com/2016/08/20/why-arent-rape-and-sexual-assault-treated-like-other-crimes/

Quote:
The bottom line is this: We wouldn’t tolerate the abysmal percentage of committed rapes that lead to conviction and punishment of the perpetrator if it were the same for murders or kidnappings. But we do treat rape and sexual assault victims with a scrutiny that has no basis in reality, given the crime is just as falsely reported as any other.

 
Celebaelin
1373534.  Wed Feb 03, 2021 6:49 pm Reply with quote

Jenny wrote:
You ignore victim blaming and frankly thinking of it as 'a general objection to pleas of mitigation' is a joke.

That's an ill-considered accusation Jenny; either I ignore your assertion or I consider it in some regard - I cannot possibly do both things. Earlier in the (origins of this) thread you indicated that defence council questions regarding eg dress and sobriety were definitive of victim blaming - I assumed that you still meant that; if you no longer find that explanation to be suited to your purposes what specifically have you chosen victim blaming to mean now?

There is however no need for me to agree with your assertion of an obvious or self-evident inequality (which clearly I currently don't) for me to additionally ask what solution you offer to the difficulty in securing convictions in Rape trials?

 
Jenny
1373597.  Thu Feb 04, 2021 10:29 am Reply with quote

OK ignore was the wrong word. You think it either nugatory or overblown. If you followed the link to the article I gave in my last post, I think that is a self-evident inequality.

If I knew of a solution I'd be a lawyer or a politician. As it is, I'm just disappointed to see that a man I generally think of as sensible has such a large blind spot that he apparently isn't even aware he has one.

 
Celebaelin
1373624.  Thu Feb 04, 2021 4:11 pm Reply with quote

I note you have chosen not to answer my questions.

Jenny wrote:
OK ignore was the wrong word. You think it either nugatory or overblown.

Thanks for telling me what I think - I might not have known otherwise. I would also like to thank you for the word 'nugatory'; there's an interesting and delicate notional division between the conceptual synonyms of being nugatory and inconsequential which when fully explored unfortunately gets us right back to 'ignore' again - all may be fair in love and oratory but that is a trick of language not a point of reason. When you identified what you meant I offered a procedural explanation - that is neither dismissive nor critical of your subject area but it does undermine your point.

Jenny wrote:
If you followed the link to the article I gave in my last post, I think that is a self-evident inequality.

That article agrees with me that Rape and Sexual Assault should be handled in a similar manner to other assaults - they are.

Jenny wrote:
If I knew of a solution I'd be a lawyer or a politician. As it is, I'm just disappointed to see that a man I generally think of as sensible has such a large blind spot that he apparently isn't even aware he has one.

I am saddened that you are unable to articulate on a subject about which you clearly feel so deeply but before you coax me to follow you irretrievably into the lifeless swamp of ad hom., since by your own admission you've run out of lucid arguments and you refuse to tie yourself down to anything as prosaic as an actual logical clarification of your continued objections, I think I'll leave this debate to its own devices and evasions.

I thank you for taking the time to participate and for your attempts to present a rational argument.

 
PDR
1373676.  Fri Feb 05, 2021 6:12 am Reply with quote

Meant to come back on this point some days ago, but I've been distracted.

Dix wrote:

2. Side-tracking in a different direction: Curiously, there is one specific version of civil cases where you will be assumed guilty if you don't respond to a claim someone has made against you.


This is illustrative of the difference between criminal law and civil law. Criminal law is the set of rules by which we all agree to abide to play nicely. People who don't play nicely can be punished, but the idea of the State infringing individual property, rights and freedoms as punishment is potentially abhorrent and open to abuse. So for that reason we have the principle that the State will only use those powers where it is really, really certain that it is justified. Thus we get the standard of proof being "beyond reasonable doubt". From this it inherently follows that until a jury has delivered a safe verdict there will be doubt, so it is presumed that the accused must be innocent until proven guilty beyond that reasonable doubt. So the presumption of innocence flows from this same core idea and so is related only to Criminal Law.

