Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.

Why rape laws don't work

2»

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    vikki1825 wrote:
    innocent until proven guilty is fair enough but when the evidence is stacked against you it doesn't look good
    But this man pleaded guilty. I'm talking about rape trials in general. You bang your head against the wall at the fact that victims have to stand up in court as a witness. Is it unreasonable to expect them to do this?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Why don't judges have the power to hand out bigger sentences?

    Do the guideline sentences for any given crime come directly from parliament?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Surely the title of this thread is misleading?

    The law worked - he was prosecuted.

    Perhaps your issue should be with the level of punishment, not the law itself?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Surely the title of this thread is misleading?

    The law worked - he was prosecuted.

    Perhaps your issue should be with the level of punishment, not the law itself?

    That's what I was getting at - but I'm not too well up on law, and wondered where the sentences come from - if it's not the judge's fault (i.e. he can't issue a longer sentence) then whose fault is it?

    I was led to believe that there are guideline sentences for any given crime, and then the judge works from that depending on the individual issues in each case brought before him.

    Who sets the given sentences, and how severely is a judge limited when deciding upon the sentence?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sentences are determined by statute, by the law.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote:
    Sentences are determined by statute, by the law.
    So remind us how the law hasn't worked?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote:
    Sentences are determined by statute, by the law.

    So it's down to the government to set harsher sentences if they wanted to?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kentish wrote:
    But this man pleaded guilty. I'm talking about rape trials in general. You bang your head against the wall at the fact that victims have to stand up in court as a witness. Is it unreasonable to expect them to do this?
    In a word no. Though it is prolonging the ordeal for the victim and their families, and if there is other evidence, IE forensic then it might be better for the victim not to have to re-live the ordeal
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote:
    The credit is there to help the victim.

    No credit = no incentive to plead guilty. Which means all defendants will run trials. Which means the victim has to go through the ordeal of the witness box.

    I don't see why it has to be so large though, I would have imagined that a smaller credit would be incentive enough, or at least that it could work on a flexible basis, do some bartering etc....
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kentish wrote:
    So remind us how the law hasn't worked?

    By not allowing a greater sentence...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote:
    By not allowing a greater sentence...
    That's what I thought.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    vikki1825 wrote:
    In a word no. Though it is prolonging the ordeal for the victim and their families, and if there is other evidence, IE forensic then it might be better for the victim not to have to re-live the ordeal
    Even with forensic evidence (I assume you mean semen taken from the victim or skin from under the nails etc) the prosecution would have to prove non consensual sex took place, and you need both witnesses for that. Yes it's horrific, but fair trials rely on witnesses.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote:
    By not allowing a greater sentence...
    How long would you give? Longer than for murder?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Would this rape have been prevented even if the guy was killed after the trial?

    No. So rape law doesn't work, Simple really.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kentish wrote:
    (I assume you mean semen taken from the victim or skin from under the nails etc) the prosecution would have to prove non consensual sex took place,
    presuming the victim didn't smash her own face up, or consent to sex so rough she ended up with a temporary stoma
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    vikki1825 wrote:
    presuming the victim didn't smash her own face up, or consent to sex so rough she ended up with a temporary stoma
    This man pleaded guilty. I'll remind you again that we're talking about rape trials in general.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    vikki1825 wrote:
    presuming the victim didn't smash her own face up, or consent to sex so rough she ended up with a temporary stoma

    The fact is that if a trial is to be run, then the complainant has to give evidence in person.

    Special measures are allowed for rape cases, where the complainant can give evidence behind screens, or via TV link.

    In this case the man pleaded guilty. He was encouraged to do so by the 25% reduction in sentence he was entitled to. Without that incentive, a defendant has nothing to lose by running a trial, and everything to gain.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    .
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    how nice....no wonder i dont like going out
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    one think i'd like to see is life meaning life and not 20 years or whatever it is ... i'm not well informed about the working of the legal system.
    Originally Posted by vikki1825
    presuming the victim didn't smash her own face up, or consent to sex so rough she ended up with a temporary stoma

    i once remember reading something about how its very hard to actually beat yourself up because of how our brain works or something ... and if she did this how would she of ended up in a field?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Robot_Alan wrote:
    one think i'd like to see is life meaning life and not 20 years or whatever it is

    But life does mean life.

    If you get released, you get released on licence. Breach the terms of the licence, and you get sent straight back to prison.

    Life sentences without parole would be unworkable on a large scale. There is no incentive to behave in prison if you won't ever get out.

    If each sentence meant the full term, all that would happen is that judges would half the sentence. And there would be no incentive to behave in prison.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally Posted by Kermit
    If you get released, you get released on licence. Breach the terms of the licence, and you get sent straight back to prison.

    like i said im not in the know about this, does sound much better though now i know that.

    still think my russian idea was good though :yeees:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No. There is no possible recovery from being murdered.
    What does the average murderer serve behind bars, 14 years?

    So how long would you give this rapist?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    .
Sign In or Register to comment.