- Joined
- Dec 26, 2003
- Messages
- 9,353
After the extremely well publicised Aberystwyth Uni student case where she couldnt remember if she had consented and also after the extremely distorted Amnesty survey on rape the government is looking to move on this area.
The whole white paper is here - http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/consultation_rape_290306.pdf?view=Binary
The purpose is slightly contradictory wanting to increase convictions without interfering with the burden of proof - its hard to see how the one can be achieved without affecting the other...
There are 4 proposals - 1. Capacity - they are considering whether to legally define capacity so that for example in the student case there could be some kind of presumption that she hadn't consented - this is the most serious area to change - a definition could have effects far wider than just rape cases - it could lead to a general defense to other crimes if performed whilst a person was drunk for example.
2. Expert Evidence - despite the recent trouble expert witnesses have caused in terms of cot death baby mis-carriages the government (alarmed by the amnesty survey that got tons of coverage and very little analysis) is considering bringing in expert witnesses to say that everything the complainant did was reasonable due to her psychological state etc. This is currently forbidden and use of experts to bolster the complainants evidence will get you a mis-trial.
The worst thing proposed under this is "The expert may give evidence on 'why victims have incomplete, discrepant or inconsistent memories of the incident' !!!
3. First complaint - this one seems fairly sensible although it will allow more use of hearsay evidence which is generally in-admissable in UK courts...
4. More use of Video evidence - which is ok but they are also proposing that the prosecution can ask the complainant supplementary (i.e. leading) questions before they face cross examination from the defence. The prosecution also gets to decide whether or not to use the video the complainant initially made - so if they have changed their story after advice from the prosecution team the defence wont get access to it...
Its all rather sad really - it would be easy to raise the conviction rate if they prosecuted less cases - i.e. if the CPS dropped cases that never stood a cat in hells chance (as they are meant to do) - but because the CPS have quotas (just like the police) they fall over themselves to prosecute these cases.
Its always a problem when laws get made in response to a single case - I hope most of this lot gets dumped - I doubt it tho.
The whole white paper is here - http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/consultation_rape_290306.pdf?view=Binary
The purpose is slightly contradictory wanting to increase convictions without interfering with the burden of proof - its hard to see how the one can be achieved without affecting the other...
There are 4 proposals - 1. Capacity - they are considering whether to legally define capacity so that for example in the student case there could be some kind of presumption that she hadn't consented - this is the most serious area to change - a definition could have effects far wider than just rape cases - it could lead to a general defense to other crimes if performed whilst a person was drunk for example.
2. Expert Evidence - despite the recent trouble expert witnesses have caused in terms of cot death baby mis-carriages the government (alarmed by the amnesty survey that got tons of coverage and very little analysis) is considering bringing in expert witnesses to say that everything the complainant did was reasonable due to her psychological state etc. This is currently forbidden and use of experts to bolster the complainants evidence will get you a mis-trial.
The worst thing proposed under this is "The expert may give evidence on 'why victims have incomplete, discrepant or inconsistent memories of the incident' !!!
3. First complaint - this one seems fairly sensible although it will allow more use of hearsay evidence which is generally in-admissable in UK courts...
4. More use of Video evidence - which is ok but they are also proposing that the prosecution can ask the complainant supplementary (i.e. leading) questions before they face cross examination from the defence. The prosecution also gets to decide whether or not to use the video the complainant initially made - so if they have changed their story after advice from the prosecution team the defence wont get access to it...
Its all rather sad really - it would be easy to raise the conviction rate if they prosecuted less cases - i.e. if the CPS dropped cases that never stood a cat in hells chance (as they are meant to do) - but because the CPS have quotas (just like the police) they fall over themselves to prosecute these cases.
Its always a problem when laws get made in response to a single case - I hope most of this lot gets dumped - I doubt it tho.