Civil law is entirely different. Civil law is simply a situation where two or more parties have a disagreement which they have been unable to resolve, so they ask someone else to decide for them (originally a Lord, then the Crown and now an appointed judge with or without a jury). The parties are essentially asking a court to settle an argument. As such it is a disagreement where (until the matter is concluded) the judge is equally likely to agree with either side. There is no risk of abuse or abhorrent wielding of despotic power, so the standard of "proof" is equal or "on the balance of probabilities". Therefore no presumption of innocence or guilt.

A civil case is judged solely on the basis of the evidence laid before the judge (and potentially jury). It therefore follows that if one side presents evidence that "Mr Ima Crook owes me £1,000" and Ima Crook does not present any refuting evidence (or argument) then the judgement can only be that the money is indeed owed. This isn't a presumption of innocence thing, because in a civil matter no one is innocent (or guilty, for that matter).

I've made a conscious decision not to participate in the main subject of this thread because (as we have seen before) I am unable to discuss these issues dispassionately and it never goes well! So don't worry, I'll not be joining in here.

HTH,

PDR

 
Alfred E Neuman
1373678.  Fri Feb 05, 2021 6:37 am Reply with quote

PDR wrote:
I've made a conscious decision not to participate in the main subject of this thread because (as we have seen before) I am unable to discuss these issues dispassionately and it never goes well! So don't worry, I'll not be joining in here.

I wouldn’t worry if I were you - apparently the term ‘civilised debate’ means you’re good to go as long as you use flowery language to insult your opponent. But for fuck’s sake, whatever you do, don’t use uncivilised language.

What’s also useful is to use all of your words, all of the time. Present the opponent with a huge wall of text - there’s no better proof that you’re right than to drown them in verbosity. People generally take a look at it, sigh, and move on. That way you can claim the last word, which (as we both know to our detrimenta) is a critical component in proving that you were right all along. Lastly, there was some stuff about chess and pigeons, but I’m too busy shitting on the board to look it up.

 
dr.bob
1373679.  Fri Feb 05, 2021 6:46 am Reply with quote

Celebaelin wrote:
That article agrees with me that Rape and Sexual Assault should be handled in a similar manner to other assaults - they are.


I have shown evidence in post 1372804 that victims of rape are more likely to be assumed to be lying by police officers than by the general public. Also that the CPS was given a success rate target for rape and sexual assault cases which allegedly led to them dropping difficult cases. Also that more blame was placed on the victim in rape cases than in a case of robbery.

If you think rape and sexual assault are handled in a similar manner to other assaults, please provide evidence that victims of other types of assault are also treated in this manner. If you fail to do so, your claim above is without basis.

I will also bring to your attention a more recent development in which victims of rape and sexual assault are required by the police to hand over their mobile phones so the police can examine all the data contained therein. Given how most people live their lives these days, all the data on your mobile phone essentially means pretty much all the data about every aspect of your life. There are reports that the use of this evidence gathering technique is putting victims off from coming forward to the police. This is only made worse when it seems that officers are demanding such access even when the victim was attacked by a complete stranger.

A report by Big Brother Watch states that:

"these digital interrogations have been used almost exclusively for complainants of rape and serious sexual offences so far."

Yet another way in which rape and sexual assault are definitely not being handled in a similar manner to other types of assault.

 
Celebaelin
1373691.  Fri Feb 05, 2021 8:24 am Reply with quote

dr.bob wrote:
Celebaelin wrote:
That article agrees with me that Rape and Sexual Assault should be handled in a similar manner to other assaults - they are.

I have shown evidence in post 1372804 that victims of rape are more likely to be assumed to be lying by police officers than by the general public.

Not to a convincing degree of confidence you haven't - of the three articles you link to the first indicates that in a 'sample of sworn police officers (N = 174) from one department in a midsized city in the Great Lakes region'

Quote:
RMA is mediated by attributions of suspect blame. Victim alcohol use was found to decrease an officer’s likelihood of responding more vigorously, showing less likelihood of calling a detective or arresting the suspect, if identified.

