In article <***@mid.individual.net>,
The Todal <***@beeb.net> wrote:
}On 29/1/15 15:27, abelard wrote:
}> 'rape' *very* difficult to establish
}
}That's the only comment from you that is sensible.
}
}Rape is rarely prosecuted. Convictions are relatively rare because the
}jury is entitled to give a defendant the benefit of the doubt. That's
}probably how it should be. But a low conviction rate does not mean that
}the CPS, out of a wish to improve conviction statistics, should avoid
}prosecuting cases. Mentally ill women might make false allegations. But
}sometimes mentally ill women are raped. The jury, rather than police
}officers, ought to be the decision maker.
No. Cases should only be prosecuted where there is a reasonable
prospect of conviction. Anything else is a waste of resources.
And the subject of rape accusations. If Fred accuses Jim of rape,
there are three possibilities:
1) Fred was raped by Jim.
2) Fred was not raped by Jim, but the accusation was not unreasonable
or malicious (it may be mistaken identity, or Fred and Jim have a
reasonable disagreement over whether there was consent, such as faulty
memories of what happened).
3) Fred was not raped by Jim and the accusation was unreasonable or
malicious.
Obviously, the ideal situation is that in case 1 Jim gets convicted of
rape, in case 3 Fred gets convicted of making a false allegation, and
in case 2 nobody gets convicted. In practice, it can be very hard to
tell which case applies, so both 1 and 3 are crimes which it is
realtively easy to get away with. A carefully crafted story will often
be impossible to disprove, leading to an inability to convict the
guilty. Since this results in no conviction,many people seem to
confuse it with a declaration that case 2 applies - i.e. that we
definitely know that no crime occurred.
Unlike false accusations of other crimes (e.g. Fred claims Jim stole
his valuable painting), there may be no convincing evidence. Very few
people give away valuable paintings, and it would be relatively easy
in many cases to establish if it was a true allegation or a malicious
one, though there would certainly be some cases where neither could be
proved. However, it is quite routine for people to have sex, so rape
is an ideal offence to commit in the hope of getting away with by
pretending it was consensual sex, but equally it is the ideal offence
to use for a false accusation as it is exceedingly difficult to
*prove* sex did not occur or *was* consensual.