The second reports that

Quote:
Therefore, the pattern of results suggests that police officers do not adhere to stereotypical myths about rape victims more than do other populations.

The findings of the paper are in truth more complex than that and indicate that all three groups tested exhibited RMA but of different myths. My first thought is that this is the sort of finding that needs investigation using a bigger sample size - I'm sure dr. Mrs bob has a better grasp on that than I do.

The third link does not reference police officers at all.

dr.bob wrote:
Also that the CPS was given a success rate target for rape and sexual assault cases which allegedly led to them dropping difficult cases.

A measure which was abandoned in 2018 because

Quote:
...they were not an appropriate tool to measure our success in bringing the right cases to court," a spokesman said.

dr.bob wrote:
Also that more blame was placed on the victim in rape cases than in a case of robbery.

I can't find this - I assume it's in the Sleath and Bull paper as that would be easier to inadvertently miss something in but I can't comment until I can locate it.

Quote:
If you think rape and sexual assault are handled in a similar manner to other assaults, please provide evidence that victims of other types of assault are also treated in this manner.

Neither you nor your sources specify a general manner of treatment that I can see - I imagine you intend to suggest that allegations of rape are treated with suspicion and the popular perception is that this is so but the evidence you provide does not cohesively support that and part of RMA looks at this aspect of 'common knowledge' as well so we must be wary of being selective.

Quote:
If you fail to do so, your claim above is without basis.

One of Jenny's moderately consistent objections was/is that Rape and Sexual Assault should not be treated in the same manner as other forms of assault. The article she cited disagreed with her on that point insisting that they should be but are not. This is in particular reference to conviction rates in Denver which muddies the waters as it crosses over both the Atlantic and the frequent lack of available evidence in, most notably, non-violent sexual assaults.

dr.bob wrote:
I will also bring to your attention a more recent development in which victims of rape and sexual assault are required by the police to hand over their mobile phones so the police can examine all the data contained therein. Given how most people live their lives these days, all the data on your mobile phone essentially means pretty much all the data about every aspect of your life. There are reports that the use of this evidence gathering technique is putting victims off from coming forward to the police. This is only made worse when it seems that officers are demanding such access even when the victim was attacked by a complete stranger.

Now that you mention it I do recall hearing that mentioned and thinking it a dreadful and unnecessary invasion of privacy particularly in the latter case. Can the Police really 'require' that when no pertinent evidence can be gained? I can see that claims by the accused of electronic exchanges of a personal nature might have some bearing on the case and could require investigation but wouldn't the existence of sent and received messages from the accused's phone be sufficient?

dr.bob wrote:
A report by Big Brother Watch states that:

"these digital interrogations have been used almost exclusively for complainants of rape and serious sexual offences so far."

I can only speculate that this might be helpful when other evidence is scant or non-existent.

dr.bob wrote:
Yet another...

You've not as yet established any other.

dr.bob wrote:
...way in which rape and sexual assault are definitely not being handled in a similar manner to other types of assault.

Quote:
The request to inspect digital material, in every case, had to have a proper basis, usually that there were reasonable grounds to believe that it might reveal material relevant to the investigation or the likely issues at trial. Regardless of the medium in which the information was held, a ‘reasonable line of enquiry’ would depend on the facts of, and the issues in, the individual case, including any potential defence. There was no presumption that a complainant’s mobile telephone or other devices should be inspected, retained or downloaded any more than there was a presumption that investigators would attempt to look through material held in hard copy. There had to be a properly identifiable foundation for the inquiry, not mere conjecture or speculation. Further, if there was a reasonable line of enquiry, the investigators should consider whether there were ways of readily accessing the information that did not involve looking at, or taking possession of, the complainant’s mobile telephone or other digital device. Disclosure should only occur when the material might reasonably be considered capable of undermining the prosecution’s case or assisting the case for the accused (see [67], [77] of the judgment).

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/law-reports/prosecution-evidence-complainants-mobile-phone/5104909.article

Quote:
What some arguably misleading headlines fail to account for is that mobile phone analysis of both a suspect and a complainant can often be ‘‘reasonable lines of enquiry’ in any police investigation and such, just like any other form of evidence such as CCTV or clothing, the police have a duty to investigate it. There are many different circumstances in which such a request for a mobile phone may be made by the police, particularly where there is contact between complainants and third parties. Because of the methods in which people communicate nowadays, many ‘first accounts’ of alleged criminal conduct are made from mobile phones or through social media messaging platforms. This form of evidence is often contemporaneous and valuable in the absence of other corroborative evidence.

https://www.bcl.com/access-to-complainants-mobiles-phones-in-criminal-investigations-is-it-really-an-invasion-of-privacy/

It would appear that you are correct in saying that these investigations of phone evidence are chiefly (or perhaps even exclusively) used in cases involving sexual offences although there is no indication of numbers or percentages. The article above suggests that establishing a time line between the event in question and the allegation being made to the Police is regarded as being of significance just as it would be in any other crime. As that article puts it

Quote:
Rape and other sexual offences are some of the most difficult cases to investigate, adjudicate and defend. Incidents usually take place in private settings, between two people and without witnesses or CCTV evidence. Other factors can muddy the waters even further, including intoxication through alcohol and drugs, and pre-existing relationships. Those involved are often known to each other in some way and in 2019, this means that there is a high likelihood of communications evidence which may shed light on the circumstances leading to an alleged offence.

I'm not convinced that the introduction of a new, well controlled, method of evidence gathering used nearly exclusively in the pursuit of sexual offenders is a good example of partiality against the exacting prosecution of Rape cases but I'll accept that all sources I've seen so far do indicate that this is a method of investigation largely or wholly limited to Rape and Sexual Assault cases and therefore a difference.

 
dr.bob
1373698.  Fri Feb 05, 2021 9:43 am Reply with quote

Celebaelin wrote:
Not to a convincing degree of confidence you haven't


I apologise that the evidence I have supplied isn't of a high enough quality for you. In truth, I don't have time to research dozens of peer-reviewed articles. Instead I hoped that, by presenting you with a selection of results, it might prompt you to consider that there might just possibly be something outside of your own personal world-view. However, from your reaction to these articles, I suspect that will never be the case.

Celebaelin wrote:
of the three articles you link to the first indicates that in a 'sample of sworn police officers (N = 174) from one department in a midsized city in the Great Lakes region'


I'm not sure how you're reading the post I referred to. This is the third article I posted. The one that noted that "more blame was attributed to the victim and less to the perpetrator in sexual assault compared with robbery."

Celebaelin wrote:
Quote:
RMA is mediated by attributions of suspect blame. Victim alcohol use was found to decrease an officer’s likelihood of responding more vigorously, showing less likelihood of calling a detective or arresting the suspect, if identified.


That's not the bit I was referring to. What point are you trying to make by quoting that?

Celebaelin wrote:
The second reports that

Quote:
Therefore, the pattern of results suggests that police officers do not adhere to stereotypical myths about rape victims more than do other populations.


At least this is the second article.

Celebaelin wrote:
The findings of the paper are in truth more complex than that and indicate that all three groups tested exhibited RMA but of different myths.


Indeed. They indicated that victims of rape are more likely to be assumed to be lying by police officers than by the general public, which was the point I made in my last post.

Are you going to respond to that point? <checks rest of post> Ah, no apparently not. Instead you're going to present me with a wall of text that takes a very long time to say very little and studiously avoids many of the points I've already made.

Twice.

No wonder Jenny accused you of ignoring things.

Celebaelin wrote:
The third link does not reference police officers at all.


If by "third link" you mean "first link" (no the basis that it's the only one you haven't mentioned yet), then no. It wouldn't. That's the link talking about the prosecution target for the CPS. What's your point?!

Celebaelin wrote:
A measure which was abandoned in 2018


Irrelevant. I was citing it as an example of why rape and sexual assault cases are handled differently to other assault cases. Unless you can show that other assault cases have been given a prosecution target that affected the number being taken to court, even if that was only temporarily, then my point still stands. Feel like tackling that point, or are you just going to ignore that too?

Celebaelin wrote:
dr.bob wrote:
Also that more blame was placed on the victim in rape cases than in a case of robbery.

I can't find this - I assume it's in the Sleath and Bull paper


No need to assume anything. It's in the Venema paper, as I clearly pointed out in my previous post. The one that you seem to have ignored.

Celebaelin wrote:
Neither you nor your sources specify a general manner of treatment that I can see


WTF is a "general manner"? I've provided a bunch of reports, and Jenny has provided others of cases that are treated badly. Are you going to ignore all of them unless and until we can show something that affects every complainant?

Celebaelin wrote:
Now that you mention it I do recall hearing that mentioned and thinking it a dreadful and unnecessary invasion of privacy particularly in the latter case.


So I'm sure you can see why it would be a huge disincentive to victims considering bringing their case to the police.

Celebaelin wrote:
Can the Police really 'require' that when no pertinent evidence can be gained?


I've already given you a link that answers this question, but again you've ignored it. I'd direct your attention to page 8 of the Big Brother Watch report.

Celebaelin wrote:
I can only speculate that this might be helpful when other evidence is scant or non-existent.


Don't bother speculating. Read some of the links I've already provided and educate yourself to the reality of what's going on in the world around you, instead of ignoring anything that clashes with your preconceptions.

Celebaelin wrote:
Quote:
The request to inspect digital material, in every case, had to have a proper basis, usually that there were reasonable grounds to believe that it might reveal material relevant to the investigation or the likely issues at trial.


This is all well and good in theory, and I'm sure that's how the regulations are written. The experiences of victims, that I've provided links to, paint a very different story of how the regulations are bring implemented on the ground.

Celebaelin wrote:
Quote:
What some arguably misleading headlines fail to account for is that mobile phone analysis of both a suspect and a complainant can often be ‘‘reasonable lines of enquiry’ in any police investigation and such, just like any other form of evidence such as CCTV or clothing, the police have a duty to investigate it.


I have no doubt that such analysis, when done properly can form part of a reasonable line of enquiry. However, the reports of victims being pressured by police into signing blank cheque “consent” forms and told that the prosecution will fail if they don't is far from reasonable.

Celebaelin wrote:
I'm not convinced that the introduction of a new, well controlled, method of evidence gathering used nearly exclusively in the pursuit of sexual offenders is a good example of partiality against the exacting prosecution of Rape cases


If it was "well controlled", I'd agree with you. Reports I've seen, and provided, suggest otherwise.

Feel free to continue to ignore them, though.

 
Celebaelin
1373706.  Fri Feb 05, 2021 11:26 am Reply with quote

I replied courteously bob - you've chosen to move straight to personal attacks.

You find it unacceptable that I referred to your links in the wrong order yet you ignore the content of the links I have provided in their entirety referencing AEN's characterisation of this thread as a 'wall of text'. I haven't carried out a word count but it seems clear to me that if you consider what must be about 1000 words at a time or quite possibly considerably less a 'wall of text' astrophysics must be a substantially simpler discipline than I gave it credit for. If you had read my provided links you would, I hope, at least understand the purpose of citing them - that is as legal commentary on the points you make.

Your post gives the impression of someone spoiling for a bitter confrontation entirely on your own terms but since civility is no longer a consideration I will revert to my first instincts not be drawn to continue this exchange of views now that you've been tagged in fresh to the fray. That I did continue initially was out of respect for your opinions but since you have no inclination to consider my views merely a desire to deride and deliberately misrepresent them and claim as justification that in responding to your post line by line I didn't consider your argument I see no point in continuing; from my point of view this is a pity but frankly I have neither the energy nor the inclination to throw accusation and counter accusation back and forth while I offer answers to your points as completely and directly as I can and you claim that I have not done so.

 
Brock
1373708.  Fri Feb 05, 2021 11:53 am Reply with quote

Celebaelin wrote:
That I did continue initially was out of respect for your opinions but since you have no inclination to consider my views merely a desire to deride and deliberately misrepresent them and claim as justification that in responding to your post line by line I didn't consider your argument I see no point in continuing; from my point of view this is a pity but frankly I have neither the energy nor the inclination to throw accusation and counter accusation back and forth while I offer answers to your points as completely and directly as I can and you claim that I have not done so.


A sentence comprising eight lines of text with one semicolon and no commas is what I'd call a "wall of text".

 
Alexander Howard
1373721.  Fri Feb 05, 2021 1:31 pm Reply with quote

Many years ago I sat in the Visitor's Gallery of the House of Commons, watching an almost empty House in which a government minister gave a statement of policy, then her opposite number said exactly the same in barely different words, and each continued to attack the other across the floor for saying what each had herself just said. Some things here remind me of that.

 
dr.bob
1374026.  Tue Feb 09, 2021 10:28 am Reply with quote

Celebaelin wrote:
You find it unacceptable that I referred to your links in the wrong order


Not unacceptable, just massively confusing. Not the ideal way to conduct a discussion.

Celebaelin wrote:
yet you ignore the content of the links I have provided in their entirety


This is factually incorrect. I responded to the content of the links you provided, noting the difference between regulations as written and how they're enacted in the real world.

Celebaelin wrote:
it seems clear to me that if you consider what must be about 1000 words at a time or quite possibly considerably less a 'wall of text' astrophysics must be a substantially simpler discipline than I gave it credit for.


I would categorise a "wall of text" not simply by the number of characters contained therein, but whether or not the text actually says anything useful. As I pointed out, your references took a lot of text to say very little, and completely ignored several of the points I raised.

Celebaelin wrote:
If you had read my provided links


I read them, and responded to them.

Celebaelin wrote:
you would, I hope, at least understand the purpose of citing them - that is as legal commentary on the points you make.


The problem with your sources is that they make a point that has already been rendered irrelevant by the sources I posted previously. The Big Brother Watch report made it clear that the way the police are implementing guidance on the ground is far from ideal. So having you post a source which says the guidance is written in a certain way adds very little to the discussion, and leaves me with the distinct impression that you haven't bothered to read the sources I've posted.

If you're just going to keep making the same assertions and never bother to read or respond to the sources I post, it makes the whole discussion exceptionally one-sided and utterly pointless.

Celebaelin wrote:
Your post gives the impression of someone spoiling for a bitter confrontation entirely on your own terms


I'm sorry it comes across that way. In reality, the post was a result of me becoming completely frustrated and annoyed that I was having a discussion with someone who consistently ignored most of the points I had raised, only chose to tackle a choice selection of points, and even tackled those poorly.

Celebaelin wrote:
but since you have no inclination to consider my views


I'll have to leave now as my irony-meter has just exploded and is threatening to set fire to the curtains.

 
Jenny
1374036.  Tue Feb 09, 2021 10:51 am Reply with quote

Celebaelin wrote:
One of Jenny's moderately consistent objections was/is that Rape and Sexual Assault should not be treated in the same manner as other forms of assault. The article she cited disagreed with her on that point insisting that they should be but are not. This is in particular reference to conviction rates in Denver which muddies the waters as it crosses over both the Atlantic and the frequent lack of available evidence in, most notably, non-violent sexual assaults.


Like dr.bob, Cele, this is where I wonder if you actually read what I write. My argument all along has been that rape and sexual assault are not, in fact, treated in the same manner as other forms of assault. I pointed out to you the paucity of even charges being brought for rape, and the tiny percentage of convictions. How does this compare with other allegations of assault and convictions for it? Or is it your contention that the victims of such offences are lying to a hugely greater extent than victims of other assaults?

Also, you have this tendency to take every example as if it were only the basis for discussion of the issue in that particular place (which in the example I used was Denver) rather than illustrative of a far more general attitude that applies on both sides of the Atlantic.

 
Celebaelin
1374049.  Tue Feb 09, 2021 1:08 pm Reply with quote

I cannot find the original source for this data from The Independent but I'll lend it credence for what it purports to be ie statistics reported for England and Wales.

Quote:
The reason for closing almost half of investigations was that no suspect had been identified, but almost a third were listed as “evidential difficulties”.

There was a sharp rise in the proportion of cases recorded as “victim does not support action”, increasing to 42 per cent for violence, 35 per cent with rapes and 29 per cent of sexual offences.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/crime-statistics-uk-justice-prosecution-rates-rape-victims-disclosure-police-funding-a8747191.html

So approximately 80% of cases of all sorts do not have sufficient evidence to achieve a realistic chance of a conviction or have no identified suspect and the proportion of reported non-sexual violent crimes for which no suspect can be identified is actually higher than that for rape.

Of the 20% of all reported crime remaining 8.2% ultimately result in prosecutions leaving 91.8% of reported crimes unprosecuted. I believe you cited the figure for reported rapes as 89% unprosecuted so I think it's reasonable to call these figures comparable. The Independent's figure for this is 98.1% however (up from 97.6%) which is troubling* but as has been mentioned several times Rape is notoriously difficult to prosecute and the figure should be viewed in light of this.

The UK figures for 2020 will be atypical because of lockdown; the best UK information I can find on violent crime is available from

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/datasets/thenatureofviolentcrimeappendixtables

and dates from 2018 - these figures are the English (England and Wales) national statistics for reported crimes AIUI but they do not show corresponding rates of conviction nor can I find any link to such data. As I mentioned previously The Independent reports that 8.2% of all reported crimes reach trial but I can find no figures for conviction rates for assaults in England and so cannot offer a basis for comparison.

Jenny wrote:
My argument all along has been that rape and sexual assault are not, in fact, treated in the same manner as other forms of assault.

No, it hasn’t been; you’ve been arguing that they are not alike and shouldn’t be considered as being so.

Jenny wrote:
Cele I think one of the issues you're overlooking is that you are putting sexual assault and physical assault on the same basis, and I don't think they are.

I on the other hand have been arguing that there is sufficient similarity in the crimes that a shared basis exists for comparison and commonality of handling under the law. That the statistics are not available online to clarify whether violent assaults against men and violent assaults against women exhibit similar prosecution and conviction rates is annoying as this would give us a national database to cite for England and Wales (my jurisdictional area of concern) which would settle the dispute as a matter of record since you now agree with me that the general nature of crime of this variety is comparable.

I have not given expression to any personally held view regarding the degree of incidence of false allegations in violent assaults but I should like to ask when you write

Jenny wrote:
Or is it your contention that the victims of such offences are lying to a hugely greater extent than victims of other assaults?

what ‘other assaults’ you mean given your current full blown acceptance of the commonalities in the grouping of assaults against the person?

* If I were to guess, as I'm obliged to, it seems likely that other comparisons on a crime by crime basis across the board would not show a 6.3% departure from the overall mean and that this disparity would be shown to be statistically significant. If that is the case the CPS needs to acknowledge this and continue to seek a way to redress this discrepancy. None of the approaches yet explored have been proven effective and as yet no further new procedural suggestions which meet with broad approval have been implemented or even made that I am aware of. The CPS are caught between the demands for increased prosecutions and those for higher conviction rates it seems.


Last edited by Celebaelin on Wed Feb 10, 2021 6:15 am; edited 2 times in total

 

Page 8 of 9
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group